A flawed prescription for civic failures

Upholding its 2025 ruling on removing stray dogs from public spaces, the Supreme Court of India has now allowed euthanasia of rabid and dangerous dogs in the interest of public health and safety.

The original judgment was seen as unrealistic given the massive investment and logistics involved in removing the dogs from spaces such as railway stations, hospitals, and highways, and rehabilitating them.

In its latest order, the Court said the dogs picked up from these locations should not be released there even after vaccination and sterilisation. Municipal authorities in the country do not have the personnel for the job or the infrastructure to house these dogs.

The Court has told the authorities to adopt legally permissible measures, including euthanasia, in cases of “rabid, incurably ill or demonstrably dangerous or aggressive dogs.”

This is effectively a prescription to cull the dogs without discrimination because the Court’s condition that the decision should align with the assessment of qualified veterinary experts is likely to be observed in the breach. It risks entrusting the municipal staff with powers to act as the judge, jury, and executioner – killing the dogs will be seen as a convenient, legitimate response.

Notably, the Court observed that there is a “discernible absence of sustained, systematic and incremental efforts to expand and strengthen the infrastructure to manage the dog population.”

This situation is likely to remain. The Court ordered the setting up of a fully functional birth control centre in every district, equipped with the requisite infrastructure, trained personnel, and surgical facilities, and proposed an expansion of this setup.

There is no clarity on timelines or other details in the directive. But what is certain is that most of the dogs around us will not live to see these centres.

In its latest ruling, the apex court seeks to solve a problem created by people and civic authorities. Stray dogs have proliferated because of conditions caused by administrative failings.

An effective implementation of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, with a firm focus on vaccination and sterilisation, remains the most viable solution to the problem.

Public policy should, no doubt, prioritise human health and welfare, but it must also be humane and kind.

It should not be hostile to life. It cannot breach the fundamental principle that the earth does not belong to human beings alone. Law and policy, designed around human existence, must not become tools to deny other living beings their rights.