New Delhi: Chief Justice of India BR Gavai on Wednesday said he will look into the ongoing issue concerning stray and community dogs after an advocate raised concerns over contradictory orders passed by different benches of the Supreme Court.
The matter was mentioned before a bench headed by CJI Gavai for urgent listing. Advocate Nanita Sharma informed the court that two benches had issued differing directives regarding the treatment and management of stray dogs. She referred to a May 2024 judgment delivered by Justices JK Maheshwari and Sanjay Karol, which emphasised that indiscriminate killing of canines is impermissible and stressed compassion towards all living beings.
According to Sharma, this earlier ruling stands in contrast with an order passed on August 11, 2025, by a bench headed by Justice JB Pardiwala, directing civic authorities in Delhi-NCR to remove stray dogs from all localities within eight weeks and house them in designated shelters. The bench had made it clear that no captured animal should be released back on the streets and warned of contempt proceedings against any person or group obstructing the operation.
The August 11 order stemmed from a suo motu case initiated after a media report highlighted a surge in stray dog attacks leading to rabies, particularly affecting children and the elderly. The bench termed the situation “disturbing and alarming” and insisted that localities be made free of stray dogs without compromise.
Sharma also mentioned a petition filed by the organisation Conference for Human Rights (India), challenging an August 2023 Delhi High Court order that had dismissed its plea seeking sterilisation and vaccination drives for community dogs under the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules. The High Court had found the authorities’ existing steps satisfactory, but the NGO appealed in July 2024, prompting Justice Gavai’s bench to issue notice.
CJI Gavai, acknowledging the apparent conflict between the two Supreme Court orders, assured that he would examine the matter. The issue now stands at a critical juncture, as the apex court weighs the need to protect public safety alongside the mandate for animal welfare.
