The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed displeasure over what it described as inadequate and poorly implemented measures by several states to deal with the growing menace of stray dogs, flagging serious gaps in sterilisation, creation of dog pounds, and removal of animals from educational and institutional premises.
A bench of justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria warned that states which had filed vague or misleading affidavits would face “strong strictures”, remarking that much of the information placed before the court appeared to be “total eye wash” and “just storytelling”.
The court was hearing a batch of matters concerning implementation of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules and its own earlier directions on removal of stray dogs and cattle from highways and sensitive institutional areas such as hospitals and schools.
Amicus curiae and senior advocate Gaurav Agrawal told the court that he had assessed each state on four parameters -- functioning of ABC centres, availability of shelters and dog pounds, removal of animals from institutional areas, and steps taken to prevent stray cattle and dogs from entering highways. Across the board, he said, there was a glaring lack of audits, timelines and capacity planning.
The bench reiterated its interim directions issued in November 2025, which require states and the National Highways Authority of India to remove stray animals from highways and institutional areas, fence educational and health institutions, and ensure that dogs removed from such premises are not released back into the same locations.
Warning states against complacency, the court said it would not hesitate to summon chief secretaries again if tangible improvement was not seen. “If you had said you don’t have information and need time, we would understand,” the bench said. “But vague averments will invite a proper dressing down.”
The bench appeared particularly alarmed by data from Assam, where it noted that over 166,000 dog bite cases were reported in 2024, followed by 20,900 incidents in January 2025 alone. “This is astonishing… this is shocking,” the court said, observing that the state had only one functional dog centre. It also flagged the lack of manpower and concrete planning, remarking that the affidavits were silent on human resources.
More broadly, the bench expressed frustration that most states had failed to even provide basic data. “None of the states have given figures on dog bites except Assam,” it said, adding that many appeared to be “building castles in the air”.
Serious doubts were raised over the credibility of figures placed by Jharkhand, which claimed that nearly 190,000 dogs had been sterilised. “We can’t believe this,” the bench said, noting that 160,000 sterilisations were claimed in just two months. “Absolutely fudged-up figures,” remarked the court, adding that there was no visible compliance on fencing or dog pounds.
Several other states were pulled up for missing or incomplete action. Gujarat, the bench noted, had furnished “no information on dog pounds at all”, while Haryana’s affidavit was found silent on steps taken to remove dogs from institutional areas. Karnataka, though appreciated for identifying stray dogs within institutions, was faulted for failing to remove even a single animal. “They haven’t picked up a single stray from institutions,” the court observed.
Tourism-heavy states were also flagged. Referring to Goa and Kerala, the bench expressed concern over stray dogs on beaches, noting that animals scavenging on food waste and fish carcasses could eventually impact tourism. “They cannot be released back,” said the court, underlining that institutional and sensitive areas required a different approach.
The court acknowledged limited progress in a few states but stressed that the scale remained grossly inadequate. In Bihar, for instance, only around 20,000 dogs were sterilised despite an estimated stray population of over 600,000. West Bengal and Delhi were similarly cautioned that sterilisation numbers, though rising, were nowhere near sufficient to control population growth.
At the same time, the bench noted some positive steps. Maharashtra was commended for creating an online dashboard tracking dog bites, sterilisations, vaccinations and veterinary facilities. “It is a good beginning,” the court said, suggesting that other states could emulate the model.
The hearing will continue on Thursday.
Curated by Dr. Elena Rodriguez
