The Supreme Court of India, on Friday, delivered a sharp rebuke during a hearing on petitions seeking modifications to its earlier orders concerning the management of stray dogs across the country. The bench, unimpressed by submissions made on behalf of veteran actor and animal welfare advocate Sharmila Tagore, stated that the arguments presented were "completely removed from reality."
Court's Stern Response to 'One Size Fits All' Argument
Appearing for Sharmila Tagore, her counsel argued that a uniform solution cannot be applied to all stray dogs, emphasizing that the issue requires a scientific and psychological approach. The counsel contended that while the existing Animal Birth Control (ABC) rules may have flaws, they should be reviewed and improved rather than discarded entirely. A key point raised was the legal distinction between normal street dogs and aggressive ones, with the suggestion that some aggressive dogs can be rehabilitated with proper treatment and behavioural care.
The counsel proposed that designated committees should clearly identify such dogs. Suggestions from international practices, like using colour-coded collars to mark dogs with a history of biting, were also placed before the court.
Bench Warns Against 'Romanticising' Dogs in Sensitive Areas
The court, however, firmly pushed back against these propositions. The judges urged the lawyers to remain realistic, pointing to India's vast population and differing ground realities compared to other nations. The bench's strongest remarks came when the counsel cited the example of a long-standing stray dog at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS).
The court immediately highlighted the health risks, stating, "Any dog that’s in the streets is bound to have ticks. And a dog with ticks in a hospital will have disastrous consequences." The bench explicitly told the counsel, "Don't try to glorify these dogs in the hospitals," and cautioned against romanticising the presence of dogs in sensitive public spaces like healthcare facilities.
Hearing Focuses on Modifying Earlier Directions
The hearing was part of the Supreme Court's ongoing examination of multiple petitions that seek changes to its previous directives in the contentious matter of stray dog management. The court's skeptical stance indicates the challenges in balancing animal welfare concerns with public health and safety. The bench's sharp critique underscores the judiciary's insistence on pragmatic, reality-based solutions over what it perceived as idealistic arguments. The matter is set for further hearings as the top court continues to deliberate on this complex issue affecting urban and rural spaces nationwide.
