We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
“Dogs living on school or railway premises cannot be relocated—it’s their home. The ABC Rules are clear that every dog must be sterilised, vaccinated, and released back. Making exceptions undermines the very basis of animal rights,” said independent activist Sonyaa Khanna.
Speaking to Hindustan Times, Maneka Gandhi, former Union minister and animal welfare advocate, said, “The Supreme Court is asking every municipal body and district magistrate to remove dogs from schools, hospitals, railway stations and bus stops, and build walls around these spaces. How will they build walls at bus stops or railway stations? How will they stop dogs from returning?”
She added, “Ninety-five percent of bite cases happen due to relocation. If roughly 35 lakh dogs are taken out of their territories, where will they go? There are no shelters, and even if they are built, who will fund them?” Gandhi said the more sustainable approach would be to expand sterilisation facilities. “We need 700 ABC centres for 700 districts. In two years, the population can fall from 1.35 crore to 60 lakh. Right now, only 50 districts have such centres,” she said.
Other activists warned that the order could worsen the problem. “It’s a problematic directive, similar to the one issued on August 11. We don’t have enough shelters, and there’s no clarity on how new dogs will be kept out of cleared areas. Chasing them away only makes them aggressive,” said Asher Jesudoss, member of the Delhi Animal Welfare Board.
“The ABC centres in Delhi are in terrible shape. We need to fix what exists before building new systems. This is not scientific population management,” he added.
Gauri Maulekhi, trustee of People for Animals – Public Policy Foundation, said vague court directions were already being misused. “In recent months, we’ve seen dogs being illegally lifted, dumped outside cities, and brutalised. Caregivers, many of them women, have been threatened. Today’s order, without safeguards, will only deepen the crisis,” she said.
Independent activist Salman Ali said the ruling went against “both the rights and dignity of dogs,” urging the government to focus on proper implementation of the ABC programme instead.
At Delhi University’s Kirori Mal College, students expressed dismay at the order. “Our students love the campus dogs, so we took the most practical step—vaccinating them to keep everyone safe. The Supreme Court’s proposal feels impractical and impossible to enforce,” said principal Dinesh Khattar.
A student added, “If ABC programmes are implemented properly and people are educated, measures like this won’t be needed. This world is as much theirs as ours.”
https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/residents-activists-call-sc-order-on-removing-stray-dogs-impractical-inhumane-101762541119844-amp.html