The Supreme Court on Wednesday delivered a blunt observation while hearing a case related to the growing menace of stray dogs, stating that it is impossible to predict an animal’s behaviour when it turns aggressive. The remark came during arguments on public safety concerns linked to stray dogs in sensitive areas such as schools, hospitals, and courts.
A three-judge bench led by Justice Vikram Nath, along with Justices Sandeep Mehta and N.V. Anjaria, questioned why stray dogs should be allowed to remain in high-risk public spaces. The bench pointed out that even if a dog does not attack, its mere presence on roads can lead to serious accidents.
During the hearing, Justice Vikram Nath remarked that danger is not limited to dog bites alone. He observed that it is impossible to assess a dog’s mood at any given moment and whether it may suddenly turn hostile. The court stressed that roads and public institutions must remain free from such unpredictable risks.
The bench further noted that while animal welfare is important, public safety cannot be compromised. It emphasized that stray dogs near busy roads, schools, and hospitals pose a continuous threat, even if they appear calm.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioners, argued that stray dogs can be captured, vaccinated, sterilised, and then released back into the same locality. However, the court responded sharply, stating that animals cannot be “trained or counselled” to ensure they will not bite after being released. The judges sarcastically observed that counselling dogs to change their behaviour was the only thing left to try.
The Supreme Court underlined that the issue extends beyond animal attacks and includes road accidents caused when vehicles suddenly swerve to avoid dogs. According to the bench, preventive measures must focus on eliminating risk altogether, not reacting after tragedy strikes.
The hearing has been adjourned to the next day. Earlier, the apex court had directed that schools, hospitals, railway stations, bus depots, and sports complexes be fenced to prevent the entry of stray dogs. It had also ordered local authorities to relocate dogs to shelters after vaccination and sterilisation, clearly stating that they should not be released back to the same locations.
In previous hearings, the court had expressed strong displeasure over state governments failing to comply with its directions and warned that the stray dog issue was damaging India’s global image. The matter has since been expanded nationwide, making all states and Union Territories parties to the case.
