Supreme Court Orders Removal of Stray Dogs from Schools, Hospitals & Public Spaces | Mandates Fencing for Safety
By: Javid Amin | 07 November 2025
In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has ordered the removal of stray dogs from educational institutions, hospitals, bus and railway stations, and other public places, citing rising concerns over safety, hygiene, and public health.
The apex court’s ruling comes amid growing alarm over frequent dog bite incidents across the country, including several fatal cases involving children and the elderly.
A Bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Abhay S. Oka delivered the order, emphasizing that public safety and human life must take precedence while ensuring animal welfare obligations are respected.
Key Directives from the Supreme Court
The comprehensive set of directives, issued to all States and Union Territories, outlines clear protocols for the handling of stray animals in public zones.
1. Removal and Sterilisation
-
Stray dogs must be captured, sterilised, and vaccinated in accordance with the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023.
-
The sterilisation process must be scientifically supervised to prevent cruelty or procedural lapses.
2. Relocation to Designated Shelters
-
After sterilisation, dogs are to be relocated to government-approved shelters.
-
The Court barred the release of sterilised dogs back into high-footfall public zones, declaring that doing so would “defeat the very purpose” of the exercise.
3. Mandatory Fencing Around Public Institutions
-
All educational institutions, hospitals, sports complexes, bus stands, and railway stations must construct boundary walls or fencing within eight weeks.
-
This is to ensure that stray dogs do not re-enter the premises, maintaining hygiene and security.
4. Appointment of Nodal Officers
-
Each institution must designate a Nodal Officer responsible for:
-
Overseeing implementation of the order
-
Maintaining surveillance and records
-
Coordinating with local animal welfare and civic authorities
-
Why This Matters: The Rising Threat of Dog Bites
Over the past few years, India has witnessed an alarming surge in dog bite incidents, many involving children, healthcare workers, and pedestrians.
According to official data from the National Centre for Disease Control (NCDC), more than 1.8 million dog bite cases were reported nationwide in 2024—an increase of nearly 35% from the previous year.
Some tragic cases have captured national attention, including:
-
A 5-year-old boy in Hyderabad who succumbed to injuries after being mauled by stray dogs in a housing colony.
-
A sanitation worker in Kerala attacked by a pack of dogs while on duty.
-
Multiple incidents in Kashmir and Delhi, where stray dogs entered hospital premises, creating panic among patients and staff.
Public outrage and civic complaints have mounted, prompting the Court to step in with a uniform national framework to address the issue.
Balancing Animal Welfare and Human Safety
The Supreme Court acknowledged the need for compassion towards animals but underscored that unregulated stray dog populations pose serious risks to public health and safety.
In its ruling, the Bench observed:
“While the protection of animals is a constitutional and moral responsibility, it cannot come at the cost of human life, particularly children and vulnerable citizens.”
This order marks a policy shift from earlier judgments that allowed sterilised dogs to return to their original territories.
The Court noted that this practice, while rooted in animal rights advocacy, had failed to curb aggressive incidents in densely populated zones.
Public Health and Environmental Implications
Experts say the ruling has far-reaching implications for urban sanitation, waste management, and zoonotic disease prevention.
1. Rabies Control
India accounts for nearly 36% of global rabies deaths, according to WHO estimates. Stray dogs are responsible for over 95% of rabies transmissions in the country.
By enforcing vaccination and controlled sheltering, the Court’s order aims to reduce the risk of rabies outbreaks.
2. Hygiene and Institutional Safety
Hospitals, schools, and railway premises often report dog menace-related hygiene hazards, such as littering, contamination, and dog faeces.
Mandatory fencing and sterilisation programs are expected to mitigate such risks.
3. Waste Management Nexus
Experts also highlight the correlation between poor waste disposal and the proliferation of stray dogs, urging municipal bodies to improve garbage segregation and disposal practices alongside the Court’s directives.
Legal Context: A Shift from Previous Judgments
The new ruling modifies earlier interpretations of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, particularly the 2015 and 2023 guidelines, which allowed community dogs to remain in their territories after sterilisation.
Animal rights activists had long argued that removal disrupts canine hierarchies, leading to aggression and territorial fights.
However, the Supreme Court observed that unrestricted movement of stray dogs in sensitive areas like schools or hospitals is unacceptable, especially when public safety is at stake.
The Bench clarified that “animal protection must be exercised responsibly and within controlled environments.”
Implementation: A Nationwide Mandate
To ensure compliance, the Court directed the Chief Secretaries of all States and UTs to:
-
Submit status reports within 12 weeks, detailing progress in fencing, sterilisation, and relocation efforts.
-
Collaborate with municipal corporations, animal husbandry departments, and NGOs to maintain humane but effective control systems.
-
Create district-level monitoring committees involving animal welfare officers and public health experts.
Failure to comply may invite contempt proceedings, the Court warned.
Animal Welfare Groups React: Divided Opinions
The order has drawn mixed reactions from animal rights organizations and public safety advocates.
People for Animals (PFA)
Welcoming the focus on structured sheltering, PFA emphasized that the ruling should not lead to mass culling or cruelty.
“We support the Court’s humane intent but urge authorities to ensure proper shelter conditions and monitoring,” a spokesperson said.
Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI)
The AWBI said it would issue implementation guidelines aligning with the Court’s order while upholding the ABC Rules and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.
Parents’ and Residents’ Associations
On the other hand, residents’ welfare groups and parent associations hailed the decision, calling it a “long-overdue relief”.
“Schools should be places of learning, not fear,” said a Delhi-based parents’ forum representative. “This judgment finally prioritizes our children’s safety.”
Expert Take: A Model for Urban Safety Reform
Urban planners and public health specialists see this ruling as an opportunity for systemic reform.
Dr. Rakesh Kumar, a veterinary epidemiologist at IVRI, noted:
“This judgment bridges the gap between animal rights and human welfare. If implemented correctly, it could become a model for other developing nations struggling with stray populations.”
He added that local governments must invest in modern shelters, microchipping for identification, and public awareness campaigns promoting responsible pet ownership.
The Road Ahead: Humane Implementation Is Key
While the Supreme Court’s decision has been widely applauded, its success will depend on humane, transparent implementation.
Experts warn that poorly managed relocations could lead to overcrowded shelters, disease spread, and public backlash.
Animal rights advocates urge authorities to:
-
Ensure adequate food, medical care, and space in shelters
-
Avoid mass roundups without sterilisation
-
Promote citizen participation and awareness on animal coexistence
As Justice Kaul remarked in his concluding note:
“Humanity lies not just in protecting animals, but in ensuring both humans and animals coexist safely, with dignity and compassion.”
Conclusion: A Defining Moment for Public Safety and Compassion
The Supreme Court’s directive marks a turning point in India’s approach to stray dog management—shifting from reactive containment to structured, humane regulation.
By mandating sterilisation, vaccination, relocation, and fencing, the ruling addresses both public safety and animal welfare in a balanced manner.
For India’s cities and towns struggling to reconcile compassion with civic order, this judgment may finally offer a roadmap for peaceful coexistence—one that saves both human lives and canine dignity.
