Delhi’s Stray Dilemma

Every dog has its day, but for Delhi’s strays, that day may have just been called off.

Recently, the Supreme Court, in response to rising dog bite incidents and rabies fatalities, directed removal, sterilisation, vaccination, and permanent relocation of all stray dogs from Delhi-NCR to shelters within 6–8 weeks, with no re-release. It is a sharp departure from the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, which require sterilised and vaccinated dogs to be returned to the same location.

Public Safety Vs. Animal Rights

Under Sections 3 and 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (PCA Act), read with Article 51A(g) of the Constitution, animals are guaranteed the right to food, shelter, and protection from harm, especially when domesticated. These provisions recognise that dignity and fair treatment are not exclusive to humans; animals too have the right not to be beaten, kicked, over-ridden, or overloaded. In Animal Welfare Board of India vs. A. Nagaraja (2014), the Supreme Court went further, extending Article 21’s “right to life” to animals, acknowledging their intrinsic value beyond utility to humans.

Yet, Article 21 also safeguards people’s right to safety, creating a constitutional tug-of-war whenever dog-bite cases dominate headlines. This tension is most visible in the debate over feeding stray dogs. For many, it is a cultural or religious act and for others, it is an expression of compassion. But in the absence of sufficient government-run shelters, most feeding takes place in public spaces, near parks, schools, or apartment gates where human-dog encounters are inevitable, and sometimes dangerous.

Municipal inefficiency further compounds the risk. Official data from MCD shows that between January and June this year, the capital reported 49 rabies cases alongside 35,198 animal bite incidents. Three in every four animal bites are due to dogs, with over 5,700 deaths in humans estimated to occur each year due to rabies in India, according to a study published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases journal.

Practical Challenges with SC Order

While on paper, the order promises swift relief to residents weary of dog bites and rabies scares. In practice, it sets the stage for a logistical and ethical challenge of unprecedented scale. The last official dog census in the capital was conducted in 2009, counting about 5.6 lakh strays. Sixteen years later, unofficial estimates suggest that the number has nearly doubled. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) currently operates just 20 animal control centres, designed only for short-term post-sterilisation care. Delhi would need thousands of such facilities to comply with the Court’s vision. Feeding lakhs of dogs daily, alongside providing veterinary care, ambulances, CCTV monitoring, and staff salaries could place a sustained fiscal burden on municipal bodies. MCD officials have admitted they are yet to finalise plans for shelter construction and funding.

Balanced Approach and Global Best Practices

Delhi’s problem is not just the number of dogs, it is about building a system that works in the long term. The Netherlands, often hailed as the first country to eliminate stray dogs, shows what a determined policy mix can achieve. The foundation was a citywide Catch–Neuter–Vaccinate–Return programme, offered free to all. Buying pets from breeders was made costly through high taxes, nudging people towards adoption. Abandonment became a serious crime, punishable with up to three years in prison and steep fines. To make sure these laws worked, the country even set up a dedicated “animal police” to respond to welfare violations.

For India, a humane and lasting solution could involve nationwide adoption campaigns and public awareness initiatives. Safe feeding zones, set away from schools, parks, and other high-risk areas, could help reduce human-dog conflicts. Large-scale sterilisation and vaccination drives should be accelerated through NGO partnerships.

Delhi’s stray dog debate is often framed as a clash between human safety and animal welfare. In truth, the Constitution protects both. Quick removals may satisfy public pressure but will see the problem return within months. A steady, well-planned, and humane approach could allow Delhi to emerge not just from crisis, but as a model for other Indian cities.

The writer is a lawyer and commenter on legal matters. Views expressed are personal