Hundreds gathered at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar to protest the Supreme Court’s order on removing stray dogs, demanding its withdrawal. Activists and musicians urged accountability from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi for ineffective management of the stray dog population.
NEW DELHI: Hundreds of people, including children, senior citizens, public figures, and activists, assembled at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar on Sunday to oppose the recent Supreme Court directive on removing stray dogs. The protesters demanded that the order be withdrawn ahead of the upcoming hearing next week.
Musicians Mohit Chauhan and Rahul Ram joined the three hour long demonstration titled “Do or Die: One Day, One Voice, One Cause,” encouraging citizens to unite in defense of stray dogs.
Protesters asserted that the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) should be held accountable for inadequately managing the city’s stray dog population. They demanded that dogs taken for sterilization and vaccination be returned to their original locations.
Earlier, the Supreme Court had labeled the rising incidents of dog bites a “matter of human safety concern” and instructed all states and Union territories to ensure that stray dogs be removed from places like schools, hospitals, sports venues, bus stands, and railway stations. This ruling has triggered widespread protests in the capital.
On August 22, 2025, a three-judge special bench, led by Justice Vikram Nath and joined by Justices Sandeep Mehta and N.V. Anjaria, revised its earlier order from August 11 that had prohibited the release of stray dogs from shelters.
The new directives stated that:
- Stray dogs collected by municipal authorities must be sterilized, vaccinated, dewormed, and returned to the area from which they were taken.
- Dogs that are rabid, suspected of rabies, or displaying aggressive behavior should not be released back onto the streets. Instead, they must be sterilized, vaccinated, and housed in separate pounds or shelters.
- Municipal bodies are required to establish designated feeding areas for stray dogs in each ward to enable better management.
The Supreme Court broadened the focus of the stray dog case to include all States and Union Territories, making them parties to the proceedings.
Also Read: Justice Vikram Nath: Thankful to the Stray Dogs Case for Making Me Known Globally
After this order, the court observed delay in implementation of the above directives.
Justice Vikram Nath Said that:
“When we require them to come and file compliance affidavit, they are just sleeping over it. No respect for the order of the court. Then alright, let them come.”
The bench observed that despite the Supreme Court allowing sufficient time for compliance, many state authorities had failed to adhere to the August 22, 2025, order pertaining to the enforcement of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules.
In this protest demonstrators said that stray dogs were being penalised for what they termed as MCD’s negligence in carrying out vaccination and sterilisation drives.
A 7-year-old Jasnoor Kaur from Tagore Garden said,
“I don’t have pets at home, but I look forward to playing with dogs in the park. I don’t want them to go away and I am here to request the government to not take them,”
Rahul Ram, who is also known for his social activism, compared the ruling on stray dogs to the earlier decision on green crackers, saying both lacked solid research and a clear implementation plan.
Women’s rights activist Yogita Bhayana emphasized that women and children often feel more secure in the presence of stray dogs.
Another protester, 65 year old Madhvi Bal, held up a copy of the Constitution, remarked,
“Article 51A of our Constitution talks about duties like protection of environment and wildlife. People now have to demand that they perform their duties, which is taking care of stray dogs. For generations, we have kept a portion of our food for strays. With rulings like these, we are moving away from our roots. This is ironic because our government is of the opinion to revive our tradition,”
Animal rights activist Ambika Shukla criticised the authorities,
She said,
“The government only cared out their vote bank. The court passed the order without hearing the other side or referring to an expert committee. People who want to be heard and say things in favour of animals have to pay fees but those who are against the dogs don’t have to pay anything. The court did not question the MCD even once, that is where our sense of injustice is brewing from,”.
The next hearing on the matter is set for January 7.