During the Supreme Court’s hearing on the controversial Delhi–NCR stray dogs case, Justice Vikram Nath asked senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi about his cropped video feed, prompting Singhvi’s witty reply, “It is the technology, Milord !” The court has reserved its order on petitions challenging the August 11 directive to relocate all stray dogs to shelters.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India witnessed an unusual light moment during the hearing of the controversial stray dogs case in the Delhi–National Capital Region (NCR). The matter came before a three-judge bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and NV Anjaria.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who was appearing virtually in support of the cause of stray dogs, was seen on screen with his head partially cropped.
Justice Nath immediately noticed this and asked Singhvi why his head was cut off on the screen. Singhvi responded with a smile, saying,
“It is the technology, Milord !”
The court has now reserved its order on several petitions seeking to put on hold the Supreme Court’s earlier suo motu order of August 11 regarding stray dogs.
That order, passed by a two-judge bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, had directed authorities in Delhi–NCR to begin picking up stray dogs from all residential and commercial areas at the earliest and relocate them to designated dog shelters.
The August 11 order had also directed the authorities to create proper dog shelters immediately and submit a progress report on the creation of such infrastructure within eight weeks.
This direction was given in a suo motu case initiated on July 28 after the court took note of multiple incidents of stray dog bites leading to rabies, especially among children.
However, on Wednesday, Chief Justice of India BR Gavai reassigned the case. The suo motu matter on stray dogs was withdrawn from the bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan and assigned to a different bench for further hearing.
During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta made a sharp remark, stating,
“People eat meat, but present themselves as animal lovers.”
He pointed out that there are instances where people post videos of themselves eating meat and then claim to be compassionate towards animals.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of an NGO that works for the welfare of stray dogs, described the situation as “very serious” and called for detailed arguments on the matter.
He also requested the court to put a stay on certain parts of the August 11 order.
The August 11 directive from the court has divided public opinion. Some believe it is a necessary step to address the growing problem of dog–human conflicts, while others feel it is unreasonable and could create more problems.
Animal rights organisation PETA India has strongly opposed the order, calling it
“impractical, illogical, and illegal.”
According to PETA India, the forced removal of community dogs from their existing locations would lead to “chaos and suffering” for both the animals and the residents.
With the order now reserved, the final decision of the Supreme Court will determine whether the controversial directive on relocating all stray dogs in Delhi–NCR to shelters within eight weeks will stand or be stayed.
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Stray Dogs
