The Supreme Court of India refused to entertain an NGO plea seeking clarification on stray dog euthanasia directions, observing that statements made by a Chief Minister cannot justify modifying judicial orders or imply permission for indiscriminate killing of stray dogs across states.
Today, On 19th May, The Supreme Court refused to recall its earlier direction that stray dogs taken from public places such as hospitals, bus stands, schools and railway stations must not be released back after vaccination or sterilisation. It also allowed authorities to euthanize rabid and dangerously aggressive stray dogs.
Today, On 19th May, The Supreme Court refused to recall its earlier directions regarding stray dogs picked up from public places like hospitals, bus stands, schools and railway stations. It said such dogs should not be released back to the same locations after vaccination and sterilisation, maintaining strict control measures.
The Supreme Court strongly criticised arguments made on behalf of Sharmila Tagore against a uniform approach to managing stray dogs, calling them “completely removed from reality.” The Bench rejected examples like dogs living in hospital campuses and warned of serious public health risks, reiterating that stray dog management must follow ABC rules.
The Supreme Court resumed its suo motu case on stray dogs, with Justice Vikram Nath asserting, “I am the master of my own court,” refusing to follow the SOP on fixed argument timings. While Sr. Adv. Gopal Sankarnarayanan said, “time should be indicated for the arguments,” Justice Vikram Nath replied, “I am not following that so far”