There is no dearth of matters of grave political and constitutional importance that the country’s apex court is presently seized of. Two of the foremost being the Presidential Reference seeking clarity on the April 2025 order of a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, fixing timelines for the President and Governors to act on bills passed by State legislatures, and the petitions related to ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar.However, in the annals of Indian judicial history, August 2025 would not be remembered for these, but for the 10 days when an army of ‘animal lovers’ mounted pressure through protests and pawed the doors of the SC till three-judge bench muzzled the order issued by a two-judge bench on August 11 relating to stray dogs.The two-judge bench, in what can perhaps be described as a moment of canine catastrophe, ordered the removal of all stray dogs, estimated to be close to 20 lakh, from the streets of the National Capital Region within eight weeks.Inflamed by the rising numbers of dog bites and rabies deaths, especially since children and elderly are affected, the bench ordered street dogs to be rounded up, taken to shelters, vaccinated, sterilised and never to be let out again.The order, issued in a huff in a suo-motu case after hearing only the Solicitor General of India and an amicus curiae, was “salutary” as the three-judge bench later mentioned while emphasising that the intent was to protect the citizens.However, as the larger bench highlighted, the order was not only “too harsh,” but contravened the Animal Birth Control Rules in force and overlooked the logistics of “gargantuan proportions” to enforce it.India’s dog-loving community, hit like a thunderbolt by the August 11 order, instantly raised howls of disapproval. WhatsApp groups that shared cute videos of dogs transformed into war rooms. Instagram influencers pivoted from posting selfies to posting protest schedules.The nation’s ‘animal lovers’—as the three-judge bench referred to the several individuals and organisations working for the welfare of the strays who challenged the order — united faster than opposition parties before an election. The movement went viral quicker than a video of a cat fitting itself into progressively smaller boxes.Although the order was meant for Delhi region, peaceful protests including many a four-legged participant were organised not only in Delhi but across many cities. In Mumbai, protesters came out braving incessant rains, which even the city’s resilient street dogs take shelter from. In Delhi, protesters gathered with catchy slogans like “Awaara nahi hamara hai” (They’re not strays, they’re ours).Keyboard warriors fought online with the ferocity of, well, strays fighting for their territories, countering the highly polarised opinions the order evoked, given many were terming its draconian directions the need of the hour.The unprecedented uprising of the dog lobby resulted in the three-judge bench modifying the order on August 22 with a new set of well-intented directives, which were also a masterclass in balancing acts. Yes, dogs would be picked up, but they’d be returned after sterilization and vaccination in the same location as per the existing ABC rules.In hindsight, despite all the opposition, the two-judge bench’s order succeeded in bringing urgency to tackle the issue of stray population, consequent increase in dog bites and rabies cases, which seem to disproportionately affect the poor.The three-judge bench, by keeping the case open and impleading all the states, has brought hope that the mammoth failure in implementing the ABC rules over the years, which led to the problem in the first place, would be addressed.The SC’s message was also clear in another aspect: We hear you, animal lovers, but this is a two-way street (one where dogs can still thankfully walk on ) that comes with accountability.It mandated feeding only in designated zones, ordered for stringent action against those obstructing officials discharging their duties.
Source link
