SC Order on Stray Dogs Sparks Debate in City
Activists also stressed that feeding restrictions alone would not solve the issue. “Waste management, vaccination, sterilisation and responsible feeding practices all have to work together,” Roy said.
Hyderabad: As the Supreme Court refused to dilute its earlier directions on stray dogs in public spaces, animal rights activists in Hyderabad said the order raises difficult questions around public safety and the country’s weak animal welfare infrastructure.
“The court is right to speak about public safety and the fear many people live with after repeated dog attacks. But confining community dogs to shelters indefinitely is not a practical or humane long‑term solution when most cities do not even have enough shelters, staff or funding to care for the animals already there,” said Saradha Sree, an activist working with stray dog welfare groups.
She pointed to failures in sterilisation and vaccination drives. “The Supreme Court itself noted poor implementation. Sterilisation and anti‑rabies vaccination programmes were supposed to be continuous and systematic. Instead, they were treated like occasional drives. That administrative failure has now turned into a public safety crisis,” she said.
Ashar, legal adviser and director of cruelty response, PETA India, told Deccan Chronicle that there is no clear national definition for what qualifies as a ‘dangerous’ dog. “Right now it is left to interpretation by local authorities. A dog barking at another animal for entering its territory may simply be seen as aggressive. That creates room for misuse,” he said.
He also questioned why stricter action was not taken against civic bodies for poor implementation of sterilisation programmes. “The Supreme Court itself noted that Animal Birth Control centres and funding remain inadequate in many districts. But there has been no real accountability for officials. Now local bodies are being asked to build shelters and expand ABC work using the same limited funds. If money gets split between both, sterilisation numbers may actually slow down, which could worsen the situation on the streets,” he said.
Another activist, Aniruddha Roy, warned the order may trigger panic removals and overcrowded shelters. “Dogs may now be picked up in large numbers without proper rehabilitation plans. Overcrowded shelters can lead to disease, stress and neglect. Public safety matters, but animal welfare cannot be treated as secondary,” he said.
On the court permitting legally permissible euthanasia of rabid or dangerous dogs, activists said strict monitoring would be needed. “The fear is not about action against genuinely rabid dogs. The concern is whether terms like ‘dangerous’ may end up being interpreted too broadly by local authorities under pressure from public anger,” Roy added.
Activists also stressed that feeding restrictions alone would not solve the issue. “Waste management, vaccination, sterilisation and responsible feeding practices all have to work together,” Roy said.
