Over the past decade, street dogs in India have shifted from being familiar neighbourhood fixtures to becoming the subject of intense legal, administrative, and social conflict. What appears on the surface as a public safety debate is, in fact, a deeper question about constitutional limits, governance capacity, scientific evidence, and the ethics of coexistence in densely populated cities.
When street dogs reach the constitutional court
India is perhaps the only country where the management of street dogs has repeatedly reached the level of constitutional adjudication. The involvement of the Supreme Court of India — including through suo motu proceedings triggered by newspaper reports — has raised concerns about judicial overreach, especially when directions are issued without hearing all affected parties.
Ordering the mass confinement of street dogs into pounds is not merely an administrative challenge; it implies enormous fiscal costs running into thousands of crores and assumes the existence of municipal infrastructure that simply does not exist in most Indian cities.
Separation of powers and the limits of judicial governance
A core constitutional issue here is the principle of separation of powers, recognised by the Court itself as part of the basic structure of the Constitution. Under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, the Animal Welfare Board is the designated executive authority responsible for framing and revising guidelines on animal management.
When courts step into the role of rule-makers or implementing agencies, they risk blurring institutional boundaries. A more constitutionally consistent approach would be judicial oversight that nudges executive authorities to perform their statutory duties effectively, rather than substituting judicial wisdom for administrative expertise.
The law already exists, the implementation does not
India’s street-dog challenge is often misdiagnosed as a legal vacuum. In reality, the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules — most recently updated in 2023 — already provide a clear national framework based on the Capture–Sterilise–Vaccinate–Release (CSVR) model.
This framework reflects the global scientific consensus endorsed by bodies such as the World Health Organisation and the World Organisation for Animal Health, which recognise sterilisation and vaccination as the only sustainable methods for controlling dog populations and preventing rabies.
Why culling and detention fail
Removal-based approaches — whether through culling or long-term detention in pounds — have repeatedly failed worldwide. They create ecological “vacuum zones” where dogs from surrounding areas migrate in, restarting the cycle of population growth, conflict, and disease.
Detention also assumes humane, well-funded, and professionally managed shelters. Ground realities in India suggest otherwise. Many municipal pounds suffer from chronic understaffing, lack of veterinary care, food shortages, and weak oversight, turning them into sites of prolonged suffering rather than solutions.
What global experience actually shows
International examples underline that success lies not in coercion but in coordinated governance. France reduced stray dog populations through municipal action combining registration, sterilisation incentives, strict penalties for abandonment, and public education — without judicial micromanagement.
The Netherlands offers an even more striking example. It became the first country to achieve zero stray dogs without killing them, by implementing a nationwide CSVR programme supported by funding, enforcement, adoption systems, and civic participation. The role of courts was minimal; execution rested with local governments and civil society.
Indian cities and the overlooked evidence
Within India too, several cities have demonstrated that sustained Animal Birth Control programmes can stabilise and even reduce street-dog populations over time. These outcomes challenge the notion that advocates of sterilisation-based approaches are driven by sentiment rather than reason. The evidence is empirical, not emotional.
Behavioural science also matters. Most dog-bite incidents are linked to hunger, mating stress, or provocation. Sterilised and regularly fed dogs tend to be territorial but non-aggressive, often acting as informal guards rather than threats.
Social realities beyond elite anxieties
Street dogs occupy a complex social space in Indian cities. In many low-income neighbourhoods, they are fed, tolerated, and even relied upon for security. Children often interact with them daily, learning empathy and responsibility. Dogs are also used in therapeutic contexts, highlighting their social value beyond mere utility.
The sharpest resistance to coexistence often emerges from elite urban spaces that are physically disconnected from everyday street life but possess disproportionate influence over public discourse and litigation.
What to note for Prelims?
- Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2023 mandate the CSVR approach.
- WHO and WOAH endorse sterilisation and vaccination for rabies control.
- Animal Welfare Board functions under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
- Separation of powers is part of the Constitution’s basic structure.
What to note for Mains?
- Judicial overreach versus executive accountability in animal welfare governance.
- Limits of coercive solutions in managing urban commons.
- Role of scientific evidence in public policy disputes.
- Balancing compassion, public safety, and constitutional principles.
