The Supreme Court (SC) has unequivocally denied requests from chief secretaries of states and Union Territories to attend hearings via video conference. The court’s directive mandates their physical presence to address non-compliance with the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, and the persistent problem of stray dog menace.
Expressing strong dissatisfaction, the court stated that authorities seem to be “sleeping over” previous orders and must now personally appear to explain why compliance affidavits have not been filed, despite repeated directives. Rejecting the solicitor general’s plea for virtual appearances, a bench led by justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta declared, “No, let them come physically.” The bench highlighted the unfortunate reality of the government framing rules while failing to implement them, demonstrating a lack of respect for court orders.
The court reiterated its stance, refusing to relax the requirement for personal attendance, stating, “They have to physically come and explain why compliance affidavits were not filed.” This firm stance follows a similar rejection made just days prior, where a plea for exemption from personal appearance for Bihar’s chief secretary, citing assembly polls, was dismissed. The court clarified that election duties do not exempt officials from their legal obligations.
Earlier, on October 27, the bench had voiced its displeasure at the widespread failure of states and UTs to submit compliance reports regarding ABC implementation, despite a three-month extension granted in August. Consequently, chief secretaries of all states and UTs were summoned for personal appearance on November 3, with only Telangana and West Bengal exempted due to their compliance. The court also specifically mandated the Delhi chief secretary’s personal attendance, notwithstanding a submitted report from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD).
Justice Nath remarked on the lack of progress, noting, “Three months were given to them in August, but nothing has come on record. Continuous incidents are happening, and your country is shown in bad light at international platforms.” The bench further questioned the apparent disregard for court orders, even with extensive media coverage, asking if state officials were unaware of the directives.
The Supreme Court is actively monitoring this issue to balance public safety concerns arising from dog-bite incidents with the mandate for humane stray dog management as per the ABC Rules. These rules promote a catch-neuter-vaccinate-release model, discouraging mass capture or confinement.
In a significant modification on August 22, a bench led by Justice Nath revised an earlier directive for the mass capture of stray dogs across Delhi and surrounding areas. The court deemed that prohibition “too harsh” and clarified that dogs must be sterilized, vaccinated, and then released back into their original localities, unless they are suffering from rabies or exhibiting aggressive behavior. This ensures adherence to the ABC Rules, 2023, which focus on humane management through sterilization and immunization. The court also mandated designated feeding areas and prohibited feeding in public streets and residential zones, with violations to face legal action.
The court’s intervention came after widespread public concern, amplified by incidents such as the death of a child due to dog bites, which initially prompted a stricter order. However, this order faced criticism from animal welfare groups for potential cruelty and statutory violations. Subsequently, the Chief Justice of India reassigned the matter to the current bench to reconcile public safety with animal welfare.