Do animals have rights? The SC ruling on stray dogs shows why this needs to change

The recent Supreme Court judgement directing municipal authorities to remove stray dogs from the streets of the Delhi National Capital Region has now been modified.

A three-judge bench has now ruled that municipal authorities must release dogs back into their original territories after they are sterilised, dewormed and immunised. The only exceptions are rabid or aggressive dogs.

The earlier directive by the division bench – mandating that stray dogs be removed, placed in shelters, and not released back into streets had sparked widespread controversy. Activists, politicians, and concerned citizens reacted strongly, urging the government to adopt humane and scientific solutions instead.

The ruling was quite shocking, given its sweeping severity, but it also appeared to be a knee-jerk response to the perceived threat of rabies and its transmission from infected dogs to humans.

And while much ink has been spilled on the earlier Supreme Court order, a far deeper issue, rooted within our legal system, continues to be overlooked – what makes it possible for the judges to give such harsh directives that show such little regard for the lives of the animals, while prioritising human rights and welfare?

The legal status of animals in India

The Supreme Court’s reiteration of the legal status of animals in India – first in Animal Welfare Board of India vs A...

Read more