Animal rights activist and BJP leader Maneka Gandhi has welcomed the recent Supreme Court decision regarding stray dogs. She said the order to create designated feeding zones was historic because until now there had been no official recognition of such spaces. For the first time, feeding zones for stray dogs have been made legally valid. However, she also raised an important concern that the court has not clearly defined what qualifies as an “aggressive dog,” which she believes needs urgent clarification.
Article Contents
Supreme Court’s Directive on Stray Dogs
The Supreme Court recently heard a petition challenging the permanent sheltering of stray dogs in Delhi-NCR. During the hearing, the court stated that stray dogs should not be permanently shifted to shelters. Instead, proper feeding areas should be created, and municipal bodies should be tasked with animal birth control measures.
The court made it clear that its order applies across the country and is not limited to Delhi-NCR. This decision was passed by a special bench headed by Justice Vikram Nath, who emphasized that any future infrastructure for stray dogs must be managed by local civic bodies.
Maneka Gandhi’s Response
In her statement, Maneka Gandhi expressed happiness and relief that the Supreme Court’s ruling was based on scientific reasoning. She noted that displacement and fear are among the main reasons stray dogs bite people. By preventing forced relocation, the order ensures that such incidents may reduce.
She clarified that releasing rabid dogs into the open was never an option. However, the court has not addressed how to classify a dog as aggressive, which she said was a vital point that needs legal definition.
According to Maneka, the creation of feeding zones will help manage stray dogs better. She also mentioned that municipalities will now have to set up signboards to mark feeding areas so that the public is aware of them.
Allocation of Funds for Animal Birth Control
Maneka Gandhi revealed that for the first time in 25 years, the government has officially allocated a large budget for controlling stray dog populations. She highlighted that the Parliament has approved Rs 2,500 crore for the Animal Birth Control (ABC) program.
Under this scheme, municipalities are expected to build and manage Animal Birth Control Centers across the country. These centers will carry out sterilization and vaccination of stray dogs to manage their population and reduce cases of rabies.
Importance of Scientific Approach
Animal rights advocates, including Maneka Gandhi, have long argued that humane and scientific methods are the only way to manage stray dogs. Relocating or eliminating them creates territorial imbalance, leading to more dog bites and rising hostility between communities and animals.
The Supreme Court’s decision aligns with this philosophy. By legalizing feeding zones, the order provides both stray animals and animal lovers with a structured framework. Maneka Gandhi emphasized that this recognition is historic because previously feeding activities were seen as personal charity rather than a regulated civic responsibility.
Court’s Observation on Aggressive Dogs
Despite the positive aspects, the order leaves some issues unresolved. The Supreme Court did not define what constitutes an “aggressive dog.” Maneka Gandhi stressed that without clear criteria, disputes could arise in local neighborhoods.
Questions like who will determine whether a dog is aggressive, and what actions will be taken afterward, remain unanswered. She said this gap must be filled with proper guidelines to prevent misuse or arbitrary decisions.
Conditions Imposed on Petitioners
During the hearing, the court directed the petitioners—including animal lovers and NGOs—to deposit money before the matter proceeds further. Individual petitioners were asked to pay Rs 25,000 each, while NGOs were ordered to deposit Rs 2 lakh each.
The court stated that this money would be used for stray dog infrastructure under municipal supervision. This condition indicates that the judiciary wants all stakeholders to contribute directly to the management of the issue.
Broader Implications for Indian Cities
The Supreme Court’s order will affect not just Delhi-NCR but every city and town in India. Many urban centers face rising conflicts between stray dogs and residents. Reports of dog bites often lead to heated debates between animal rights activists and local communities.
The decision provides a structured mechanism that can reduce tensions. With feeding zones and sterilization centers, municipalities can regulate stray populations instead of allowing uncontrolled growth.
Maneka Gandhi on Municipal Responsibility
Maneka Gandhi emphasized that the real responsibility now lies with municipal corporations. She said that civic authorities must set up Animal Birth Control Centers, put up clear signboards for feeding zones, and ensure transparency in operations.
She warned that without active involvement of local governments, the order could remain ineffective. According to her, the central government has already done its part by allocating funds, so now state and local bodies must implement the plan efficiently.
Feeding Zones as a Humane Solution
The concept of designated feeding zones for stray dogs is not new in global cities. Countries with successful stray management models have adopted similar approaches. By ensuring dogs have a fixed place for food, conflicts with humans often reduce.
Animal rights experts argue that when dogs know where they will get food, they become less aggressive and territorial. This also helps in organizing vaccination drives and sterilization programs because the dogs gather regularly at known places.
The Supreme Court’s recognition of feeding zones as legally valid has been seen as a progressive step by activists like Maneka Gandhi.
Public Concerns About Safety
At the same time, sections of the public remain concerned about safety. Many residents fear that feeding zones may attract large packs of dogs, creating risks for children and elderly people.
Maneka Gandhi responded to such fears by pointing out that feeding zones, if properly managed, will reduce chaos. She said that dog attacks often occur when animals are starving or displaced. Regular feeding reduces aggression and makes them easier to monitor medically.
Legal and Social Debate
The Supreme Court’s order has triggered a wider debate. Supporters believe the judgment balances compassion with scientific reasoning. Critics, however, say the order may still not address rising dog bite cases in urban areas.
The absence of a definition for “aggressive dogs” remains the biggest point of concern. Legal experts suggest that state governments may have to issue follow-up guidelines to implement the ruling effectively.
Historical Context
India has grappled with the issue of stray dogs for decades. The Animal Birth Control Rules were first introduced in the early 2000s, focusing on sterilization and vaccination rather than culling. However, poor implementation and lack of funds led to inconsistent results across states.
Maneka Gandhi, who has been at the forefront of animal rights advocacy for over three decades, has consistently opposed culling. She has argued that only sterilization and structured feeding can control stray populations without cruelty.
The Supreme Court’s ruling is seen as a validation of her long-standing position.
The Road Ahead
With Rs 2,500 crore allocated, municipalities now have no excuse to delay. The creation of feeding zones and ABC centers must be prioritized. Transparency will be crucial because corruption or negligence could derail the plan.
Public participation will also be necessary. Residents must cooperate with local authorities and animal rights groups to ensure smooth functioning of feeding zones. Without community support, enforcement will be difficult.
Maneka Gandhi has urged citizens to see the order as an opportunity to coexist peacefully with animals. She believes that with clear rules and proper funding, stray dogs can live in harmony with humans without posing threats.
The Supreme Court’s order on stray dogs has opened a new chapter in animal welfare in India. For the first time, feeding zones have been made legally valid, providing structure to what was previously an informal practice.
Maneka Gandhi has welcomed the decision but also highlighted the urgent need to define what qualifies as an aggressive dog. With Rs 2,500 crore allocated for Animal Birth Control, the infrastructure is expected to expand nationwide.
If implemented effectively, the order could reduce dog bites, control stray populations, and set an example of humane coexistence. The responsibility now lies with municipal bodies to act promptly and with integrity.
Discover more from
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.