By Dr. Gyan Pathak
Chief Justice of India (CJI) B R Gavai’s assurance of giving a relook at the ban order passed on “Community Dogs” on Monday, August 11, 2025 by a Supreme Court Bench comprising of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan has given a cause to be happy for many people who have compassion towards dogs in particular, and all living beings in general.
The bench has ordered shifting all “stray dogs” from residential localities to shelters in view of rising dog bites and rabies cases, which has drawn sharp criticism from animal lovers. It has created a great controversy since many, including Resident Welfare Associations (RWAs), has welcomed the order.
The issue was raised before the CJI this morning and was also apprised of a previous court order that barred the relocation and killing of “stray dogs” and mandated the following of existing laws. It was pointed out that a May 2024 order by a bench of Justice JK Maheshwari, had observed, “Exhibiting compassion to all living beings is a Constitutional value.”
The bench that ordered that ban had said, “We need to pick up or round up with whatever means to ensure dog-free locality, and that’s how children and the aged will feel safe.” The bench had also made it clear that no petitions by dog lovers or any other party would be heard. Justice Pardiwala had said “We are not doing this for us. It is for the public interest. So, no sentiments of any nature should be involved. Action should be taken at the earliest.”
The order immediately attracted sharp criticism, from civil society, politicians, and celebrities. An actor John Abraham even appealed to the CJP for immediate review of the order. Animal Welfare activist and former Union Minister Maneka Gandhi labelled the order against dogs “impractical”, “financially unviable,” and “potentially harmful” to the region’s ecological balance.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) said that such a large-scale displacement is both unscientific and ineffective. PETA India’s Senior Director of Veterinary Affairs Dr Mini Aravindan has said, “Communities think of neighbourhood dogs as family, and the displacement and jailing of dogs is not scientific and has NEVER worked…It will also ultimately do nothing to curb the dog population, reduce rabies or prevent dog bite incidents.”
Community Dogs actually have been subjected to both compassion and cruelty by the human beings. Calling community dogs “stray dogs” or “street dogs” itself is a mild form of cruelty against them, though they actually need compassion of human beings.
Community dogs are a visible part of urban and rural landscapes in many countries, especially in South Asia, and more widespread in India across all the states. Our attitudes toward them usually fall somewhere between two extremes: compassion and cruelty. Both have deep roots in culture, law, economics, and public health concerns.
Compassion towards community dogs arises from empathy, ethical beliefs, and sometimes religious or cultural values that emphasize kindness toward all living beings. Many people find it moral and ethical duty to show compassion towards them. Many people believe dogs, like humans, have the right to live free from unnecessary suffering.
Many religions teach us about compassion towards animals, particularly dogs, which the humans have domesticated. In Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and other traditions, caring for animals is considered a virtue.
Recognition of sentience is another issue involved. Awareness that dogs feel pain, joy, and fear leads to a moral obligation to protect them. Moreover, there is a community bonding. Community dogs often form relationships with local residents who feed them, name them, and sometimes provide medical help.
Act of compassion traditionally shown towards community dogs are: Feeding and providing water, especially in harsh weather; Vaccination drives (especially against rabies); Sterilization under the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Programme; Rescuing injured or abused animals and getting them veterinary care; and Building small shelters or providing blankets during winter.
As against compassion, the community dogs are also subjected to cruelty. Cruelty can be both active (deliberate harm) and passive (neglect or indifference). The reasons for cruelty are also many. The top among them is fear and safety concerns. Rabies outbreaks, aggressive dog behaviour, and dog-bite incidents can trigger hostility. Misinformation is another reason. The myths about community dogs are widespread such as they are inherently dangerous or “dirty.”
Irritation at nuisance, such as by barking, chasing vehicles, or scavenging garbage can annoy residents, is also among the chief causes for cruelty against them. The last, but not the least is the lack of awareness of laws: Many people don’t know harming dogs is a punishable offence in India under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. Formerly it was also offence under Indian penal code section 428 and 429, and now under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Section 325.
Community dogs are subjected to several cruelties by humans, which include Physical violence—beating, poisoning, or running over intentionally; Forcible relocation without sterilization (leading to territory conflicts and increased aggression); Denial of food/water or destruction of their shelters; and Public campaigns calling for culling instead of humane management.
These all have been happening despite existing legal and policy framework in India. They are Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, which mandates sterilization and vaccination instead of killing or displacing street dogs; Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, which Prohibits causing unnecessary pain or suffering to animals; several Supreme Court and High Court rulings, which recognize feeding and caring for “street dogs” as legal and protect animal lovers from harassment; and WHO & OIE recommendations, which suggest sterilization + vaccination as the most humane and effective long-term control.
In the given scenario, what India needs is balancing compassion and public safety. A sustainable approach requires: Mass sterilization & vaccination programs to control population and prevent rabies; Public education to replace fear with informed safety practices; Community participation—citizens, NGOs, and municipal bodies working together; Conflict mediation between feeders and those concerned about dog bites; and a better waste management to reduce food sources that encourage overpopulation.
There is also an ethical perspective. Philosophers often frame the debate around “coexistence ethics”—acknowledging that humans have created the conditions for “street dogs’ survival” (through waste, urbanization, abandonment), so we carry a moral responsibility to manage them humanely. Cruelty, therefore, is not just a moral failing but also a societal abdication of responsibility. (IPA Service)
