From August 16, the Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments on what has been described by some as a ‘menace’ of stray dogs in Kerala. A polarised debate on whether strays should be euthanised is expected to transpire.
—
“LET no dogs be killed in the interim,” requested an advocate of a division Bench of the Supreme Court as it was about to conclude a hearing on the ‘menace’ of stray dogs in Kerala.
“Let the dogs not kill us,” rejoined another advocate present in the courtroom.
The Bench, comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and K.V. Vishwanathan, told the counsels that “an enduring solution is required”, indicating that it might not be fully in agreement with Kannur district panchayat’s plea to euthanise “suspected rabid” and “extremely dangerous” stray dogs.
The panchayat had moved the Supreme Court after an eleven year old autistic child was killed by a pack of dogs on June 11 in the coastal town of Muzhappilangad in the district.
“Incidents of stray dog attacks and road accidents due to collision with dogs are increasing day by day within the district panchayat area as well as throughout the state,” the petition states.
The petitioners clarified that they were “not for indiscriminate killing” of dogs, but expressed their fear that “furious dogs that bite cannot be controlled by birth control”.
“We have to identify the ferocious dogs and kill them,” they contended.
The Bench was also hearing a similar petition moved by the Kerala State Commission for Protection of Child Rights seeking directions to euthanise stray dogs.
“Incidents of dog bites are increasing and causing serious threat to (the) life of children in Kerala… It is a serious violation of child rights,” the commission, represented by advocate Jaimon Andrews, had told the court on an earlier date.
As the issue has resulted in considerable polarisation between people in favour of ending the stray dog ‘menace’ on one hand, and animal rights activists on the other hand, multiple parties have filed intervention applications in the matter.
Today, the Bench did not hear extensive arguments on the merits of the case. Instead, it focussed on procedural issues, chief among them being how to proceed in a situation where multiple parties are seeking intervention.
Senior advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing People for Animals, among others, suggested the Bench to direct creation of a common compilation that could be relied upon by all parties and the Bench during the course of the proceedings, as was done in marriage equality proceedings in May.
The court agreed and appointed advocate-on-record Manisha Karia as the nodal counsel for the proper compilation of documents.
The common compilation will comprise details of various intervention applications, pending cases in other courts, and laws relating to the control of stray dogs.
Senior advocate Anand Grover, for Federation of Animal Protection Organisations, asked the Bench to preemptively apportion time between various advocates to ensure fair allocation of time to argue. The Bench said that it will consider his request.
In April 2023, the Union government notified the Animal Birth Control Rules. The Rules prescribe programmes for sterilisation and immunisation of stray dogs by local bodies. They supplant the Animal Birth Control (Dog) Rules, 2001.
The 2023 Rules require stray dogs to be caught, vaccinated, neutered and released back to the area in which they reside.
There is prohibition on relocation of stray dogs, pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision in Animal Welfare Board of India versus People for Elimination of Stray Troubles And Others (2017).
“The only enduring rule is birth control,” advocate-on-record Jasmine Damkewala submitted in the court today, adding further that in some districts of Kerala people are being encouraged to kill stray dogs.
Senior advocate Krishnan Venugopal, representing All Creatures Great and Small, Haryana claimed that the alleged menace in Kerala is due to the state government not implementing the 2023 Rules.
“They say they should be able to pick up any ‘suspected rabid dog’ and do whatever they want without any regulatory or statutory control. This is a very serious matter: to permit people to engage in this kind of cruelty,” Venugopal said, mentioning instances where dogs were purportedly thrown into rivers, poisoned or hanged.
One of the issues that the court will hear arguments on is whether state law could prevail over Union law in the context of animal welfare legislation.
The court will commence hearing arguments on the matter on August 16.
Animal Welfare Board of India And Another versus People for Elimination of Stray Troubles And Others CA No. 5988/2019
With State of Kerala And Others versus M.R. Ajayan And Others CA No. 5947/2019
