The
Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on petitions challenging
its August 11 order that directed
authorities to round up all stray dogs in Delhi and the NCR region.
A
Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and NV Anjaria did not grant any
immediate stay on the earlier directions issued to municipal bodies.
The court also sought clarity from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) on its stance in the
matter.
"What
is your stand? This is happening because of the inaction of the Municipal
Corporation. The government does nothing. The local authorities do
nothing," Justice Vikram Nath said. He stressed that the local bodies were
failing to fulfil their duties and should take responsibility.
Solicitor
General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, argued that the issue affects
public safety. "In a democracy, there is one is vocal majority and one who
silently suffers. We have seen videos of people eating chicken egg etc and then
claiming to be animal lovers. It is an issue to be resolved. Children are
dying... Sterilisation does not stop rabies... even if immunised..." he
said.
Citing
WHO data, Mehta said there were about 305 rabies deaths annually, most among children
under 15. “Dogs do not have to be killed... they have to be separated. Parents
cannot send children out to play. Young girls are mutilated,” he added, calling
it a case of “vocal minority view vs silent majority suffering view.”
Senior
Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for NGO Project Kindness, urged the court to
halt the August 11 directions. He questioned the lack of infrastructure, such
as shelter homes and sterilisation facilities, accusing authorities of misusing
funds, the news report said.
Sibal warned that without proper facilities, the order would
lead to cruelty: “They will be culled... dogs are kept together... food is
thrown and then they attack each other... This cannot be permitted.”
Senior
Advocates Sidharth Luthra and Abhishek Manu Singhvi supported the stay request,
pointing out that infrastructure to house stray dogs was almost non-existent.
Singhvi said the directions “put the cart before the horse” and argued there
had been zero reported rabies deaths in Delhi.
Justice
Sandeep Mehta noted that many statements made were “anecdotal” and pressed for
evidence.
The
Bench asked all intervenors to file affidavits with evidence. Justice Nath
summed up: “Parliament frames rules and laws... but not implemented. On one hand,
humans are suffering and on the other hand, the animal lovers are here. Have
some responsibility.”
The
court has reserved its order on the interim plea for stay.