Supreme Court Stray Dogs Hearing: Apex Court Flags Highway Safety, Says All Sides Will Be Heard

The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday commenced a detailed hearing on the issue of stray dogs and cattle, raising serious concerns over public safety and repeated accidents on highways caused by stray animals. A special three-judge bench made it clear that the matter would be heard comprehensively, with the court allowing arguments from all sides, including those supporting and opposing existing policies on stray animal management.

Opening the proceedings, Justice Vikram Nath remarked that the court would listen to both perspectives without prejudice, underlining the importance of balancing animal welfare with the safety of citizens. The bench, which also comprised Justices Sandeep Mehta and N V Anjaria, stressed that the issue had wide-ranging consequences and required urgent, coordinated action by authorities across the country.

The hearing stems from a suo motu case initiated by the apex court last year after media reports highlighted deaths caused by rabies following stray dog bites, particularly among children. Over time, the scope of the case expanded to include the growing menace of stray cattle and animals on national and state highways, which the court noted has led to repeated and avoidable road accidents.

During the proceedings, the bench expressed grave concern over recent incidents in Rajasthan, where two judges were involved in road accidents caused by stray cattle within a span of two days. One of the judges reportedly sustained a serious spinal injury. The court observed that such incidents underscore the urgency of enforcing earlier directions issued to states and highway authorities.

The bench questioned the National Highways Authority of India on why vulnerable stretches of highways could not be barricaded or cordoned off to prevent animals from entering high-speed corridors. The court said that basic preventive infrastructure measures appeared to be missing despite repeated instructions and asked authorities to explain enforcement gaps.

It was submitted during the hearing that NHAI has identified approximately 1,400 square kilometres of highway stretches where stray animals frequently stray onto carriageways. These stretches, officials said, often pass through markets, villages and residential areas, making enforcement more complex compared to access-controlled expressways.

The amicus curiae informed the court that while super expressways are designed to restrict entry, most national and state highways are mixed-use roads, increasing the likelihood of animal intrusion. The bench acknowledged the challenge but reiterated that safety of road users could not be compromised due to administrative or logistical constraints.

The court was also informed that the Animal Welfare Board of India issued a standard operating procedure in November 2025 covering sterilisation, vaccination and removal of stray dogs. The SOP was framed in compliance with earlier Supreme Court directions to ensure a uniform framework across states and local bodies.

Referring to its November order, the bench recalled that it had directed the immediate relocation of stray dogs from sensitive institutional areas such as schools, hospitals and public offices after due sterilisation and vaccination. The court had clarified that such animals should not be released back into high-risk zones.

The judges also took note of a large number of applications filed in the case, observing that the volume was unusually high. The bench stated that all related petitions, including transfer pleas, would be taken up together to ensure a holistic resolution.

The matter remains under active consideration, with the Supreme Court continuing to monitor compliance by states and central agencies. The court indicated that public safety, accountability and humane animal management would remain central to its approach in the case.