By Inderjit Badhwar
The Supreme Court’s handling of Delhi’s stray dog crisis has taken a dramatic turn. Within days of its August 11 directive to “immediately remove” stray dogs from the capital’s streets, a larger bench modified the order, stressing vaccination, sterilisation, and regulated feeding over wholesale removal. The reversal has brought relief to activists and animal welfare groups, but it also highlights the growing unease of ordinary citizens who live in fear of dog bites and rabies.
This issue, at its heart, is not about choosing between humans and animals. It is about the absence of coherent governance, poor municipal coordination, and inadequate public health measures that have left both vulnerable. For years, the judiciary upheld the Animal Birth Control framework as the humane and lawful path, only to see it undermined by inconsistent implementation. The latest judicial U-turn throws the spotlight back on policymakers: Will they rise to the occasion and create a balanced framework that protects the rights and safety of both humans and animals?
The debate is not new, but the urgency is unprecedented. Delhi recorded more than 30,000 dog bite cases last year, with hospitals reporting hundreds every week. Behind these numbers lie human tragedies—children who do not survive rabies, the elderly afraid to step out of their homes, and communities increasingly divided between compassion for animals and the instinct for self-preservation. On the other hand, decades of research and judicial precedent remind us that culling or mass removal is neither a sustainable nor a lawful solution. Stray dogs are a product of urban neglect—overflowing garbage, poor sterilisation coverage, and ineffective vaccination drives.
The Court’s modification offers a pause, but not a resolution. Unless the state takes this opportunity to invest in infrastructure, enforce sterilisation and vaccination at scale, and create humane feeding zones, the conflict will return with even greater force. As our cover story by Binny Yadav explains, this is more than a judicial episode. It is a mirror held up to India’s governance failures, a reminder that laws and orders cannot substitute for long-term vision and planning. The real challenge now lies not with the courts, but with those entrusted to govern.