Noida: The Supreme Court made unusually stern observations on Tuesday while hearing a continuing matter regarding the rising incidents of stray dog attacks across the country. The Court raised serious concerns over public safety, alleged apathy on the part of state governments and the accountability of dog lover organisations, stressing that compassion for animals cannot come at the cost of innocent human lives.

Referring to the death of a nine-year-old child who was mauled by stray dogs, the Bench remarked that emotions appear to be selectively reserved for animals, while the suffering of victims especially children and the elderly is being overlooked. “Should this Court shut its eyes and allow everything to continue like this?” the Court asked pointedly.

Tough Questions for Dog Lover Organisations

During the hearing, the Court directly questioned the role and responsibility of dog lover groups that feed stray dogs in public spaces. The Bench observed that organisations and individuals who encourage stray dogs by feeding them cannot escape legal responsibility when such animals turn violent.

“They feed dogs roaming freely, they promote their presence in public spaces but when these dogs attack a child or an elderly person, who is accountable?” the Court asked, indicating that liability may extend beyond the state to private actors as well.

Attacks on Children and the Elderly a Serious Concern

The Court expressed deep concern over repeated incidents where stray dogs have launched fatal or grievous attacks on children and senior citizens. It termed the situation a “public health and safety crisis,” noting that citizens cannot be expected to live in fear while accessing public spaces.

“Is a person supposed to check whether a dog is present before stepping out into the street? Is this freedom?” the Bench observed, echoing widespread public anxiety.

Responsibility Not Limited to the State

Clarifying the scope of accountability, the Supreme Court stated that the duty to ensure public safety is not confined to state governments alone. If individuals or organisations regularly feed stray dogs and their conduct contributes to aggressive behaviour, legal responsibility can be imposed on them as well.

The Court added, “If someone wants to keep dogs, they should keep them at home or on a farm not abandon them in public places and allow nuisance or danger to the public.”

Earlier Hearing: Refusal to Watch Videos

In a previous hearing, the Supreme Court had declined to view videos showing alleged cruelty to stray dogs, stating it did not want to enter into a “competition of videos.” However, the Bench acknowledged that disturbing videos of dog attacks also exist and must be taken seriously.

What Lies Ahead

In the next hearing, the Centre and multiple state governments are expected to be summoned. The Court has clearly indicated that in cases involving death or serious injury due to stray dog attacks, state governments may be directed to pay substantial compensation.

The matter remains under active consideration, with the Supreme Court signalling that public safety will take precedence over all other considerations.