The Supreme Court has expressed deep concern over the increasing number of dog-bite cases across the country, especially in areas where people expect safety and order.

The court noted that “incidents of dog-bite attacks continue to be reported with alarming frequency”, making it necessary to step in and issue clear instructions to protect the public. On Friday, the Court directed that stray dogs must be removed “forthwith” from educational institutions, hospitals, sports complexes, bus stands, depots, and railway stations. These animals, the order stated, must be shifted to a designated shelter only after they are sterilized and vaccinated as per Animal Birth Control Rules.

A three-judge bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N V Anjaria emphasized that these directions should be “implemented uniformly across India”, and the authorities must submit status compliance reports within eight weeks. The bench further clarified that “the stray dogs so picked up shall not be released back to the same location from which they were picked up”. The judges explained that sending the dogs back to the same spots would defeat the entire purpose of making institutional areas safe. As the order stated, “We have consciously directed the non-release of such stray dogs to the same location from which they were picked up as permitting the same would frustrate the very effect of the directions issued to liberate such institutional areas from the presence of stray dogs.” With this, the responsibility of removing strays was placed squarely on the respective municipal bodies and authorities.

The Court pointed out that media reports have highlighted multiple dog-bite incidents inside institutional premises, which should ideally be secure environments, especially for children, patients, and sportspersons. The bench observed, “The recurrence of such incidents, particularly within institutional spaces meant for learning, and recreation, reflects not only administrative apathy but also a systemic failure to secure these premises from preventable hazards.” This failure, the court explained, is a threat to the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. According to the Court, “The situation calls for immediate judicial intervention to safeguard the fundamental right to life and safety of citizens, especially children, patients, and sportspersons, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”

Adding context from public health data, the Court noted that India still reports some of the world’s highest numbers of rabies-related deaths even after decades of progress. Despite the introduction of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules—built around the Capture-Sterilize-Vaccinate-Release (CSVR) model—the bench pointed out that implementation has been weak. It stated that “despite significant advances in public health, India continues to report one of the world’s highest statistics of rabies-related mortality”, and that “implementation of these Rules has been ineffective, to say the least, across jurisdictions”, leading to persistent dangers in many areas.

The bench also referred to a recent case where a Welsh entrepreneur was reportedly bitten by a stray dog during a morning run in Bengaluru. Highlighting its larger implications, the court said that this incident “underscores that the menace is neither confined to rural or densely populated localities nor limited to vulnerable citizens, but has assumed proportions that affect public safety, tourism, and the image of the country in the global perspective.” The judges stressed that data from states and Union Territories clearly shows a yearly rise in dog-bite cases, many of them occurring inside or near public institutions. As the court noted, “data emerging from several States and Union Territories reveal a year-on-year increase in reported dog-bite cases, many occurring within or near public institutions.”

To tackle this growing crisis, the Court instructed all states and Union Territories to identify vulnerable institutional spaces within two weeks. It ordered that administrative heads must, through their municipal bodies, create secure environments by installing boundary walls, fencing, gates, or any other required structures to prevent stray dogs from entering these areas. Every educational institute, hospital, sports complex, bus stand, and railway station must appoint a nodal officer responsible for keeping the area clean and ensuring that dogs do not enter or settle there. The details of this officer, the Court said, “shall be displayed permanently at the entrance and notified to the jurisdiction municipal body or authority.”

To maintain accountability, the Court mandated that municipal authorities and panchayats conduct inspections every three months to ensure no stray dog settlements exist within or near these institutions. The bench warned that “any lapse in this regard shall be viewed seriously”, sending a strong message about strict enforcement.

Significantly, the Court extended its order beyond dogs. It directed municipal authorities, road and transport departments, PWDs, UT administrations, and the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to work together in removing stray cattle or animals from highways and expressways. These animals must be relocated to shelters, Gaushalas, or cattle pounds and provided proper food, water, and veterinary care. The Court insisted that “the cattle and other stray animals so picked up shall be kept in appropriate shelters… and provided with all necessary food, water, and veterinary care in accordance with the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and the Animal Birth Control Rules 2023.”

To strengthen road safety further, the bench ordered the creation of dedicated highway patrol teams for constant monitoring and fast response to incidents involving animals on the road. Authorities must also install signboards displaying helpline numbers for reporting such issues. The Court clearly stated that these directions must be implemented nationwide and required chief secretaries of all states, UTs, NHAI chairpersons, and the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways to submit compliance reports within eight weeks. These reports must detail the mechanisms established for removing and sheltering stray animals, the operation of patrol teams, and the functioning of helplines.

The Supreme Court will review these compliance reports on January 13, 2026.