After considering the stray dog menace in Kerala, the Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that compassion for stray dogs cannot hold a society to ransom.
“Compassion should be shown towards stray dogs but ... these animals cannot be allowed to become a menace to society. A balance needs to be created for dealing with such situation,” a Bench of Justices Dipak Misra and U.U. Lalit observed.
The Bench agreed to hear submissions on a revised module containing procedures prescribed in the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules 2001, framed under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, for eradicating the threat of rabies and reducing man-dog conflict.
However, Kerala-based activist Sabu Steephen, a petitioner in person, challenged the validity of the 2001 Rules itself, contending that they should be struck down as they were violative of the parent statute, Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
Mr. Steephen contended that while the 1960 law clearly allowed the “destruction” of stray dogs, the 2001 Rules gave full protection to stray dogs.
He claimed it was “unconstitutional.”
59 Acts to control dogs
He argued that there were 59 Acts for the destruction and control of stray dogs, but all these laws had become inoperative due to the existence of the 2001 Rules.
Justice Misra pointed out that Mr. Steephen’s plea should be first heard as it challenged the validity of the 2001 Rules itself. The court scheduled the hearing for October 4.
Senior advocate Anand Grover, appearing for the Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisation, said Animal Birth Control rules should be implemented in letter and in spirit and the States should be directed to file compliance report on action being taken to sterilise and vaccinate dogs.
“Is this problem of stray dog menace only in Kerala and not in other States,” asked the Bench.
