Dogs, Law and the People: Test of Coexistence
Y Babji
The dog is often called man’s best friend. This may
be both a fact and an opinion. In the oldest proverbs and phrases, dogs are
rarely depicted as faithful or as man’s best friend, but rather as vicious,
ravening or watchful.
Dogs were the first species to be domesticated by
humans over 14,000 years ago, even before agriculture. They did not just live
with humans but evolved alongside them, changing their own digestive systems to
handle a starch-rich, human-like diet. This long evolutionary partnership has
resulted in unparalleled social cognitive abilities, such as the capacity to
understand human gestures, read facial expressions and form deep, almost
child-like, emotional bonds. While other animals have keen senses, dogs possess
a highly specialised, hyper-social nature that allows them to thrive in human
environments. However, in contemporary India, the relationship has become
increasingly strained.
In cities and villages alike, pet dogs are
cherished members of families, while street dogs are both protected and feared.
Rising dog-bite incidents, public health concerns and recurring court
interventions have turned what was once a social issue into a serious
governance and legal challenge.
India today faces a difficult question: how does a
densely populated country balance compassion for animals with the
constitutional duty to protect human life and safety?
The Problem
India is estimated to have nearly 100 million dogs,
of which more than half are free-roaming street dogs. This places India among
the countries with the largest stray dog populations in the world. While dogs
are not inherently dangerous, unmanaged populations, poor waste systems and
lack of sterilisation have resulted in increased human–dog conflict.
India also accounts for over one-third of global
rabies deaths, a statistic repeatedly flagged by the World Health Organization.
Children, sanitation workers and elderly citizens are among the most
vulnerable. These numbers underline that the issue is not emotional or
ideological but a public health and safety concern.
Unsafe Streets
Across the country, incidents of dog attacks have
triggered public outrage. In Kerala, a spate of dog-bite cases in 2022 and 2023
led to protests and court interventions. In urban centres like Hyderabad,
Bengaluru and Delhi, residents have complained of dogs chasing vehicles,
attacking pedestrians and occupying public parks.
Citizens often find themselves helpless, caught
between fear of harm and fear of being accused of cruelty. The absence of a
clear and visible response from authorities has deepened frustration.
The Law
India does not have a single comprehensive law
governing dogs. Instead, regulation is spread across multiple statutes. The
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 protects animals from abuse and
establishes humane treatment as a legal principle. The Animal Birth Control
(Dogs) Rules, 2023 mandate sterilisation and vaccination of street dogs and
prohibit their killing or relocation, except in limited circumstances.
Municipal and panchayat laws assign responsibility
for public health, sanitation and animal control to local bodies. In addition,
criminal liability may arise under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (earlier Indian
Penal Code) in cases of negligence, nuisance or harm caused by pet owners.
The legal framework, therefore, seeks balance, but
its implementation remains uneven.
Role of Courts
With increasing complaints, courts have become
central to the debate. The Supreme Court recently took suo motu cognisance of
the growing stray dog menace and transferred multiple petitions from High
Courts for consolidated hearing.
The Court observed that while animal welfare is
important, public safety cannot be compromised. It emphasised that local bodies
cannot abdicate their responsibility and that humane solutions must be
effective, not symbolic.
High Courts in Telangana, Punjab and Haryana have
echoed similar concerns, stressing that compassion cannot come at the cost of
human life. Courts have repeatedly directed municipalities to identify
aggressive dogs, act on complaints and ensure scientific implementation of
sterilisation programmes.
NGO Perspective
Animal welfare organisations argue that cruelty,
culling and relocation do not solve the problem. According to them,
sterilisation combined with vaccination is the only long-term solution. They
also point to poor garbage management and human aggression as factors that
provoke dogs.
However, NGOs themselves admit that Animal Birth
Control programmes suffer from inadequate funding, lack of trained personnel
and poor monitoring. In some cities, allegations of fake sterilisation records
have surfaced, undermining public trust.
Citizens in Between
For ordinary citizens, the debate is less about
ideology and more about daily survival. Parents worry about children walking to
school. Senior citizens fear stepping out in the early morning. Delivery
workers face regular attacks. Many residents feel the law protects dogs but
leaves humans vulnerable.
This perception, whether accurate or not, has
created social friction and polarised communities.
Local Bodies
Urban local bodies and rural panchayats hold the
key to resolving the crisis. They are legally responsible for sterilisation,
vaccination, dog census, waste management and grievance redressal. Yet capacity
constraints, lack of funds and weak accountability have rendered many systems
ineffective.
Courts have increasingly linked municipal inaction
to violation of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the
Constitution, reinforcing that public safety is not optional governance.
Compassion with Caution
Courts have recognised the right of citizens to
feed street dogs as an act of compassion. At the same time, they have stressed
that feeding must not endanger others. Unregulated feeding can make dogs
territorial and aggressive.
Designated feeding zones, fixed timings and
coordination with resident welfare associations are emerging as best practices.
Compassion without responsibility, courts have noted, can worsen conflict.
Owner Accountability
India’s pet dog population is rapidly growing, but
regulation has not kept pace. Unregistered pets, lack of vaccination and
abandonment are common problems. Abandoned pets often swell the street dog
population and become aggressive due to trauma.
Several municipalities have begun mandating pet
registration and penalising abandonment, recognising that responsible ownership
is essential for public safety.
Lessons from Abroad
Countries that have effectively managed dog
populations rely on strict licensing, strong shelter systems and heavy
penalties for abandonment. India’s challenge is unique due to population
density and open waste systems, but global experience shows that firm
governance combined with humane policy works.
Finding the Middle Path
The dog issue in India is not a choice between
human rights and animal rights. It is a test of governance. Humane treatment of
animals and protection of human life are not contradictory values. They must
coexist.
Effective sterilisation, waste management, clear
feeder guidelines, compulsory pet registration and accountable municipal action
offer a practical way forward.
Conclusion
Dogs are not the problem. Weak implementation, poor
coordination and governance failures are. India’s legal framework already
provides the tools. What is needed is execution with empathy, science and
responsibility.
A safe city for humans and a humane environment for
animals are not competing goals. They are the shared markers of a mature and
civilised society.
