The Supreme Court on Tuesday raised pointed questions while hearing a plea alleging harassment over feeding stray dogs in Noida. A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta suggested the petitioner consider feeding the animals at home instead of public spaces, asking, “Why don’t you feed them in your own house? Nobody is stopping you.”
The court was dealing with a special leave petition challenging a March 2024 order of the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner’s counsel contended that local authorities were preventing his client from feeding community dogs, which, according to him, violated the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023.
The bench, however, expressed concerns over public safety and inconvenience to pedestrians and cyclists. When the counsel mentioned that his client encounters dogs during morning walks, the bench observed, “Morning walkers are also at risk. Cycle riders and two-wheelers are at greater risk.” The matter was eventually tagged with another similar pending case.
Under Rule 20 of the ABC Rules, the responsibility of ensuring designated feeding points lies with resident welfare associations (RWAs), apartment owners’ associations, and municipal bodies. The petitioner’s counsel pointed out that while arrangements were being made in Greater Noida, no such efforts were visible in Noida city.
During the earlier proceedings in the High Court, the petitioner had requested effective implementation of the rules in accordance with the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. However, the court had noted rising incidents of stray dog attacks and underscored the right of the general public to move freely and safely.
In disposing of the plea, the High Court directed authorities to balance animal welfare with public safety, ensuring protection for both community dogs and people using public spaces.
Read More: Online Gaming Firms Term 28% GST as Legally Defective in Supreme Court
