Supreme Court Slams States Over Growing Stray Dog Menace

The stray dog controversy in India has been put into the national limelight yet again, with a vehement attack on the State governments by the Supreme Court of India on their efforts to control the increasing number of stray dogs. The Court referred to the promises made by states as casting castles in the air, and it was quite plain that a promise on paper was of very little value without evidence on the ground.

The comment is made during a time of heightened awareness of cases of dog bites, the safety of the public, and the humane treatment of dogs. The Court chose to investigate governance problems, implementation deficiencies, and administrative negligence instead of blaming stray dogs or requiring extreme solutions.

What was the background that caused the remark of the Court?

The Supreme Court has directed states and local governments to control stray dog populations through Animal Birth Control methods and anti-rabies vaccination programs since its first ruling. But the Court reached its decision about the latest hearings.

• States did not have proper sterilization facilities.
• There were inadequate or understaffed veterinary premises.
• The local agencies were not able to achieve sterilization and vaccination.
• Reports made to the Court indicated intent and not outcomes.

The Court became fed up with constant procrastination and saw that states were developing schemes that seemed impressive but had minimal effect on the ground, hence the saying of building castles in the air.

Does the Court rule in favor of dogs?

The position of the Court is not anti-dog as many may assume. Indeed, it has a powerful influence to enforce a humane and scientific attitude to the problem.

The Court was emphatic to the effect that:

• The culling and killing of stray dogs should not be done.
• The issue of population control has to be just and legal.
• Animal welfare and public safety need to be accompanied.

By enforcing the right procedure of sterilization and inoculation, the Court is indirectly safeguarding the dog against inhumane retaliatory acts that occur in high-profile dog attacks in most cases.

The reason why bad implementation is bad.

• When states do not take responsibility, the results are on human beings and animals:
• Breeding is uncontrolled, and this leads to an increase in the population of stray dogs.
• Vaccination deficiency increases the risk of rabies.
• The incidence of bites increases public fear and anger.
• Dogs are subjected to abuse, poisoning, or criminal translocation.
• Here, the criticism of the Court is a wake-up call. It shifts the blame where it should be, on governments and civic authorities, and not on animals.

What the Court will require of States

Assurances are not wanted by the Supreme Court, but action. Its expectations are clear:

• Increase in sterilization centres and personnel.
• Vaccination drives and time-bound sterilization.
• Real statistics on the homeless populations.
• Interaction between the municipalities, animal welfare organizations, and health departments.

Moderation of a sensitive matter.

Given these, the stray dog problem in India is a complex challenge encompassing urban planning, waste management, human health, and even the welfare of animals. Knee-jerk reactions, which require the mass killings or disregard for the safety of citizens, worsen the situation further.

The intervention by the Court notes a way in the middle:

• Humane treatment of animals
• Protection of citizens
• Responsible governance

Conclusion

The phrase castles in the air used by the Supreme Court is not an admonition against roving dogs – it is an admonition about administrative flunkies. The Court has strengthened the principle of the non-optional but rather the necessity of humane solutions through keeping states accountable for the mis implementation of sterilization and vaccination programe.

When governments stop doing paperwork and start doing something, India will be able to find a solution to the stray dog menace that will save lives, limit the conflict, and allow humanity to prevail. Finally, the point is made: it is not the dogs, but inaction.

Reference link: https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/building-castles-in-air-top-court-to-states-in-stray-dogs-case-10902342