Context:

• Recent incidents of violence against citizens feeding street dogs — including fatal and serious assaults in Raipur, Gwalior, and Kolkata — highlight growing hostility toward animal caregivers.
• The debate over managing India’s large free-roaming dog population has intensified, marked by legal confusion, policy inconsistency, and vigilantism.
• These developments raise important issues related to animal welfare laws, urban governance, public health (rabies control), and citizen rights.

Rising Violence Against Animal Caregivers:

• Recent attacks reveal increasing intolerance toward people involved in feeding, sterilising, and vaccinating street dogs, despite such activities being lawful.
• Key concerns:
  • Citizens feeding dogs have faced physical assaults and intimidation.
  • Victims were engaged in activities consistent with legal animal welfare frameworks.
  • Public rhetoric and social media debates have contributed to anti-feeder vigilantism.
  • Weak law enforcement response has emboldened perpetrators.
• This reflects a breakdown in rule of law and civic tolerance.

Legal Framework for Street Dog Management:

• Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023: The ABC Rules framed under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 provide the official policy framework.
• Core provisions:
  • Humane capture of free-roaming dogs.
  • Sterilisation to control population growth.
  • Anti-rabies vaccination.
  • Release back to original location.
  • Municipal responsibility for implementation.
• This model emphasises humane and scientific population control.

Judicial Interventions and Policy Confusion:

• Supreme Court directions:
  • Recent (August 2025) judicial interventions have added uncertainty.
  • The apex court directed municipal bodies in Delhi-NCR to remove street dogs and house them in shelters indefinitely.
  • The critics argued that this contradicted the ABC Rules, 2023.
• Subsequent developments (2026 hearings):
  • The earlier orders were reversed and partially restored.
  • The court held that feeding should occur within private premises, and states could be liable for compensation if dog attacks occur.
• Concerns: Courts entering the policy-making domain. Lack of clarity for municipal authorities. Conflicting interpretations of animal welfare law.

Ecological Reality - Limits of Elimination Policies:

• The “vacuum effect”:
  • Attempts to remove street dogs fail due to ecological dynamics, such as removed dogs being replaced by migrating animals, remaining dogs reproduce faster, and populations return to original levels.
  • This phenomenon is well-documented globally.
• Indian experience:
  • Cities (like Chennai) attempting removal policies have seen no long-term population reduction.
  • Dogs continue to roam even where such directives are attempted.
  • Street dogs are a resilient landrace embedded in South Asia’s urban ecology.

Evidence-Based Solutions:

• Strengthening ABC implementation: Large-scale sterilisation is the most effective strategy. Scientific data shows that around 70% sterilisation coverage slows reproduction, stabilises populations, reduces bite incidents, and controls rabies transmission.
• Adoption of Indian-breed dogs: Encouraging adoption can reduce free-roaming populations, promote animal welfare, and reduce commercial breeding demand.
• Legal protection for caregivers:
  • Animal caregivers fill gaps left by under-resourced municipalities, assist vaccination and monitoring.
  • Therefore, policy should recognise caregivers legally, protecting them from harassment and violence.
• Rabies and public health measures: Dog bites can be reduced through vaccination campaigns, public awareness, safe human-animal interaction, and waste management.

Major Challenges:

• Policy and legal ambiguity: Due to lack of coordination between courts and municipalities.
• Administrative weakness: Poor funding for sterilisation programmes. Limited veterinary infrastructure. Inadequate municipal capacity.
• Social polarisation: Anti-feeder sentiment, vigilante violence, and public fear of dog attacks.
• Public health concerns: India accounts for a large share of global rabies deaths. Poor vaccination coverage.
• Urban governance issues: Poor waste management sustains dog populations. Rapid urbanisation increases conflict.

Way Forward:

• Policy measures: Strict implementation of ABC Rules, 2023. Dedicated funding for sterilisation and vaccination. National guidelines for municipal animal management.
• Legal measures: Clear judicial interpretation aligned with statutory rules. Protection of lawful animal caregivers. Accountability for violence and vigilantism.
• Administrative measures: Expand veterinary infrastructure. Create municipal animal management units. Data-driven population monitoring.
• Social measures: Public awareness on humane coexistence, community participation in ABC programmes, and responsible pet ownership.
• Public health measures: Universal anti-rabies vaccination, bite-prevention education, and improved waste management.

Conclusion:

• India’s street dog issue cannot be resolved through elimination or reactionary policies.
• Policy must be guided by science, legality, and compassion, ensuring both public safety and animal welfare.
• A balanced approach — rooted in evidence-based governance and civic responsibility — is essential to prevent violence and build safer, more humane cities.