Madras High Court launches suo motu PIL to enforce Supreme Court stray dog orders across Tamil Nadu and Puducherry
The Madras High Court has initiated suo motu public interest litigation to ensure Tamil Nadu and Puducherry authorities comply with landmark Supreme Court directions on controlling stray dog attacks. Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan are scheduled to hear the case on Monday, June 22, 2026.
Arrayed as respondents are the Chief Secretaries and departmental secretaries handling Animal Husbandry, Health, and Municipal Administration in both Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. The court's intervention follows a strongly worded May 19, 2026 ruling from a three-judge Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and N.V. Anjaria.
That Bench declared that the "unchecked population of dogs has become increasingly feral," adding that such animals have no place in densely populated human settlements given the grave threat they pose to public safety. The judges went further, stating that compassion for animals "cannot be interpreted in a manner that compels citizens to endure recurring threats to their own lives, safety and bodily integrity." When human life and animal welfare collide, the constitutional balance must tilt decisively toward protecting people, the court ruled.
The Supreme Court also drew attention to disturbing ground realities — children mauled, elderly persons attacked, ordinary citizens left vulnerable in public spaces, and even international tourists falling victim. Allowing such conditions to persist, the Bench warned, risks reducing civic life to a Darwinian struggle where only the fittest survive.
The figures behind the ruling are stark. A Hindu report dated May 6, 2026 revealed that Tamil Nadu recorded 2.63 lakh dog bite cases and 17 deaths in just the first four months of 2026 alone. The full year 2025 saw 6.25 lakh bite cases and 34 fatalities statewide. Comparable statistics from other states prompted the Supreme Court to blame state governments and union territories for failing to implement the Animal Birth Control framework effectively — more than two decades after its formulation in 2001.
On the question of re-releasing sterilised dogs, the top court held that strays removed from institutional premises such as schools, hospitals, bus stands, and railway stations carry no absolute right to be returned to those same locations. Sterilised animals picked up from such spaces must be moved to animal shelters instead.
The court also upheld a Standard Operating Procedure issued by the Animal Welfare Board of India on November 27, 2025, which broadened the definition of institutional premises to include public spaces such as religious sites, parks, and tourist destinations.
📰 Source: The Hindu National