After Top Court's Stray Dog Order For Delhi, Madras High Court's Big Hint
A Bench was hearing and disposing of a batch of petitions relating to stray animals — one on stray cattle, another on street dogs in general, and a third on the menace of dogs inside a temple that had allegedly bitten devotees, causing injuries and raising fears of rabies.
During the hearing, petitioners submitted alarming data, claiming that Tamil Nadu had already recorded 3.67 lakh dog bites and 20 deaths due to dog-bite-related rabies this year alone. The judges said they would issue combined formal orders after studying the Supreme Court's detailed guidelines.
The possible directive has sparked mixed reactions. Animal welfare activists expressed concern over the state's lack of infrastructure, manpower, and veterinary expertise to handle such a large street dog population. "Dogs have equal rights to live in this world," one activist said, adding that a poorly implemented crackdown could leave thousands of dogs neglected or starving. They urged the court instead to ensure that the state rigorously enforces the Animal Birth Control (ABC) programme, which focuses on sterilisation and vaccination as humane solutions.
On the other hand, many residents and civic activists welcomed the move, stressing that human life must come first. They argued that the rising number of fatal and non-fatal dog attacks called for immediate, decisive intervention. "Lives should not be lost to dog bites in this day and age," one petitioner said, pointing to the absence of coordinated rabies control measures in several districts.
The court's reference to the Supreme Court's Delhi order suggests that Tamil Nadu could soon see new, court-mandated protocols for street dog management — potentially affecting everything from municipal responsibility and sterilisation drives to shelter management and public awareness campaigns.
The Bench is expected to issue its final directions after reviewing the top court's ruling, setting the stage for a state-wide policy on balancing public safety and animal rights.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
28 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Power contractors threaten stir over ‘illegal' connections in Bengaluru
BENGALURU: The Karnataka State Licensed Electrical Contractors Association (KSLECA) urged the state government to immediately restore electricity connections to buildings that had applied before April 4, when a Supreme Court order restricting power supply to properties without approved plans or Occupancy Certificates (OC) came into effect. The association also warned that if their demands are not met, over 20,000 contractors, consumers, farmers, and organizations will stage a massive protest at Freedom Park on August 20 Speaking at a press conference here on Wednesday, C Ramesh, state president, KSLECA, said, 'We demand that while implementing the Supreme Court's December 17, 2024 order, it has to to exempt ongoing and completed building projects from mandatory Occupancy/Completion Certificates if temporary electricity connection is obtained before April 9, 2025.' According to Ramesh, the earlier KERC order of January 13, 2023, allowed electricity connections based on address proof and an approved plan, and was valid until March 13, 2025. He alleged that lakhs of applicants who had paid fees and prepared infrastructure before April 4 are being denied power. Other demands from the association include allowing First-Class contractors to handle operations and maintenance of 66/11 kV and 110/11 kV substations, speeding up connections for loads above 2 MW, ensuring ESCOM-funded compensations for contract labour accidents, and exempting certain agricultural electricity connections from a Rs 15,000 penalty under the Revised Accelerated Electricity Scheme notified on April 15. The association highlighted that despite assurances from the Energy Minister and senior officials after a protest on March 18, there has been no progress on several agreed points. They warned of a massive statewide protest if the issues remain unresolved, involving contractors, consumers, pro-Karnataka activists, farmers, and writers.
Hans India
28 minutes ago
- Hans India
Supreme Court to hear pleas seeking restoration of J&K's statehood today
New Delhi: The Supreme Court will on Thursday take up a set of applications seeking the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir within a fixed timeframe. According to the causelist published on the apex court's website, a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran will hear the matter on Thursday, a day ahead of Independence Day. Last week, CJI Gavai agreed to retain the petitions on the hearing board after they were mentioned by senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan. One of the applications, filed by Zahoor Ahmed Bhat and activist Khurshaid Ahmad Malik, argued that the prolonged delay in restoring statehood is "gravely affecting the rights of the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir and also violating the idea of federalism." The applicants contended that the absence of a time-bound framework for restoration amounts to a breach of federalism, which is part of the Constitution's Basic Structure. In its landmark verdict on Article 370, a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by then CJI D.Y. Chandrachud had left open the question of whether Parliament has the authority to extinguish statehood by converting a state into one or more Union Territories. The Bench relied on a statement by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assuring that statehood would be restored to Jammu and Kashmir. During the oral hearings, SG Mehta, the second-highest law officer of the Centre, had told the court that the Union Home Ministry could not provide an exact timeline, saying it would take "some time" to restore statehood. Nevertheless, the Constitution Bench -- which also included Justices S.K. Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, and Surya Kant -- directed the Election Commission of India to hold Legislative Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir under Section 14 of the Reorganisation Act by September 30, 2024, and stated that "restoration of statehood shall take place at the earliest and as soon as possible." The verdict also upheld Ladakh's status as a Union Territory under Article 3(a) read with Explanation I of the Constitution, which allows the creation of a Union Territory by separating a territory from a state. In May 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed review petitions challenging this ruling, finding "no error apparent on the face of the record" and declining to list the matter for an open court hearing.
News18
41 minutes ago
- News18
No Cruelty, Mistreatment Or Starvation: SC Lists Strict Guidelines For Delhi Dogs Order
The Supreme Court order mandated that dogs should not face mistreatment, cruelty, or substandard care. The Supreme Court on Wednesday released a comprehensive written order elaborating on its August 11 verdict. This order provided detailed guidelines to ensure the welfare of captured stray dogs, highlighting that these animals should never face mistreatment, cruelty, overcrowding, starvation, or neglect. The detailed order was issued as the suo motu case concerning the stray dog menace was transferred from the bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan to a new three-judge bench led by Justice Vikram Nath. The court reiterated that all stray dogs in Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR) must be promptly rounded up and housed in shelters, prohibiting their release back onto the streets. Authorities were instructed to prevent overcrowding and ensure continuous care for the animals. The order mandated that dogs should not face mistreatment, cruelty, or substandard care. Civic agencies and personnel at dog shelters were directed to avoid overcrowding, maintain constant monitoring, and provide adequate, regular feeding. Trained veterinarians are required to give timely medical care, and vulnerable or weak animals should be housed separately whenever possible. The written order also detailed minimum staffing standards, record-keeping, and identification procedures. The court acknowledged public concerns prompting its intervention and emphasised that the round-up exercise followed prolonged deliberation, not impulsive action. The court acted after concluding that there had been a systematic failure by authorities over the past two decades to address a public safety issue. Balancing human safety with animal welfare, the court dismissed what it termed 'virtue signalling" by some stakeholders, urging genuine supporters to volunteer in shelters. The directions were for the welfare of both humans and dogs, the court noted, calling upon the public and animal-welfare organisations to responsibly assist in running the shelters. Regarding adoptions raised during the August 11 hearing, the written order authorised adoption schemes but only after rigorous vetting according to the Standard Protocol for Adoption of Community Animals dated May 17, 2022, from the Animal Welfare Board of India. Adoptions must ensure permanent rehoming without releasing animals back into public spaces. The original oral order, now fully incorporated, had instructed authorities in Delhi, Noida, Ghaziabad, and Gurugram to establish shelters for at least 5,000 dogs within six to eight weeks and begin immediate capture operations. The written version added Faridabad to the list and mandated a helpline for dog-bite complaints, ensuring offending animals are picked up within four hours. The bench warned that obstructing the capture programme would be treated as contempt of court. The court criticised the Animal Birth Control rules that require sterilised animals to be released back into the same locality, questioning why sterilised animals should return to places where they continue to menace residents. The detailed written order highlighted the court's concern for vulnerable human groups like visually impaired persons, children, the elderly, and the homeless, who are especially at risk from dog attacks and have limited access to post-exposure treatment. The court emphasised that the law must safeguard the rights and security of every individual, particularly those at the margins. The litigation began suo motu following media reports of a child's death from rabies after a dog bite. The bench frequently cited alarming statistics on dog-bite incidents, especially involving infants and the elderly. The issue has sparked intense public debate, with divisions between animal-welfare advocates and residents' associations, as well as among municipal officials tasked with implementation. By explicitly codifying welfare standards and operational protocols, the court aims to ensure the stray dog round-up does not lead to abuse or neglect, while also addressing long-standing public safety concerns. view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
