“The Supreme Court has rejected the “catch-sterilize-release” model for managing stray dogs. Justices J. B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan stated that returning sterilized dogs to their original localities doesn’t improve public safety, which is the primary concern. The ruling signifies a major change in the approach to controlling the stray dog population.”
The Supreme Court of India’s recent observations on the alarming rise in stray dog attacks, especially against children and infants, have resonated far beyond Delhi NCR. While the apex court’s August 11 order directs authorities in the capital region to pick up stray dogs from all localities and shift them to far-off places, the underlying concern is one that rings painfully familiar in the Kashmir Valley. Over the past decade, Kashmir has witnessed an unprecedented surge in the stray dog population. Srinagar, in particular, has become a hotspot, with repeated media reports and public complaints of attacks in residential areas, near schools, and along busy marketplaces. The figures speak for themselves: according to official estimates, thousands of bite cases are reported annually in Kashmir, with the majority of victims being children. The situation has been aggravated by gaps in municipal capacity, legal constraints, and the absence of a sustained sterilisation-and-relocation policy. The Supreme Court’s unequivocal rejection of the current “catch-sterilise-release” model marks a significant shift. As the Bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan rightly pointed out, returning sterilised dogs to the same locality does little to address the root cause—public safety. This mirrors the frustration of many in the Valley who have long questioned why, after repeated complaints, aggressive strays are brought back to the very spots where they attacked people. The court’s remarks also touch upon a deeper public health concern: rabies. In Kashmir, where access to immediate and adequate post-bite treatment can be challenging, especially in rural areas, every dog attack carries an added layer of risk. The Bench’s pointed question—whether animal activists can “bring back those who have fallen prey to rabies”—is a reminder that sentimentality cannot override the right to safety and life. Kashmir’s stray dog crisis is also linked to urban planning failures.
“The Supreme Court’s recent judgment on stray dogs prioritizes public safety, particularly the protection of children, is seen as a way to resolve policy deadlocks. The author calls on local governments in Jammu and Kashmir to follow the court’s lead by mapping high-risk zones, using capture teams, and relocating stray animals to shelters. The message is that while animal compassion is important, human safety is paramount and local governments should act decisively on the issue.”
Poor waste management, particularly the dumping of untreated garbage in open spaces, has created an endless food supply for stray populations. Markets, hospital premises, and tourist hubs like Boulevard Road in Srinagar are prime examples where overflowing trash bins double as feeding grounds. This is an area where the Valley can immediately act—closing the food loop is key to controlling the population. There is also a governance lesson here. The Supreme Court has made it clear that “no sentiments of any nature” should delay action and warned of legal consequences for obstructing authorities. In Kashmir, where animal rights activism has occasionally clashed with public safety demands, this clarity from the country’s highest court could help break policy deadlocks. Public safety, especially the protection of children, must take precedence. The time is ripe for Jammu and Kashmir’s municipal bodies and the administration to adopt a similarly uncompromising approach—mapping high-risk zones, deploying dedicated capture teams, and relocating strays to properly managed shelters outside populated areas. The Supreme Court has set the tone; it is now up to local governments, including in the Valley, to act decisively. The message is simple: compassion for animals and safety for humans are not mutually exclusive. But when the scales tip dangerously, as they have in Kashmir, the law must step in firmly—just as the Supreme Court has done.
