Dog Menace / 'Effect of Dog Bite Lifelong, Keep Them in Your House', SC Warns Feeders, States
·4 months ago·3 min read

Key Points
- Supreme Court indicated it may impose heavy compensation liabilities on state governments for each dog bite incident and death caused by stray dogs.
- The bench also suggested holding dog feeders accountable for attacks, questioning why dogs they feed are allowed to roam and bite.
- Court rejected arguments that empathy prevents attacks, stating the public cannot "read a dog's mood" for safety.
New Delhi, Jan 13: The Supreme Court on Tuesday indicated it may impose heavy compensation liabilities on state governments for every dog bite incident and death caused by stray dogs, and could also hold dog feeders responsible for attacks that leave victims with lifelong consequences.
Hearing a batch of petitions related to stray dog and cattle menace, the top court questioned why stray dogs should be allowed to roam freely and pose risks to public safety.
“For every dog bite, for every death, we will be likely fixing heavy compensation for states for not making requisite arrangements. And also liability to dog feeders. You take them to your house, keep them — why should they be allowed to roam around, biting, chasing? The effect of a dog bite is lifelong,” the court observed, according to legal news portal Bar and Bench.
The bench also raised concerns about accountability in cases involving children. “Who should be made responsible when a nine-year-old child is killed by dogs who are fed by a particular organisation? Should the organisation not be made liable for damages?” the court asked.
‘Cannot Read a Dog’s Mood’
During an earlier hearing on January 7, the Supreme Court rejected arguments that empathy towards animals prevents attacks. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioners, had submitted that animals do not attack if treated with compassion.
“If you invade their space, they will attack,” Sibal had argued, as reported by LiveLaw.
Responding, Justice Vikram Nath said the issue extends beyond bites to the constant threat posed by stray dogs. “How can you identify? Which dog is in what mood in the morning, you don’t know,” he remarked.
Sibal suggested that unruly dogs could be captured, sterilised and released back. However, the court remained unconvinced about public safety implications.
Ongoing Case on Street Safety
The matter is being heard by a three-judge bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria, which has expressed serious concerns over the safety risks posed by stray animals on streets and highways.
Also Read: Orissa High Court Grants Interim Relief to Somesh Satapathy, Arpita Choudhury
In an earlier order dated November 7 last year, the Supreme Court directed the removal of stray dogs from institutional premises such as schools, hospitals, sports complexes, bus stands and railway stations, and their relocation to designated shelters after sterilisation and vaccination.
Hearing a batch of petitions related to stray dog and cattle menace, the top court questioned why stray dogs should be allowed to roam freely and pose risks to public safety.
“For every dog bite, for every death, we will be likely fixing heavy compensation for states for not making requisite arrangements. And also liability to dog feeders. You take them to your house, keep them — why should they be allowed to roam around, biting, chasing? The effect of a dog bite is lifelong,” the court observed, according to legal news portal Bar and Bench.
The bench also raised concerns about accountability in cases involving children. “Who should be made responsible when a nine-year-old child is killed by dogs who are fed by a particular organisation? Should the organisation not be made liable for damages?” the court asked.
‘Cannot Read a Dog’s Mood’
During an earlier hearing on January 7, the Supreme Court rejected arguments that empathy towards animals prevents attacks. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioners, had submitted that animals do not attack if treated with compassion.
“If you invade their space, they will attack,” Sibal had argued, as reported by LiveLaw.
Responding, Justice Vikram Nath said the issue extends beyond bites to the constant threat posed by stray dogs. “How can you identify? Which dog is in what mood in the morning, you don’t know,” he remarked.
Sibal suggested that unruly dogs could be captured, sterilised and released back. However, the court remained unconvinced about public safety implications.
Ongoing Case on Street Safety
The matter is being heard by a three-judge bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria, which has expressed serious concerns over the safety risks posed by stray animals on streets and highways.
Also Read: Orissa High Court Grants Interim Relief to Somesh Satapathy, Arpita Choudhury
In an earlier order dated November 7 last year, the Supreme Court directed the removal of stray dogs from institutional premises such as schools, hospitals, sports complexes, bus stands and railway stations, and their relocation to designated shelters after sterilisation and vaccination.
📱 Get Argus News App
✨📰 60 Word News🎬 Argus Podcast📺 Live TV and Breaking News🔔 Free Notification Alerts
Download Free:
Related Topics
Explore more stories