New Delhi: The Supreme Court on July 15 pulled up a petitioner from Noida who claimed he was being harassed for feeding stray dogs, asking him, “Why don’t you feed them in your own house?” . The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta displayed concern that public feeding might pose safety hazards.
Highlighting the impracticality of feeders using every public lane, the court asked whether there was room for humans on our roads if feeders occupied them all. It suggested that the petitioner could instead confine feeding to his private home.
Regarding public safety, the judges asked the petitioner, “You go on cycling in the morning? Try doing it and see what happens,” warning of potential attacks on early-morning walkers and two-wheeler users—especially cyclists.
The petition was filed under the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023—Rule 20 mandates that resident welfare associations (RWAs), apartment owners’ associations, or local bodies must establish designated feeding points for stray animals. The petitioner noted such points were being set up in Greater Noida but not yet in Noida.
The Supreme Court has tagged this plea with a similar ongoing case to consider both together. It did not issue immediate orders, choosing instead to examine the balance between compassion for animals and the safety of the public.
