The Delhi High Court on Monday directed the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) to identity one ward each in their area and organize a camp for sterlization and vaccination of stray dogs there, as a pilot project.
A division bench comprising Justice Dinesh Mehta and Justice Rajnish Kumar Gupta ordered that the initiative shall be taken as a pilot project, which shall be done in consultation with the amicus curaie- Ms. Gauri Maulekhi.
The Court directed that prior publicity be given about the camp in the respective areas and placards be displayed with wide publicity— clarifying that the dogs will not be captured or be sent to dog pounds and that the dogs can be brought by public to the camp only for sterlization or vaccination purposes.
The Court was hearing a suo motu PIL registered to monitor compliance with Supreme Court directions to remove dogs from the premises of educational institutions, hospitals, bus stands, railway stations, etc.
During the hearing today, MCD’s standing counsel Manu Chaturvedi told Court that a status report has been filed stating that various Animal Birth Control (ABC) centres have been identified across 8 zones however, the same is pending approval for 3 zones. He said that sterlization for the said 3 zones is being catered to by Centres in other zones. He also told the Court about the number of vaccinations and sterlization conducted of stray dogs in the last six months.
On Court’s query if there is a number about population of stray dogs in Delhi, Chaturvedi said that there is no census but on a rough estimate, there are about 8 lakh street dogs in the national capital but there is no official data.
He also informed that data is maintained at the end of sterlization and suggested that pilot project can be launched wherein micro chipping can be done on dogs.
On discussion about how does one catch a stray dog in a civil society, Advocate Sheffy Bhatia, appearing in one of the connected petitions, said that she is a feeder in her locality and that the authorities can coordinate with such feeders so that it is easy to catch the dogs for sterlization.
Chaturvedi then said that the authorities can identify sites and a proposal can be brought which can be launched as a pilot project.
“We will sit down with the GNCTD as well and we can consult with the petitioner too. The proposal can be identified that there are these sites and we can run a pilot project and compare that data…. We can identify a mix, one area of NDMC and one of MCD, maybe 2-3 wards,” he said.
On this the Bench remarked that both NDMC and MCD can identify one wards each from their area and launch a pilot camp, so that an example can be set for the society that each dog in those areas is sterlized.
“We will do it very systematically. We will put a camp. And it will be said that this is the camp, this is for stray dogs, please don’t disturb. So that pet lovers don’t have any fear that the dogs will be caught. It will be written that these dogs won’t be put to any camp and these people will come and all pets will be brought (to the camp)…. Let it begin from one ward so that a message should go that dogs are not brought to dog pounds or are not killed,” the Court said.
“As a society I am also conscious that they should not extinct. I am conscious that atleast one percent of dogs should remain unsterlized so that after 15 years it should not happen that all dogs should go. You (MCD) make this application that atleast 5 percent should be left unsterlized so that future generations should not see a situation that there is no pet… Whether court does it or not is a different thing but it should come from your side,” it added.
The matter will now be heard on September 01 at 2:30 PM.
Apex Court had directed that all jurisdictional High Courts, while undertaking the monitoring exercise, shall be fully empowered to take appropriate action including initiation of contempt proceedings against the erring officials responsible for non-compliance, inaction, or wilful disregard of judicial directions.
The Court had opined that entrusting High Courts with monitoring and compliance with these directions as well as earlier directions for removal of stray dogs from public places would ensure closer engagement with local conditions and timely corrective intervention.
Thus, the Top Court had directed all High Courts to register a suo motu writ petition in the name of “In Re Compliance With The Directions Issued By Supreme Court…” for monitoring compliance with the directions issued by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court had said that the concerned High Courts would be at liberty to expand the scope of the directions to address local conditions, without diluting the Supreme Court’s directions.
The matter arose from the Supreme Court’s suo motu proceedings on stray dog attacks. On November 7, 2025, the Court had directedremoval of stray dogs from educational institutions, hospitals, bus stands, railway stations and similar public spaces, and ordered that dogs picked up from such places should not be released back to the same locations after sterilisation and vaccination.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION REGARDING COMPLAINCE WITH THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THE SUPREME COURT & other connected matters
