STRAY DOG CASE BROUGHT ME GLOBAL RECOGNITION IN CIVIL SOCIETY; GRATEFUL TO CJI FOR ASSIGNING IT: JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH:

Justice Vikram Nath expressed his gratitude to the Chief Justice of India for assigning him the high-profile stray dog case, noting that it brought him widespread recognition both in India and internationally. Speaking about the experience, he recalled attending the ‘Law Asia POLA Summit,’ where presidents of various lawyers’ associations engaged him with questions regarding the stray dog matter. He described feeling elated, reflecting on the fact that even people outside India were aware of his work on the issue. Justice Nath remarked that the case had not only earned him recognition from human admirers but also a playful sense of goodwill from dogs themselves, humorously noting that, in addition to human blessings and good wishes, he had the “good wishes” of dogs as well.

The case itself had significant implications for animal welfare and the management of stray dogs in Delhi-NCR. Justice Vikram Nath was the presiding judge of a three-judge bench that, on August 22, stayed an earlier direction issued on August 11 by a two-judge bench, which had prohibited the release of stray dogs from shelters. The order of Justice Nath’s bench directed that stray dogs must be returned to the locations from which they were picked up, following proper vaccination and sterilization procedures. The Chief Justice of India reassigned the suo motu case on stray dogs to Justice Nath’s bench after it was brought to his attention that the August 11 order conflicted with prior directions issued by coordinate benches on the same matter, highlighting the need for consistency in judicial handling of animal welfare issues.

Justice Nath’s handling of the case demonstrated the judiciary’s commitment to balancing public safety with the ethical treatment of animals. The bench underscored that while stray dogs pose challenges in urban areas, punitive or restrictive measures, such as keeping them indefinitely in shelters, are neither humane nor aligned with the principles of animal welfare enshrined in law. By ordering the release of the animals back to their original habitats after vaccination and sterilization, the Court sought to ensure that the dogs could live safely while minimizing public health risks.

The judge also reflected on the broader significance of the case in raising awareness about animal welfare and responsible urban management. He observed that the case attracted attention not only from civil society groups in India but also from international observers, highlighting the global resonance of ethical and compassionate governance. Justice Nath emphasized that the recognition he received was not merely personal, but also an affirmation of the judiciary’s role in addressing nuanced social issues with fairness and empathy.

Through this case, Justice Vikram Nath illustrated that judicial intervention can promote coexistence between humans and animals, uphold the principles of law, and encourage public awareness of humane practices. His approach underscored that legal measures must integrate both compassion and pragmatism, ensuring that the rights and welfare of animals are protected while also addressing community concerns. The stray dog case remains a landmark example of how the judiciary can mediate conflicts between urban development and ethical animal treatment, setting a precedent for future cases involving human-animal interactions.