NALSAR Gets Limited Exemption: Supreme Court Allows Stray Dogs In Campuses Only If Student Bodies Accept Legal Liability

In In Re : ‘City Hounded By Strays, Kids Pay Price’, the Supreme Court has ruled that stray dogs can be maintained or fed inside educational institution campuses only when the concerned student groups or animal welfare bodies formally accept legal responsibility for any harm caused by the dogs.

The Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N. V. Anjaria said that protection of stray dogs cannot be separated from the duty to ensure safety of students, staff and other individuals present within institutional premises.

The Court observed that rights claimed in favour of stray dogs cannot exist “in isolation” without accountability. It directed that any animal welfare group or student-led body operating within a campus must file an affidavit before the head of the institution undertaking liability for any dog-bite incidents or injuries linked to stray dogs maintained on the campus.

The Bench clarified that if such an undertaking is not submitted, no activity relating to feeding or maintaining stray dogs would be allowed inside educational institutions. The Court also warned that failure to implement this direction could invite action against the institution’s head.

The observations came while the Court considered submissions made on behalf of NALSAR University of Law, which sought permission to continue its stray dog welfare programme despite the Court’s earlier directions favouring removal of stray dogs from educational campuses in the interest of public safety.

NALSAR informed the Court that its Animal Law Centre has been carrying out sterilisation, vaccination and awareness programmes involving students and staff. It argued that the initiative functions as a humane and controlled model under the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023.

Accepting the submission as a limited exception, the Supreme Court permitted the university’s Capture-Sterilise-Vaccinate-Release (CSVR) model to continue on an experimental basis.

However, the Court imposed strict conditions. It directed the Animal Law Centre to furnish an undertaking before the Vice Chancellor stating that it would face tortious liability if any stray dog bite incident occurs inside the campus.

The Court emphasised that frameworks relating to stray dog protection must include “clearly defined principles of accountability.” It reiterated that human life and public safety cannot be compromised while implementing animal welfare measures.

The ruling forms part of the Supreme Court’s continuing examination of the growing stray dog menace across the country. The Court has recently delivered multiple orders on issues concerning stray dog management, including directions relating to removal of stray dogs from public places and euthanasia of rabid or demonstrably dangerous dogs.