Stray Dogs Supreme Court Hearing highlights: Hearing ends, bench to assemble again on January 20

The Supreme Court said on Tuesday that stray dogs cannot be in anyone's possession. "If you want a pet, take licence," the bench added.

Justice Sandeep Mehta slams a lawyer who called for a national adoption mission for dogs. "Incentivisation could be something as simple as sterilisation and vaccination," he suggested.

To this, Mehta said, "Are you for real? A young counsel just showed us statistics of orphan children on the streets. Perhaps some lawyers could argue for adoption of those children. Since the year 2011, since I was elevated, these are the longest arguments I have heard. And till now, no one has argued so long for human beings."

Read our satire piece here on the matter while following the hearing updates.

Lawyer, representing singer Mohit Chauhan, says the spirit of ABC rules in compassionate management of dogs and seeks recognition for individual feeders. "The spirit of ABC rules is compassionate management of dogs. In foreign jurisdictions, caregivers and dog feeders are recognised to be hand in hand with authorities. I just want recognition for individual feeders. Give us responsibility."

Read our special piece here.

One of the lawyers said that the existing rules are insufficient to solve the situation. "This Court has power to issue orders to solve a dangerous situation under article 142 and 32. There is a clear vacuum. If the existing rules do not solve the problem of dog bites there is clearly a vacuum," the lawyer added.

A dog bite victim calls for compassion for dogs, saying fear in dogs activates defensive aggression.

"I was mauled by a community dog. I wanted to understand what made the dog bite me without any provocation. This dog was subjected to prolonged cruelty. Kicking, stoning etc. it was defensive aggression in response to fear. I suffered because of the action of somebody else. What manifests aggression in a community dog. Cruelty towards an otherwise friendly dog activates fear. Fear activates defensive aggression," she told the court.

The Supreme Court bench also pulled up dog feeders, saying they should be held responsible when dog bites and deaths happen. "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 Supreme Court rapped all state governments, saying they "failed miserably" to implement the ABC Rules. "We are going to take the Union government and state governments to task. The issue has been ongoing forever. You yourself have mentioned that parliament has been looking into it since the 1950s. It is because of the Union and state governments that the problem has multiplied 1000 times. Complete failure on the part of the Union and state governments. For every man, woman and child who has lost their lives to a dog bite, we will impose heavy compensation on the government responsible," the bench said.

(Inputs by India's Today's Nalini Sharma)

The bench told one of the lawyers, appearing for animal activists and dog lovers, that emotions seem to be only for dogs, during the hearing. "I am emotionally attached to human beings. It seems very elitist to make these arguments pertaining to one species. I recognise the issues that are before my lords. My lordships are confronted with a situation that parliament has been confronted with since 1950. The ABC rules are a result of parliament applying its mind," lawyer Menaka Guruswamy replied to the bench.

The dogs are watching us as the hearing on the contentious matter continues this week. Read our special piece.

Senior advocate Datar argues that a street dog in a gate society remains a street dog and "has no right to be there".

Datar urges the bench to extend the November 7 order to airports as well. "Please extend the order to airports. Airport says it cannot do anything, if we complaint, because impression is dogs would have to be released back," he said, adding, "The impression is that once a street dog is placed in an area like that it gets some kind of special protection. The court should clear this."

The bench mentions a case of a lawyer being bitten in Gujarat High Court and how authorities were beaten up when they went to pick up the dogs. It was a reaction to lawyer,  against the dog lovers' and animal activists' pleas, calling for the November 7 order to be expanded to airports and courts. "Yes for courts, when a lawyer was bitten in Gujarat, and when the municipal corporation people went to capture the dogs, they were thrashed. By lawyers! By these so-called dog lovers."

Senior advocate Arvind Datar, oppositing the pleas against the Supreme Court's November 7 order, says many terms in ABC rules are not defined. "As far as public institutions, people have access. If a human being can't stay there, animals can't either. No street dog can be relocated there. It would amount to animal trespass. If a dog is removed, it can't go back there, because it had no right to be there in the first place. In ABC Rules, many terms are not defined. No definition of street dogs," he added.

The bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria begins hearing. Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for an organisation, backs the Supreme Court's November 7 order. He urges the top court to consider the issue of feral dogs in wildlife areas, citing the example of Ladakh.

The bench will begin the hearing shortly.

Ahead of the stray dogs hearing in the Supreme Court, here's a special piece by India Today. Read here

In the last hearing, one of the counsels of dog lovers and animal activists mentioned the case of brutality and violence towards women dog feeders. The bench refused to take up the matter, saying it pertains to law and order and doesn't fall in the same category as the ongoing stray dogs case. It, however, asked the feeders to approach the High Courts and file FIRs instead, stressing that the top court's November 7 order cannot be a licence to be violent towards dog feeders. Read here

In the last hearing last week, the Supreme Court schooled dog lovers for being "far from reality" and said not to glorify the presence of dogs in hospitals when one of the lawyers of the petitioners spoke about a canine that lived in AIIMS Delhi. Read here

The hearing on the matter of stray dogs in India will resume at 10.30 am. A bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria will hear the matter.