The Kerala High Court has suggested that clusters of two or three local bodies establish common shelters for stray dogs, after civic authorities cited difficulties in finding suitable land. The court also warned that local self-government institutions could face contempt proceedings if they fail to comply with directions issued by the Supreme Court on the management of stray dogs.
A bench comprising Justices A K Jayasankaran Nambiar and A K Preetha made the suggestion while hearing a suo motu petition initiated after a Supreme Court order directed all high courts to register similar cases on the stray dog issue. The proceedings place responsibility on local bodies to create operational arrangements for animal birth control and the subsequent release of dogs.
The High Court said local bodies could consider a common facility serving two or three civic authorities instead of each body attempting to establish an individual shelter. The proposal addresses a practical constraint faced by municipalities and other local institutions: the availability of land for shelters in densely settled urban areas.
The bench further said that opposition from local residents could not be cited as a reason for failing to establish shelters or comply with the Supreme Court’s directions. It directed local bodies to take steps to address such protests and proceed with the required arrangements. Failure to do so, the court said, could expose them to contempt proceedings before the Supreme Court.
The hearing also raised questions about what happens to dogs picked up from public institutions for the animal birth control procedure. Counsel representing Animal Rescue Centre, Kochi, told the court that dogs collected from such premises had, in several instances, not been released after the procedure. The submission raised concerns about animals being retained in shelters indefinitely.
According to the position placed before the court, the Supreme Court’s directions prohibit the release of dogs back into the premises from which they were picked up, but do not prohibit their release at suitable locations outside those premises. The High Court observed that the guidelines require such dogs to be released and do not permit them to be kept indefinitely in shelters.
Kochi Corporation’s counsel undertook to submit details of dogs picked up from within the corporation’s territorial limits for the animal birth control procedure. The information is expected to include the number of dogs collected and the locations where they were released after the procedure.
The corporation was also directed to provide details of the animal birth control procedure it follows. The direction came amid concerns raised before the court about how the procedure is conducted and questions regarding the competence of those performing it. The corporation’s submission will therefore place both the scale of its operations and its post-procedure release practices before the court.
The proceedings highlight the administrative challenge of implementing stray-dog management rules across multiple urban local bodies, where land, resident opposition, shelter capacity and release protocols are closely linked. The next step is Kochi Corporation’s submission of the requested records and procedural details to the High Court.
