New Delhi (Gurpreet Singh: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to urgently hear a plea seeking action over comments allegedly made by Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann regarding the court’s recent order on stray dogs.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta declined to entertain the mention of the matter after the petitioner’s counsel claimed that the Chief Minister had interpreted the court’s directions as permitting the killing of stray dogs.
The lawyer argued that following the Supreme Court’s May 19 ruling in the stray dogs case, the Punjab Chief Minister had reportedly posted on social media suggesting that the order amounted to a “free hand” to eliminate stray dogs. The counsel also alleged that stray animals were being killed in certain areas in the aftermath of the judgment.
However, the bench questioned the basis of the plea, observing that statements made by public representatives could not be treated as a reason to seek modification or reconsideration of judicial orders. The court remarked that such issues do not automatically warrant interference from the apex court.
When the counsel pressed for urgent listing, the bench declined outright, stating that the matter was not fit for consideration at this stage and suggested approaching the Punjab and Haryana High Court instead.
The petitioner’s side further contended that the situation on the ground was worsening and that the implementation of the court’s order was leading to alleged culling of stray dogs.
In its earlier ruling on May 19, the Supreme Court had allowed the humane euthanasia of rabid, incurably ill, and dangerously aggressive stray dogs in specific circumstances, while emphasizing that public safety must take precedence when balanced against animal welfare concerns.
The court had also directed states and Union Territories to strengthen infrastructure for managing stray animal populations and instructed high courts to monitor compliance with earlier guidelines issued in August and November 2025.
The matter continues to spark debate, with animal welfare concerns being weighed against public safety considerations across several states.
