Published on: October 18, 2025 | 2:37 PM IST

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Friday was informed that no coercive action will be taken against nine individuals who had protested against the Supreme Court’s directive requiring civic authorities to confine stray dogs in dedicated shelters without releasing them back onto the streets.

The assurance was conveyed by the Delhi Police, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Naresh Kumar Chahar, before a bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. The police clarified that the decision is conditional upon the individuals cooperating with the ongoing investigation.

“On instructions from the Investigative Officer (IO), the learned APP for the state submits that no coercive action is being contemplated against the petitioners, subject to them joining the investigation,” the court noted in its Thursday order.

Background of the case
The nine individuals had filed a petition seeking to quash the FIR registered against them on August 16 at the Connaught Place police station. The FIR, filed under sections including 223, 221, 121, and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, stemmed from their protest against the Supreme Court’s August 11 ruling at Central Park.

The original order, issued by Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, mandated that the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and other civic bodies in Noida, Ghaziabad, Gurugram, and later Faridabad, round up all stray dogs within eight weeks and house them in shelters with no re-release. Authorities were also directed to establish shelters accommodating at least 5,000 animals within the stipulated time.

A follow-up written order on August 13 included welfare safeguards for dogs, but the measures sparked controversy, drawing objections from animal welfare groups citing potential cruelty. On August 22, a three-judge bench modified the directive, allowing dogs to be released after sterilisation and immunisation, except those suffering from rabies or showing aggressive behaviour.

Petitioners’ argument
The nine protesters, describing themselves as dog lovers, argued that their demonstration was a peaceful, symbolic, and lawful exercise of fundamental rights, and that the FIR was an attempt to criminalise legitimate dissent.

“The demonstration was symbolic, issue-based and non-violent, with no damage to public or private property or harm to any individual,” the petition stated.

They also highlighted the Supreme Court’s August 22 clarification, which recognised both the statutory protections for animals and the rights of citizens involved in animal welfare. The petitioners contended that any attempt to penalise such peaceful protests violates constitutional rights under Part III of the Constitution.

Furthermore, the plea argued that the FIR was based on an alleged violation of prohibitory orders, yet no evidence of such orders being issued exists, rendering the police action unconstitutional and illegal.

The Delhi High Court will continue to monitor the case as investigations proceed, ensuring the rights of peaceful protesters and animal welfare concerns are balanced.