The Supreme Court stays the observation of the Nagpur Bench that people feeding stray dogs must adopt them, however directs dog feeders not to create public nuisance.

The Supreme Court of India has stayed an order of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court which had issued directions that if the dog lovers were really interested in protection and welfare of stray dogs then they should adopt these stray animals, take them home or at least put them in a dog shelter and bear all expenses of their registration with the Municipal Authorities.

The Order of the Nagpur Bench reads as follows:

If these so called friends of stray dogs are really interested in protection and welfare of the stray dogs, they must adopt the stray dogs, take home the stray dogs or at least put them up in some good dog shelter homes and bear all the expenses for their registration with Municipal Authorities and towards their maintenance, health and vaccination...
 
However the Hon’ble Supreme Court has also issued certain directions to the Nagpur Municipal Corporation such as that the general public must ensure that public nuisance is not caused by feeding of the stray dogs

Further, we direct the Municipal Corporation to ensure and take required steps to enable the general public to feed the stray dogs at appropriate locations demarcated/identified by them. Equally, the Municipal Corporation will take steps to deal with the issue of ‘nuisance’ caused by ferocious and aggressive stray dogs, in accordance with law. The general public must ensure that public nuisance is not caused by feeding stray dogs.
 
The Supreme Court has also directed the Nagpur Municipal Corporation that:

Till the next date of hearing, it will be open to the Municipal Corporation to note down the names and details of the dog feeders, in case public nuisance or endangerment is caused because of their conduct. However, coercive steps in terms of fine as directed by the High Court, would not be taken without permission of this court.

Swati Sudhirchandra Chatterjee & Ors. v. Vijay Shankarrao Talewar & Ors.