In reference to the Supreme Court order dated 07.11.2025, which has been interpreted by certain local authorities as permitting or mandating the removal of dogs from public places, it is respectfully submitted that such an interpretation must be exercised with utmost caution and in full conformity with existing statutory and constitutional protections afforded to community dogs under Indian law. Any administrative action must remain strictly aligned with the framework laid down under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PCA) Act, 1960, the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, and judicial precedents that govern humane and lawful management of community animals.

Under the PCA Act, the right of community (stray) dogs to live freely within their natural territories is implicitly protected through clear prohibitions against harm, displacement, and cruel treatment. Section 11(1) expressly criminalises causing unnecessary pain, injury, suffering, or ill-treatment to any animal. Arbitrary removal or forced relocation of community dogs—particularly those that are healthy, vaccinated, and sterilised—falls squarely within the scope of actions prohibited by this statute, thereby safeguarding their dignity and freedom.

Further, the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2001 and the revised ABC Rules, 2023, which continue to remain operational under the PCA Act, stipulate that all sterilised and vaccinated community dogs must be returned to the very same location from where they were picked up. This territorial return mandate is not discretionary but legally binding, reflecting the scientific and humane principle that community dogs play a stabilising role in local ecosystems and help prevent the entry of unvaccinated or aggressive animals.

Collectively, the PCA Act, the ABC Rules, and established judicial principles affirm that community dogs possess a legally recognised right to live, exist, and move freely in their accustomed habitats, subject only to humane, scientifically managed population control. Any administrative effort to remove, displace, or confine these dogs—under any interpretation of the 07.11.2025 order—must therefore be considered contrary to statutory law, inconsistent with animal welfare jurisprudence, and incompatible with public health guidelines emphasising sterilisation and rabies vaccination as the only sustainable solutions.

In light of these binding legal provisions, we earnestly and unequivocally urge the Government of Puducherry to refrain from implementing or authorising any mass removal of community dogs. Instead, we request immediate reinforcement of a lawful, humane approach centered on mass sterilisation, anti-rabies vaccination, and compliance with the ABC Rules, which alone ensure safety, legality, and long-term population management. Any alternative course of action risks violating central legislation, constitutional values, and established rights of community animals.