A judgment awaits: The SC Special Bench’s stray dog decision could bring closure to many stories
A three-judge bench is set to deliver verdict in a suo motu case on stray dog bites on August 22. The opportunity before the Court is not only to settle contrary decisions of various High Courts and benches on stray dog management, but also devise a meaningful way of holding municipalities accountable.
Aditya Sharma
21 August 2025
ON JUNE 30, SIX YEAR OLD CHAVI SHARMA affectionately called ‘Bittu’ by her family, was attacked by a stray dog while walking to her aunt’s house in Pooth Kalan, Delhi. Around 4:45 pm, the dog lunged, tearing her skirt and inflicting deep bite wounds on her thigh, arm, knee, and hand.
Rushed to Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital in Rohini, Chavi became one of nearly 100 patients treated in the emergency ward that day. Tragically, despite medical efforts, she succumbed to rabies twelve days later, just weeks after celebrating her sixth birthday on June 13. Her family, still haunted by her absence, clings to memories of her vibrant spirit, hoping to hear her voice return from play.
Born in a village near Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, Chavi lost her mother at birth. Bereft of women caregivers, Chavi and her two sisters were entrusted to relatives for upbringing. She found a loving home with her father’s elder brother in Delhi, where she was embraced by her adoptive parents, Satish Sharma, 47, and Manju Sharma, 45, and her brothers, Vishal, 24, and Mukesh, 19.
“Bittu was everybody’s favorite,” Vishal recalls, his voice breaking. “She had a way of connecting with everyone she met.”
A news report in the Times of India on Chavi’s death became the trigger for a suo motu cognizance by a Supreme Court bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, who on August 11, passed a sweeping order directing the removal of all stray dogs from the Delhi NCR region within thirty days. Animal rights activists have argued that the order overlooks the possibility of developing a nuanced street dog management policy in India, and was in violation of the Animal Birth Control Rules. Subsequently, upon referral to a three-judge bench, the Supreme Court has reserved order on the issue, even as Justice Pardiwala’s August 11 order was not stayed. Tomorrow, the three-judge bench is set to deliver its verdict - one that has an opportunity to settle an untidy jurisprudence on the management of stray dogs, and devising a procedural solution to hold municipal corporations accountable.
A news report in the Times of India on Chavi’s death became the trigger for a suo motu cognizance by a Supreme Court bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan.
Interestingly, misinformation seems to have flowed both ways.
Animal rights activist and former union minister Maneka Gandhi have observed, while criticising the order of August 11, that the “child did not die because of a dog but due to ‘meningitis’ and the parents have confirmed it.”
The doctors who treated Chavi have something else to say.
A system on trial
On June 30, around 5 pm in the evening, the family got to know that a dog had bitten Chavi. The neighbours rescued her from the dog. There, then was a crowd gathered around her and took her to her house. The family then rushed to the Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, the nearest public hospital located 5.5 km from their house. Doctors in the emergency ward examined Chavi and prepared her to give Anti-rabies injections.
“They gave her injections on every wound except the hand and back of the arm to which Manish objected,” Vishal said. He recalled that the doctors said that she was in pain and giving injections there would pain her more. .
She was given next dates of vaccination on July 3, 7 and 28.
