But a closer reading of the 131-page judgment shows the Court did not give a blanket licence to randomly pick up, relocate or kill stray dogs.
In fact, when a plea objecting to Mann’s statement was mentioned before the Supreme Court on May 25, the Court refused to entertain it and asked the petitioner to move the Punjab and Haryana High Court instead.
“Go the Punjab High Court.
Strict compliance of the order is to be done by the High Courts,” the Bench said.
So what exactly has the Supreme Court permitted - and what has it not?
But a closer reading of the 131-page judgment shows the Court did not give a blanket licence to randomly pick up, relocate or kill stray dogs.
Instead, the Bench repeatedly tied any such action to statutory safeguards, veterinary assessment and compliance with the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and the Animal Birth Control Rules.
In fact, when a plea objecting to Mann’s statement was mentioned before the Supreme Court on May 25, the Court refused to entertain it and asked the petitioner to move the Punjab and Haryana High Court instead.
“Go the Punjab High Court. If the CM makes a statement, do we change our order? Strict compliance of the order is to be done by the High Courts,” the Bench said.
So what exactly has the Supreme Court permitted - and what has it not?
