NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has uploaded the full order in suo motu case on the stray dog issue, in which a two-judge bench on Monday, August 11, directed that stray dogs in Delhi-NCR be relocated to shelters.In the judgment, uploaded on the apex court’s website on Wednesday, the Court has included directions to ensure that the dogs are not ill-treated in shelter homes while saying that the judiciary bears the sole responsibility to “possess the courage and strength” to remind people of truths that they may not prefer to hear.Meanwhile, in a related development, a new three-judge bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N V Anjaria will hear the matter on Thursday.The directions to permanently relocate all strays from streets to shelters “at the earliest” were passed by a bench comprising Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan on August 11.The bench passed a slew of directions while hearing a suo-motu case initiated on July 28 over stray-dog bites leading to rabies, particularly among children, in the national capital.

Here are top observations of Supreme Court order

“The judiciary must not assume or take on the colouration of the prevailing popular sentiments of the time, for its role is not to echo the passions of the moment but to uphold the enduring principles of justice, conscience and equity,” the order said.“As the sentinel on the qui vive, a guardian of rights, the judiciary bears the solemn responsibility to possess the courage and the strength to remind the people of truths that they may not like or prefer not to hear,” it added.The bench acknowledged the “genuine love and care” many people have for stray dogs and encouraged them to “come forward and become a part of this exercise,” taking responsibility for the care and upkeep of the animals in shelters or pounds.“In light of the concerns of the interveners, we urge all to adopt and give dogs a shelter in their homes. However, we do not ascribe to the virtue signalling of all those who share love and concern for the animals,” the order noted.The court said it is mindful of and sensitive to the concept of coexistence, but stressed that coexistence should not mean one life existing at the cost of another.“As a court, our heart pains equally for everyone. We condemn those who, beneath the cloak of ‘love and care’ for the voiceless, pursue the warmth of self-congratulation. The directions given by us, as a court which functions for the welfare of the people, are both in the interest of humans as well as dogs. This is not personal,” it added.“The exercise that we propose to undertake is not to be performed in a casual manner. The burning issue that we have embarked upon is not driven by a momentary impulse,” the bench said.“On the contrary, it is only after the deepest of deliberations, and having reached the firm conclusion about the systematic failure of the concerned authorities over the past two decades to address an issue that strikes at the heart of public safety that we have decided to take the matter in our hands,” it added.Noting the rising incidents of dog bites, the bench said this is not the time for resistance or hesitation stemming from complacency. It added that streets should not be places of vulnerability.“Among a bundle of concerns, we are at pains to take cognisance of the experiences of visually-impaired persons, young children, elderly persons, people from a humble background who are not able to afford even a day’s meal, let alone the medical expenses. The visually-impaired persons are at the highest risk of dog bites as their primary support, their canes, are seen as threats by the dogs,” it said.The bench also said there is no way one can identify or classify between a rabies-carrying dog and other dogs.“It is often said that ‘no person is above the law’. However, of equal significance is the flip side of that maxim — ‘no person is below the law’ either,” it said.