New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday continued its marathon hearing on the contentious issue of stray dog management in India. A Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and N.V. Anjaria heard a barrage of arguments ranging from constitutional compassion to the state's failure in preventing rabies deaths.

The Court has now concluded the submissions of individual intervenors and NGOs. The matter is listed for January 28 at 2 PM, where the Amicus Curiae, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), and State Governments will present their final stands.

The hearing saw a sharp divide in ideologies. Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for animal welfare groups, made an impassioned plea for "peaceful co-existence." He argued that the Constitution mandates compassion towards all living beings and that the solution lies in better-equipped municipal corporations rather than mass culling or removal.

"Please be compassionate towards the life of those who cannot speak. To accommodate them in a world given to us by a higher power... Balance should be there."

Dave also apologized to the Bench for the "bad publicity" and social media vilification the Court has faced regarding this sensitive case, termed by the judges as "improper.

On the other side of the spectrum, advocates for dog bite victims shifted the focus to human rights. Advocate Manoj Shirsat invoked a past judgment by Justice Abhay S. Oka (from his Bombay HC tenure), arguing that the failure to control the stray dog population constitutes a violation of Article 21 (Right to Life). The argument posited that if a citizen dies due to a stray dog attack, the State must be held liable to pay compensation for its administrative failure.

The proceedings saw a tense moment when a counsel attempted to dispute the cause of death of a child in a high-profile dog bite case that triggered these petitions. Justice Sandeep Mehta sternly interjected, prohibiting any factual re-litigation of the specific incident.

"We are not allowing you to comment on that death. We prohibit you. Not a word on that.

This hearing is setting the stage for a landmark judgment that will define urban governance in India. The Court is navigating a minefield: balancing the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023—which prohibit the relocation of dogs—against the rising public outcry over safety. With the States and NHRC set to argue next week, the Court will soon have to decide if "compassion" can legally coexist with the "nuisance" caused by unchecked stray populations.