Acting on a plea by the Animal Welfare Board of India, the Supreme Court on Friday provided relief to thousands of stray dogs in Mumbai. The Court ordered an interim stay on the High Court’s decision that allowed municipal authorities in the state to kill stray dogs since they were causing “nuisance”.

Senior advocate Fali S Nariman argued that a dog “cannot be exterminated because it barks,” the Bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justice P Sathasivam agreed to examine the matter and, meanwhile, ordered a stay on the decision of the full Bench of the High Court.

The majority verdict of the High Court was suspended till January 29, allowing aggrieved parties to approach the higher court.

Nariman and senior counsel T R Andhyarujina fiercely argued asking to know, “how an order could be passed that stray dogs be exterminated?”, when there are clear guidelines by the apex court for resorting to killing stray canines. They said if a dog is rabid or mortally wounded or incurably ill, it has to be taken and euthanised by the authorities as per the rules and guidelines.

However, to a query by the Bench that a stray dog may bite so many people, Nariman submitted: “In that case, the important thing is to sterlise such dogs and not kill them.”

While staying the killing till further orders, the court also sought response from a Goa-based organisation People for Elimination of Stray Troubles. It was on their petition, seeking a directive for killing stray dogs, that the High Court passed the order.

Municipal records showed that there are 70,182 dogs in the metropolis in 2008. The matter came up before the Goa bench of the Bombay High Court, which later finding certain infirmities referred the matter to the larger Bench in Mumbai. In 1990, the Bombay High Court had banned killing of dogs.

Two judges - Justices D B Bhosale and Vijaya Tahilramani - had held that the Municipal Commissioner, under Section 191 of Mumbai Municipal Corporation (MMC) Act, has discretionary powers to order killing of a stray dog, provided it is causing nuisance. However, Justice S Radhakrishnan held that the commissioner can kill dogs only in the circumstances prescribed by Animal Birth Control rule: if the dog is rabid or mortally wounded or incurably ill. Also, a perennially-violent dog can be called incurably ill, and be killed, he held. Other two judges agreed with him, but further held that beyond this, civic commissioner can order killing if a dog is causing nuisance.