In his celebrated lecture titled “Role of the Judge in a Democracy”, Justice A.K. Sikri, a renowned former judge of the Supreme Court, quotes the American jurist and legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin as saying that a true democracy is “not just a statistical democracy, in which anything a majority or plurality wants is legitimate for that reason, but communal democracy, where everyone must be allowed to participate in politics as an equal”.One way to interpret this in the context of justice would be to say that the courts are morally and legally bound to protect the underdog – those citizens who wield little power, those who are in a tiny minority and those who espouse uncommon and unusual causes like having compassion for living creatures.The recent judgement by Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan of the Supreme Court shows a severe disdain for such an understanding of justice. The underdog the judges came down heavily upon was quite literally the street dog, and the citizens who take care of them.On Monday (August 11), the Supreme Court bench directed the Delhi government and authorities in adjacent Ghaziabad, Noida and Gurugram to capture all street dogs in the Delhi-NCR region, numbering in lakhs, and permanently confine them in dog pounds to be erected outside of the city.Indeed, large sections of Indian society have entrenched negative views on street dogs. Most people look at the ever-present canine resident of their neighbourhoods with fear and loathing. They say this creature is dangerous. They say it bites.In contrast, women, men and children who tend to street dogs are significantly fewer. There are no statistics to indicate their actual number. This relatively small group perceives the street dog as a being that is remarkably capable of bonding, love and resilience.Faced with these diametrically opposite views, a potent arbiter is obviously expected to listen patiently to all stakeholders.Instead, the Supreme Court bench refused to consider any applications filed by multiple parties who wanted to make a case for science-backed solutions to bring down dog populations humanely.In violation of the Animal Birth Control Rules of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, the bench said, “We have noticed some unreasonable and absurd rule that you pick one dog, sterilise them and bring them back to the same place. We fail to understand why you bring them back … Forget the rules and face reality. These dogs are to be rounded up and captured immediately by whatever means.”Also read: Should the Dogs Go to Pakistan?Ignorance combined with a stupefying unwillingness to learn the scientific nuances of dog behaviour and the movement of animal populations while performing such a vital decision-making role cannot be justified. Had the honourable judges allowed dog behaviourists and animal carers to speak, they would have come to know that street dogs are not intruders; rather, they are original inhabitants who intently guard their space, thereby averting the entry of other dogs to their area.A forced removal of street dogs from the Delhi-NCR region would make the arrival of dogs, pigs or monkeys from other cities, villages and towns practically inevitable. If with a magic wand, the government of Delhi is able to remove all of these animals, piles of garbage would still attract scavengers like rats and most definitely disease-causing bacteria.Also, not letting animal carers and welfare organisations be heard in the apex court is a serious blow to a citizen’s fundamental right to seek justice. Where shall aggrieved parties go if they are being turned away from the highest body meant to administer fair legal judgements?Citing lines from The Good, The Bad and the Ugly, a Hollywood western film, Justice Pardiwala said, “If you have to shoot a man, shoot and don’t talk … So, no talk. It is time to act, and now.”This casual reference to trigger-happy shooting in a western movie reeks of vigilante justice.A parallel diktat was passed by Turkey’s parliament last year that required municipal bodies to capture millions of stray dogs and put them in shelters.In a moving essay titled ‘When All Else Fails, Blame the Dogs’ published in the New York Times, author and journalist Kaya Genc says, “I also can’t shake the sense that for the government, this is not really about the dogs. Mr Erdogan long ago mastered the art of scapegoating.”When the economy is faltering, and governmental services, including health, education and drinking water are abysmal, what better way to redirect the wrath of an irate populace than to label the low-ranking street dog as dangerous.The order that mandates the capture and confinement of street dogs follows the Supreme Court’s suo motu cognisance of a news item that had reported the death of a six-year-old girl due to rabies.Senior political leader and animal rights advocate Maneka Gandhi has said that the girl’s parents confirmed she had actually died of meningitis.This suggests the possibility of inadequate fact-checking by the media outlet where the news had first appeared. This, too, is sadly predictable in an age where news media routinely frame events in a sensational manner to attract more readers.So, it bears saying that two crucial pillars of our democracy – the press and the judiciary – failed to employ the discipline of verification in their processes. Without verification, there is no truth. And without truth, there is no justice.A more enlightened approach would have been to guide the state government to ascertain the veracity of every dog bite complaint and to make a distinction between the percentage of dog bites due to house pets and those ascribed to street dogs.Not every dog bite complaint is bona fide. In a report published in Scroll in October 2023, Keren Nazareth of the Indian unit of the Humane Society International, an animal welfare organisation, pointed to data from her team’s on-ground evaluation of dog bite complaints. “We found that in Lucknow, out of 1,322 dog bite complaints received between April and August in 2023, only 83 were based on actual bite cases,” she said.According to one estimate, rabies accounts for approximately 5,700 deaths in India every year. But it is also true that India has registered a 75% drop in rabies-related deaths in recent years.Also read: Supreme Court’s War on Delhi’s Stray Dogs is Misguided and Legally ProblematicThe apex court could have also directed a structural overhaul of the municipal processes that would result in efficient animal birth control programs. It is imperative to place checks and balances to hold civic bodies accountable for their veterinary activities.Finally, ascribing culpability to animal rights activists for rabies deaths is another erroneous assumption made by the bench. The judges asked if those who fight for the welfare of street dogs would be able to bring back children lost to rabid dogs.The bench must know that many citizens who feed street dogs get them sterilised and vaccinated as well, thereby making their cities safer. Yet they are made to feel like fugitives for the simple act of giving food to the hungry.They are asked to take the dogs home. Many do. One or two dogs, depending on the size of their residence. But several carers look after more than two or three dogs. Their houses are unlikely to accommodate all their furry friends.Undoubtedly, anyone who lives on the streets is worthy of our compassion, whether human or animal. Why should kindness be criminalised? One of the most intrinsic qualities of being human is to care for someone who can do nothing in return.Indeed, maintaining a balance between public convenience and compassion is essential. Even so, the repeated requests of animal carers to designate suitable stray dog feeding spots are ignored, delayed or even opposed by resident welfare associations. These citizens invest their time, money and effort in this cause, and often find themselves overstretched and fatigued in a largely solitary initiative. They want the canine population to go down more than anyone else. But in a scientific and humane manner. A just judiciary would agree.Anjali Lal Gupta teaches at the Department of Communication, University of Hyderabad.