A major irregularity has surfaced in Gwalior Municipal Corporation’s stray dog sterilization programme, with investigators uncovering the alleged use of a forged affidavit linked to the sterilization of hundreds of street dogs. The case relates to operations carried out at the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Centre between March and April 2022, during which 656 stray dogs were reportedly sterilized.

According to officials, a municipal inquiry found that an affidavit submitted as part of the project documentation contained serious discrepancies. Investigators allege that the stamp paper was purchased and signed by one veterinarian, while the affidavit was submitted in the name of another doctor. Following the findings, police have registered a criminal case for fraud and forgery and launched a detailed investigation.

The complaint was filed by Municipal Corporation nodal officer Keshav Singh Chauhan, who approached Padav police station after reviewing the inquiry report. Based on the complaint, police registered a case against veterinarian Dr. Raviraman Sharma.

Questions Over Project Documentation

Municipal records show that a Chhattisgarh-based organisation had been awarded the contract for sterilization of stray dogs under the civic body's Animal Birth Control programme in 2022. Under established guidelines, sterilized dogs must be released back at the same location from where they were captured. An affidavit confirming compliance with this requirement was submitted to the corporation.

During verification, officials found that the affidavit had been prepared on stamp paper purchased in the name of Dr. Raviraman Sharma and also carried his signatures. However, the document submitted to the Municipal Corporation reportedly mentioned the name of another veterinarian, Dr. Raghav Parashar.

Officials believe the discrepancy may have been intended to mislead authorities and conceal the actual source of the affidavit.

FIR Registered After Inquiry

The matter came to light after the Municipal Corporation sought clarification from the organisation involved in the project. According to reports, the organisation acknowledged that Dr. Raviraman Sharma was posted at the ABC Centre during the relevant period and had handled the affidavit-related process.

Following the inquiry, municipal authorities forwarded their findings to the police. Preliminary investigation revealed sufficient grounds to register a case involving the alleged use of forged documents and fraudulent representation.

Police have begun collecting original records, including the stamp paper and affidavit, as part of the evidence-gathering process.

Wider Concerns Raised

Officials say the case may not be limited to a single affidavit. The scope of the investigation is being expanded to examine whether any additional irregularities occurred in project records, claims submitted by the contractor, or related payment processes.

The incident has also raised concerns about oversight and accountability in government-funded animal welfare projects. Transparency in Animal Birth Control programmes is considered crucial because the projects are directly linked to public health and urban animal management.

Padav police station in-charge Shailendra Bhargava said the investigation is ongoing and all relevant documents are being examined. Authorities are also looking into the possible involvement of other individuals connected to the project.

For now, the Gwalior dog sterilization scam has emerged as one of the most closely watched civic investigations in the city, with officials indicating that further revelations may follow as the probe progresses.

High Court directive prompts civic body to regulate street dog feeding in the city

Raipur's civic administration has moved to formally regulate the feeding of stray dogs across the city, designating specific feeding zones in all 70 wards under the jurisdiction of the Raipur Municipal Corporation. The decision follows a directive from the Chhattisgarh High Court and is aimed at resolving the recurring disputes between animal welfare activists and resident welfare groups that have long strained neighbourhoods across the state capital.

Information boards have been installed at each designated location to guide residents and animal feeders. The move marks a significant shift in how the city intends to handle a problem that has quietly simmered in residential areas for years.

What Triggered the Move

Complaints about stray dog feeding have been a persistent source of friction in Raipur. Residents in several localities had repeatedly raised objections — about dogs congregating near building entrances, housing societies, and pedestrian areas — while those committed to feeding them often found themselves at loggerheads with neighbours. Matters escalated enough to reach the High Court, which directed the municipal corporation to bring in a structured arrangement.

With the court order now serving as the operational mandate, the civic body has moved quickly to implement a city-wide framework.

Zones Spread Across the City

The municipal corporation has identified feeding locations spanning Zone 1 through Zone 10. According to officials, the designated spots include open grounds, marketplaces, ponds, community halls, cremation grounds, and vacant plots — spaces considered suitable for this purpose without creating nuisance in densely populated residential pockets.

Each zone office holds the complete list of feeding points for the wards under its coverage. Residents can visit their respective zone offices or look for the newly installed notice boards to locate the feeding zone nearest to their area.

Stray Dog Management Continues

The feeding zone policy does not signal any relaxation in the corporation's broader stray dog management efforts. Municipal officials have made clear that complaint-based action will continue as before.

When a complaint is received, the corporation's teams will capture the dogs from the reported location and process them under Animal Birth Control (ABC) guidelines. This involves a standard protocol — deworming, anti-rabies vaccination, and sterilisation — before the animals are returned. The ABC programme is the central pillar of India's stray dog management policy and has been running in cities across the country under directions from the Animal Welfare Board of India.

A Balance Between Welfare and Coexistence

Officials framing the feeding zone initiative have described it as an effort to bring both sides of the debate to a workable middle ground. Animal lovers retain the right to feed strays, but now within a defined framework that prevents conflicts in shared spaces. Residents in apartments or gated localities who have objected to feeding near their premises now have a civic mechanism to point to.

The corporation is, in effect, doing what many urban local bodies have struggled to do — give legal and spatial structure to an activity that has existed informally for decades.

How Citizens Can Find Their Feeding Zone

For residents unsure of their ward's designated spot, the municipal corporation has outlined a simple path: approach the local zone office, or check the information boards that have been installed in and around the designated locations. All 70 wards have at least one feeding zone, officials said, ensuring that the system covers the entire city rather than select pockets.

Whether the framework holds in practice will depend on enforcement, awareness, and the willingness of both feeders and residents to use the new system. For now, Raipur becomes one of the few Indian cities to have a formally mapped, ward-level stray dog feeding policy in place.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday made strong observations on the growing menace of stray dog attacks across the country and said that dangerous and rabies-infected stray dogs can be euthanised in accordance with the law. The court emphasized that the safety and lives of citizens are of utmost importance and said that the right to live with dignity also includes the right to live free from the fear of stray dog attacks.

A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice NV Anjaria dismissed all petitions seeking withdrawal of the court’s November 2025 directions regarding stray dogs. The bench made it clear that public safety cannot be compromised and warned that officials failing to implement the directions could face contempt proceedings.

The Supreme Court reiterated its earlier directions to remove stray dogs from public places such as schools, hospitals, bus stands, railway stations and highways. The court said the animals should be shifted to shelters or Animal Birth Control (ABC) centres and should not be released back onto the streets without proper procedures. It also upheld restrictions on feeding stray dogs on roads and public places.

During the hearing, the court referred to several incidents of dog attacks reported from different states. It noted that in Rajasthan’s Sri Ganganagar alone, 1,084 dog bite cases were reported within a month, including several incidents involving small children suffering serious facial injuries. In Tamil Nadu, nearly two lakh dog bite cases were recorded in the first four months of the year. The court also cited an incident in Surat where a German tourist was attacked by a stray dog. The bench observed that such incidents are creating fear among citizens and weakening public trust in urban administration.

The apex court issued nine key directions to states and civic authorities. It directed all state governments to strictly implement the rules framed by the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI). Every district must have at least one fully functional Animal Birth Control centre, while densely populated cities should establish additional centres based on requirement.

The court further stated that euthanasia may be carried out in cases involving rabies-infected or highly aggressive stray dogs where human life is at risk. It also directed authorities to ensure adequate availability of anti-rabies vaccines and medicines in hospitals and healthcare centres.

The Supreme Court also assigned responsibility to the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to address the issue of stray animals on highways. It directed NHAI to take necessary measures to remove stray animals from highways through coordinated efforts with local authorities and monitoring mechanisms.

The bench observed that municipal officials and civic authorities implementing court orders should receive legal protection and should not ordinarily face FIRs or punitive action while carrying out their duties. However, it warned that failure to comply with court directions would invite contempt proceedings.

The court also referred to its January 2026 hearing in the matter, during which it had remarked that its observations should not be taken lightly. At that time, the bench had stated that if a stray dog attack results in serious injury or death, responsibility could also be fixed on dog feeders along with municipal bodies. The court had observed that local administrations were clearly failing in handling the situation.

The matter first came before the Supreme Court in July 2025 when the court took suo motu cognisance of rising stray dog attacks and deaths across India. In August 2025, the court had ordered authorities in Delhi-NCR to capture all stray dogs and shift them to shelters within eight weeks. Following protests from animal rights groups, the court later modified the order and allowed non-aggressive and non-rabid dogs to be released back into their original areas after sterilisation and vaccination.