Nagpur Advocates Raise Eyebrows Over Financial Stakes Behind Stray Dog Resistance

Nagpur’s legal fraternity is questioning the motives behind the backlash to the Supreme Court’s order to remove and shelter stray dogs. Advocates suspect that certain NGOs and businesses involved in sterilisation and vaccination programs are resisting the directive due to financial interests. In smaller cities, where the welfare curve often intertwines with commerce, these claims spark a vital discussion on whose interests truly shape policy.

Claims of Financial Incentives
Senior advocate Firdos Mirza highlighted how NGOs earn nearly ₹850 per dog sterilised under the Animal Birth Control programme. With an estimated 1.5 lakh stray dogs in Nagpur alone, the potential revenue runs into crores. He questioned whether such financial gains are overshadowing the intent to prioritise human safety.

Vaccine Market Under Scrutiny
Advocate Wilson Matthew added another layer to the debate: the lucrative vaccine industry. With around 3,000 dog-bite cases in Nagpur annually, and anti-rabies treatment costing ₹350 per dose across five doses, the cost for one patient can cross ₹1,700. In smaller cities where private facilities seem better stocked than government hospitals, the concern is that commercial motives may be driving opposition to controlling stray populations.

Balancing Compassion and Clean Ethics
There’s no denying the need for humane treatment of animals. But when financial incentives cloud policy decisions, even well-intended actions can stray from principle. In Tier 2 towns, where local sentiment matters deeply, transparency is essential to balance welfare with fairness.

Conclusion
The debate in Nagpur serves as a reminder that welfare initiatives must remain free from profit-driven influence. As court orders meet resistance, citizens in smaller cities must stay informed—and demand decisions made in public interest, not private pockets.