Heres the same with which paragraph. and links to all orders, AWBI sops and judgement. As per Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment dated 19th May 2026 in Suo Moto WP(C) 5/2025 (2026 INSC 506) (link below), citizens may note the following: 1) All applications filed by NGOs/animal welfare groups seeking modification, clarification, recall or stay of the Hon'ble SC directions dated 7th Nov 2025 regarding removal of stray dogs from institutional areas have been dismissed. (Page 91, Paras 75–76) 2) Supreme Court held that stray dogs do not possess any absolute or perpetual right to occupy every premises and that Article 21 rights of citizens, including safety and public health, are paramount. (Pages 50–58, Paras 41–49; Pages 76–78, Paras 61–62) 3) SC held that institutional and restricted-access areas such as schools, colleges, hospitals, sports complexes, airports, railway stations, bus depots and similar establishments cannot be subjected to compulsory re-release under Rule 11(19) of ABC Rules, 2023. (Pages 52–58, Paras 43–49; Page 91, Para 75) 4) Any student-led body or animal welfare group wishing to maintain/feed stray dogs within educational campuses must furnish an affidavit/undertaking accepting tortious liability for stray dog attacks, failing which such activity shall not be permitted. (Pages 89–90, Paras 73–74) 5) Supreme Court held that Rule 11(19) regarding “same locality” cannot be interpreted expansively and must be confined only to public-access areas contemplated under Section 2(i) of PCA Act, 1960. (Pages 54–55, Paras 44–45) 6) SC expressly held that “gated campus” under Rule 7(2) cannot be interpreted to legitimise stray dog presence in sensitive or controlled-access premises. (Pages 52–54, Para 43) 7) Supreme Court held that over-expansive application of ABC Rules would create absurd consequences, compromise public safety and defeat Article 21 rights. (Pages 56–58, Paras 46–49; Pages 76–78, Paras 61–62) 8) Supreme Court invoked its plenary powers under Article 142 to ensure that the ABC Rules are interpreted harmoniously with constitutional principles, public safety and practical governance requirements. (Pages 60–78, Paras 50–62) 9) SC clarified that its directions do not override the statutory framework but “supplement, clarify and operationalise” the ABC Rules in a constitutionally workable manner. (Page 78, Para 62) 10) Supreme Court has made it clear that authorities cannot avoid implementation on grounds of administrative difficulty where public safety and human life are at stake. (Pages 71–72, Paras 55–56) What you can do: a. Document stray dog menace, attacks, illegal feeding or non-compliance and file complaints before Municipal Authorities/Police Authorities citing the Supreme Court judgment. b. Take photographs/videos of violations and obstruction of court directions. Documentation of public activities is not an offence. c. Approach jurisdictional High Courts in cases of non-compliance or continued threat to public safety. here's the SC judgement and the SC orders and AWBI SOP upheld by the SC. AWBI SOPs upheld by SC judgement awbi.gov.in/uploads/regulati… SC order dated November 7, 2025 drive.google.com/file/d/1iaG… SC order dated August 22, 2025 drive.google.com/file/d/1ade… The 19th May '26 Supreme Court judgment api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/…