The Supreme Court expressed concern over the indiscriminate demolition actions and emphasised the need for judicial oversight on Tuesday, when it imposed a nationwide restraint on demolition activities. The court ruled that no demolition, including of those accused or convicted of crime, should occur without the court’s explicit permission.
A bench of justices Bhushan R. Gavai and KV Viswanathan issued the directive, but they added a disclaimer that the restraining order would not apply to encroachments on public roads, walkways, railway lines or water bodies. Nevertheless, the top court was clear that “heavens will not fall” if local governments nationwide decided to hold off on taking swift action against demolitions until later.
“We direct that till the next date of hearing, there will be no demolition without taking leave of this court. However, such protection would not be applicable for unauthorised constructions on public streets, footpaths, abutting railway lines, water bodies or public spaces,” ordered the bench, setting down the matter for October 1.
The bench emphasised the need to strike a balance between the preservation of constitutional rights and the necessity of law enforcement. It added that it would issue orders to expedite demolition measures, avoid any unjustified harm or prejudice, and make sure that all legal and procedural safeguards are followed.
“We are not going to issue guidelines, but we will be issuing directives. We will streamline the procedure. We are not on community A or B, or any narrative in so far as directions are concerned. Even if there is one instance of illegal demolition irrespective of the religion, it is against the ethos of the Constitution,” the bench told solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Centre and state of Uttar Pradesh in the matter.
The court’s decision was made in reaction to many petitions that contested the recent spike in property demolitions that were directed at homes connected to criminal suspects. This directive has come four days after another bench in the Supreme Court said that the growing trend of demolishing properties of individuals accused of crimes, often targeting their families too and executed via bulldozers, is “inconceivable in a nation where law is supreme, adding that if not checked, this pernicious practice “may be seen as running a bulldozer over the laws of the land.” On September 2, the justice Gavai-led bench had initiated steps towards issuing pan-Indian guidelines on demolitions, noting that demolishing homes of accused persons without following legal procedures violates fundamental rights and due process.
The nation’s highest court has issued these directives and observations in response to the growing trend of “bulldozer justice,” which is the practice of destroying the homes of those who are accused of crimes and, occasionally, of their families, frequently with the use of bulldozers or earthmovers, without following the proper legal procedures.
Representing petitioners such as Jamiat-Ulama-I-Hind, senior counsel CU Singh and MR Shamshad noted on Tuesday that demolitions were occurring on a daily basis, sometimes even on the same day as purported episodes of unrest. The court was asked to have a quick hearing by both solicitors.
However, SG Mehta defended the government’s actions, claiming that demolition notices were issued in 2022 and that future measures were predicated on those notices. Mehta emphasised that the demolitions adhered to procedural requirements and denied any allegations of targeted demolitions against particular communities.
However, the bench also adopted a pessimistic stance over the “grandstanding” and “glorification” of tearing down properties with bulldozers, citing remarks made by certain political officials indicating that bulldozers will continue to operate regardless of who is in control. The court was apparently referring to a statement made by Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath on September 4 in response to a criticism by Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav over the use of bulldozers against the properties of accused individuals.
“We don’t usually take notice of the newspaper reports but even after our order on September 2, there were statements that bulldozers will continue, and it all depends on who has the steering… there has been glorification and grandstanding. The question is – should this happen in our country? We can even ask the Election Commission of India to look into it if it can be allowed, at all,” said the bench.
While Mehta contended that a “narrative” was being built that a particular community was being targeted and that the same narrative has appealed to the court, the bench clarified that it was not influenced by the “outside noises” but was moved by the fact that demolition actions ought to pass the judicial muster and that no property can be brought down for “extraneous reasons”.
“We have already made it clear that we will not come between demolition and unauthorised constructions…But the executive can’t be judge…We have steered clear of all religion-specific instances. We are on directives that will apply across the board,” it told Mehta.
The bench clarified that the court’s order would be in the form of directives rather than guidelines as it directed that the restraint on demolitions would be in place until the matter is reviewed again on October 1.
In the September 2 hearing on this case, the bench suggested creating a unified legal framework to stop these kinds of capricious acts. The bench emphasised that legal procedures must be followed even in cases of illegal construction and that suggestions from various stakeholders should be considered when formulating comprehensive regulations. It also reiterated that no person’s property should be destroyed because they or a family member is suspected of engaging in illegal activities.
The practice of demolishing the properties of people who are accused of crimes was subsequently denounced by a different bench chaired by Justice Hrishikesh Roy on September 12, when it heard a case involving the attempted demolition of an ancestral house in Gujarat’s Kheda district due to the alleged involvement of a family member in a criminal incident.
It restrained the authorities from carrying out any demolition and noted in its order: “Alleged involvement in crime is no ground for demolition of a property. Moreover, the alleged crime has to be proved through due legal process in a court of law.”
