The Supreme Court on Monday (September 2, 2024) questioned the bulldozing of homes and private properties of persons accused of crimes or even their relatives by States as a possible act of public retribution, saying the law does not permit the destruction of the family shelters of even convicts.
“How can anybody’s home be demolished because he is an accused in a case? The law does not permit that… Can it happen even if a person is a convict?” Justice B.R. Gavai, heading a Bench with Justice K.V. Viswanathan, asked.
Also read | Fast-tracked bulldozer justice in Madhya Pradesh
Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for the petitioner side along with senior advocate C.U. Singh, urged the court to make a statement that “bulldozer justice will not be meted out anywhere in the country”.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the Uttar Pradesh government which has been blamed for retributory demolitions, said municipal laws provide for the demolition of illegal structures.
Mr. Mehta denied targetted, communal or retributive demolitions by States. He said the States follow the law. Demolitions happened after complying with statutory procedure. The law officer said even the government was against retributive demolitions of accused persons’ or their families’ homes and properties. That was not permitted under the law.
However, he urged the court to consider an alternative to the petitioners’ narrative.
Mr. Mehta asked what if a person, accused of a crime, had already been facing a notice from the municipal authorities, warning him that his illegal structure was bound to be demolished.
“If he has a pending notice, he will not be absolved because he happens to be an accused in a crime. From the facts gleaned in many cases, notices had been sent to these persons. They later happened to be accused in crimes,” Mr. Mehta countered.
Justice Gavai acknowledged that municipal laws do provide for demolition of illegal constructions, but they seem to be implemented “more in breach”.
“We are not protecting any unauthorised structures, may it even be temples…” Justice Gavai remarked. Mr. Mehta intervened to say “any religious structures”.
Justice Gavai underscored that “immoveable properties can be demolished only in accordance with procedure laid down in law”.
Justice Viswanathan said the apex court was intending to lay down uniform guidelines on a pan-India basis to streamline the procedure for identifying unauthorised structures, issuing notice to persons concerned, giving them a fair hearing and subsequent action.
“If we lay down guidelines, even digitalise the process, neither authorities nor the persons concerned can take advantage,” Justice Viswanathan said.
The court listed the case on September 17 for laying down guidelines. It asked petitioners to provide it with suggestions.
The petitioners had highlighted the recent cases of demolitions in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan.
In Madhya Pradesh, a family’s ancestral home was pulled down. In Udaipur, the municipal corporation demolished a tenant’s house for allegedly ‘encroaching’ on forest land. The razing of the house had followed shortly after the tenant’s 15-year-old son was arrested for allegedly stabbing his classmate from another community, leading to communal tensions in the city.
The last time the court heard the case in 2022, Mr. Dave, appearing for Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, had said the court should view the problem from a larger perspective.
He said the country was a facing an “extraordinarily serious” situation. Justice was being delivered by the arms of the bulldozer. Rule of law lay in the debris.
Mr. Dave had argued that powerful State governments and its functionaries were taking advantage of municipal laws to “wreck vengeance” by using bulldozers to demolish the private homes and buildings of people whom they believe were behind communal violence and riots.
In its detailed affidavit filed two years ago, the Uttar Pradesh government had said petitions filed in the Supreme Court against “routine” demolitions were a surreptitious attempt by third parties like Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind to protect “illegal encroachments” and “sensationalise” the issue.
Uttar Pradesh had said demolitions conducted were those against unauthorised constructions on public land. Action was taken strictly under the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act 1959 and U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act 1973.
