Saurabh Mukherjee
The Supreme Court on Monday (September 2) strongly criticized the practice of "bulldozer justice," ruling that properties cannot be demolished solely because their owners are accused of a crime. The court announced its intention to establish guidelines on this matter.
The practice of demolishing the homes of individuals accused of offenses is increasingly being treated as a standard form of punishment and is considered legitimate by many. This approach was initiated over five years ago in Uttar Pradesh under chief minister Yogi Adityanath and has since been adopted by other Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP)-ruled states, including Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, and Assam.
In response to a series of petitions challenging demolition actions frequently taken against the homes of individuals accused of serious crimes, the court declared that property cannot be demolished even if the person is ultimately convicted.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan said, "Even if he is a convict, still it can't be done without following the procedure as prescribed by law."
"We propose to lay down certain guidelines on a pan-India basis so that the concerns about the issues raised are taken care of," the bench added.
Justice KV Viswanathan remarked that while a father might have a problematic son, demolishing the house on this basis is not an appropriate solution. The court specified that demolitions should only occur if the structure in question is illegal.
Justice Viswanathan questioned why the concern authorities could not issue directives to prevent such cases. He suggested a procedure that includes issuing a notice, allowing time to respond, providing an opportunity to seek legal remedies, and only then proceeding with demolition.
There is no need for guidelines on bulldozer justice, as it is fundamentally lawless and should be entirely rejected. The court emphasized this by questioning how anyone's house can be demolished simply because they are an accused in a case.
The bench also clarified that the law does not permit such demolitions even if a person is convicted.
The provision for demolishing illegal constructions in certain laws is being misused to target specific communities. This is evident from the Uttar Pradesh government's claim that all statutory procedures are followed in these demolitions. The real issue is why only certain constructions are singled out.
Bulldozer actions are not fundamentally legal issues but rather political ones, and they are often disproportionately targeted at Muslims. No legal framework supports the concept of instant justice promoted by the bulldozer culture; justice in a rule-of-law society must follow due process.
Discriminatory and arbitrary politics fuelled by religious hatred are driving the bulldozer actions. A government that adopts such policies is acting lawlessly and should face severe consequences, including potential dismissal if it continues such practices.
Sadly, there exists a segment of society that not only condones but also glorifies such instant justice, with the bulldozer becoming a symbol of this mindset. When the drive for instant justice merges with bias against Muslims, the bulldozer turns into a tool of retribution, endorsed and empowered by the State.
The Supreme Court has scheduled the matter for a hearing on September 17.
The practice of demolishing the homes of individuals accused of offenses is increasingly being treated as a standard form of punishment and is considered legitimate by many. This approach was initiated over five years ago in Uttar Pradesh under chief minister Yogi Adityanath and has since been adopted by other Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP)-ruled states, including Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, and Assam.
In response to a series of petitions challenging demolition actions frequently taken against the homes of individuals accused of serious crimes, the court declared that property cannot be demolished even if the person is ultimately convicted.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan said, "Even if he is a convict, still it can't be done without following the procedure as prescribed by law."
"We propose to lay down certain guidelines on a pan-India basis so that the concerns about the issues raised are taken care of," the bench added.
Justice KV Viswanathan remarked that while a father might have a problematic son, demolishing the house on this basis is not an appropriate solution. The court specified that demolitions should only occur if the structure in question is illegal.
Justice Viswanathan questioned why the concern authorities could not issue directives to prevent such cases. He suggested a procedure that includes issuing a notice, allowing time to respond, providing an opportunity to seek legal remedies, and only then proceeding with demolition.
There is no need for guidelines on bulldozer justice, as it is fundamentally lawless and should be entirely rejected. The court emphasized this by questioning how anyone's house can be demolished simply because they are an accused in a case.
The bench also clarified that the law does not permit such demolitions even if a person is convicted.
The provision for demolishing illegal constructions in certain laws is being misused to target specific communities. This is evident from the Uttar Pradesh government's claim that all statutory procedures are followed in these demolitions. The real issue is why only certain constructions are singled out.
Bulldozer actions are not fundamentally legal issues but rather political ones, and they are often disproportionately targeted at Muslims. No legal framework supports the concept of instant justice promoted by the bulldozer culture; justice in a rule-of-law society must follow due process.
Discriminatory and arbitrary politics fuelled by religious hatred are driving the bulldozer actions. A government that adopts such policies is acting lawlessly and should face severe consequences, including potential dismissal if it continues such practices.
Sadly, there exists a segment of society that not only condones but also glorifies such instant justice, with the bulldozer becoming a symbol of this mindset. When the drive for instant justice merges with bias against Muslims, the bulldozer turns into a tool of retribution, endorsed and empowered by the State.
The Supreme Court has scheduled the matter for a hearing on September 17.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment