Law doesn’t allow razing of homes of accused: SC

CategoryPolity

Last Updated04/09/2024

Justice Gavai acknowledged that municipal laws do provide for demolition of illegal constructions, but they seem to be implemented “more in breach”.

The recent remarks by the Supreme Court of India have reignited the debate over the legality and morality of demolishing homes and private properties of individuals accused of crimes.
The practice, colloquially referred to as "bulldozer justice," has been under scrutiny, particularly in the context of actions taken by certain state governments.
The apex court's intervention is crucial in defining the boundaries of state power and ensuring adherence to the rule of law.

On September 2, 2024, a Supreme Court Bench led by Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan questioned the legality of demolishing homes of individuals merely accused of crimes, labeling such actions as potentially retributive and unlawful.
Justice Gavai emphasized that the law does not permit the destruction of a person's shelter, even if they are convicted of a crime, let alone merely accused.
The Court's concern highlights the need for a legal framework that prevents the misuse of power under the guise of enforcing the law.

Senior advocates Dushyant Dave and C.U. Singh, representing the petitioners, urged the Court to make a definitive statement against the practice of "bulldozer justice."
The petitioners cited instances from Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan where homes were demolished shortly after the accused individuals were linked to criminal activities, often leading to communal tensions.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Uttar Pradesh government, defended the demolitions, stating that they were carried out under municipal laws against illegal structures.
He denied that the demolitions were targeted, communal, or retributive. According to Mehta, these actions were taken after following due process and were not influenced by the accused's involvement in criminal activities.
He urged the Court to consider the possibility that these individuals were already under notice for illegal constructions before being accused of crimes.

The Supreme Court acknowledged that while municipal laws do provide for the demolition of illegal constructions, these laws are often implemented inconsistently. Justice Gavai highlighted that any action against immovable properties must be carried out in strict accordance with legal procedures.
The Court also expressed its intention to establish uniform guidelines to streamline the identification and demolition process of unauthorized structures, ensuring that all parties involved receive a fair hearing.