India
SC halts bulldozer action without approval till October 1 | India News – Times of India
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday put a stop to ‘bulldozer justice’ by directing all state governments and their authorities not to pursue any form of criminal prosecution. demolition work until October 1 without approval. It added that people who public office need to stop glorifying this practice and make a big deal about it.
Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan expressed serious concerns over the use of bulldozers as a punitive measure, which the Supreme Court said was against the ethics of the Constitution and should be subject to “judicial scrutiny”. They said there were concerns about misuse of this by the executive, which cannot act as a judge.
However, the court noted that its decision did not prevent authorities from taking action in cases of encroachment on roads and public land. It also allowed the demolition of structures built on them without warning, even if they had a religious background.
The Supreme Court has passed an interim order which will remain valid till the next hearing on October 1. It was alleged that the demolition of houses and commercial properties in several states continued unabated even after the Supreme Court had rebuked the practice and agreed to hear a petition seeking directions.
Senior advocate CU Singh and advocate Fauzia Shakil brought to the court’s notice incidents in Rajasthan’s Bhilwara where several shops were recently razed to the ground. Senior advocate MR Shamshad, appearing for Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, intervened and said targeted demolition were carried out.
SG Tushar Mehta refuted this claim and told the court that a narrative was being created that people from a particular community were being targeted by bulldozers. He urged the court not to give credence to this.
Mehta said the notifications were issued in 2022 in the case of demolition in Rajasthan. He added that in MP, 50% of the around 700 shops demolished belonged to Hindus.
The bench asked the SG why demolitions were being carried out in “haste” in Rajasthan when nothing had been done for the past two years, and assured him that it was not influenced by “outside noise”. SC said it was not concerned about any community but about the law and its implementation, which should apply to all. “Our immediate priority is to streamline the procedure,” SC said.
Can EC request position on glorification of netas bulldozer action: Supreme Court
The court also took a strong stance against people holding public office, including ministers, who glorified the practice of bulldozer justice and said it may seek a response from the Election Commission on the issue. “This glorification, boasting and justification of bulldozer must stop,” the court said.
The court then passed an interim order saying: “No demolition work shall take place until the following date without the permission of this court. However, such order would not apply to any unauthorised construction on public streets, footpaths, adjacent railway lines or public spaces.”
During the previous hearing on September 2, the court had sharply criticized the practice of ‘bulldozer justice’, where houses or business premises are demolished, simply because they belong to someone suspected of having committed a crime. In addition, the court stressed the need for national guidelines and asked the parties for suggestions.
Another bench of the Supreme Court had on September 12 said that government agencies engaging in ‘bulldozer justice’ amounts to violating the laws of the land with a bulldozer. It had also said that alleged involvement in criminality is not a ground for demolishing a property.
“In a country where the actions of the state are governed by the rule of law, trespass by one family member cannot invite action against other family members or their legally constructed abode. Alleged involvement in a crime is not a ground for demolition of a property. Moreover, the alleged crime has to be proved through due legal process in a court of law. The court cannot be unaware of such threats of demolition which are unthinkable in a country where law is supreme. Otherwise, such actions can be seen as bulldozing the laws of the land,” a bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Sudhanshu Dhulia and SVN Bhatti had said.
Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan expressed serious concerns over the use of bulldozers as a punitive measure, which the Supreme Court said was against the ethics of the Constitution and should be subject to “judicial scrutiny”. They said there were concerns about misuse of this by the executive, which cannot act as a judge.
However, the court noted that its decision did not prevent authorities from taking action in cases of encroachment on roads and public land. It also allowed the demolition of structures built on them without warning, even if they had a religious background.
The Supreme Court has passed an interim order which will remain valid till the next hearing on October 1. It was alleged that the demolition of houses and commercial properties in several states continued unabated even after the Supreme Court had rebuked the practice and agreed to hear a petition seeking directions.
Senior advocate CU Singh and advocate Fauzia Shakil brought to the court’s notice incidents in Rajasthan’s Bhilwara where several shops were recently razed to the ground. Senior advocate MR Shamshad, appearing for Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, intervened and said targeted demolition were carried out.
SG Tushar Mehta refuted this claim and told the court that a narrative was being created that people from a particular community were being targeted by bulldozers. He urged the court not to give credence to this.
Mehta said the notifications were issued in 2022 in the case of demolition in Rajasthan. He added that in MP, 50% of the around 700 shops demolished belonged to Hindus.
The bench asked the SG why demolitions were being carried out in “haste” in Rajasthan when nothing had been done for the past two years, and assured him that it was not influenced by “outside noise”. SC said it was not concerned about any community but about the law and its implementation, which should apply to all. “Our immediate priority is to streamline the procedure,” SC said.
Can EC request position on glorification of netas bulldozer action: Supreme Court
The court also took a strong stance against people holding public office, including ministers, who glorified the practice of bulldozer justice and said it may seek a response from the Election Commission on the issue. “This glorification, boasting and justification of bulldozer must stop,” the court said.
The court then passed an interim order saying: “No demolition work shall take place until the following date without the permission of this court. However, such order would not apply to any unauthorised construction on public streets, footpaths, adjacent railway lines or public spaces.”
During the previous hearing on September 2, the court had sharply criticized the practice of ‘bulldozer justice’, where houses or business premises are demolished, simply because they belong to someone suspected of having committed a crime. In addition, the court stressed the need for national guidelines and asked the parties for suggestions.
Another bench of the Supreme Court had on September 12 said that government agencies engaging in ‘bulldozer justice’ amounts to violating the laws of the land with a bulldozer. It had also said that alleged involvement in criminality is not a ground for demolishing a property.
“In a country where the actions of the state are governed by the rule of law, trespass by one family member cannot invite action against other family members or their legally constructed abode. Alleged involvement in a crime is not a ground for demolition of a property. Moreover, the alleged crime has to be proved through due legal process in a court of law. The court cannot be unaware of such threats of demolition which are unthinkable in a country where law is supreme. Otherwise, such actions can be seen as bulldozing the laws of the land,” a bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Sudhanshu Dhulia and SVN Bhatti had said.
