SC halts 'bulldozer justice', says 'no demolitions without our prior permission'

Amid bulldozer action against alleged illegal houses and shops of offenders in BJP-ruled states, the Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered that no demolition of properties of persons accused of crimes can take place without its prior permission.

A Bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Viswanathan, however, clarified that the order won't apply to encroachments on public roads, footpaths, railway lines and water bodies.

“Till next date there shall be no demolitions without seeking leave of this court. However the order would not be applicable to unauthorised constructions on public streets, footpaths, abutting railway lines or public spaces,” the Bench said in an interim order and posted the matter for further hearing on October 1.

“Even if there’s one instance of illegal demolition, it’s against ethos of the Constitution,” said the Bench which invoked its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution (which empowers it to pass any orders to do complete justice) to halt ‘bulldozer justice’.

As Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said the hands of statutory authorities can't be tied in this manner, the Bench said “heavens won't fall” if the demolitions were stopped for a week.

To Mehta’s submission that a “narrative” was being built over demolition of illegal constructions, the Bench said, “Rest assured that outside noise is not influencing us.”

The order came on petitions filed by Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind and others challenging demolitions undertaken by various authorities, including the MCD, which had attempted to demolish illegal constructions of those accused of rioting and violence in Jehangirpuri area of Delhi in 2022.

Frowning upon such demolition actions, the Bench had on September 2 said it will lay down guidelines on the issue as it wondered how someone’s house can be demolished just because the person happened to be an accused.

“We propose to lay down certain guidelines on a pan-India basis so that the concerns with regard to the issues raised are taken care of,” it had said.

“How can anybody's house be demolished only because he is an accused? Even if he is a convict, still it can't be done without following the procedure as prescribed by law,” the Bench had said, adding demolitions should not be carried out without following the due process and without prior notice to the occupants.

Contending that the right to shelter was an important facet of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, the petitioners submitted that demolishing the homes of those accused of crimes went against the Constitution and the top court should order reconstruction of houses demolished by authorities.