Lagatar24 Desk
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India strongly criticized the practice of ‘bulldozer justice’ on Monday, questioning the legality of demolishing homes merely because they belong to individuals accused or convicted in criminal cases. The court also suggested the need for pan-India guidelines to ensure that such demolitions are carried out only through proper legal procedures.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, representing the petitioners, urged the court to prevent the spread of ‘bulldozer justice’ across the country. Addressing the bench comprising Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Viswanathan, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta clarified that immovable properties cannot be demolished solely because the owner is accused of a crime. He emphasized that demolitions should only occur if the property is illegally constructed. However, Mr. Mehta argued that the matter had been misrepresented in court.
Justice Gavai, responding to the arguments, suggested that guidelines might be issued to address the issue. “How can a house be demolished just because the owner is an accused or even a convict? If the construction is unauthorized, fine, but there has to be some streamlining. We will lay down a procedure,” Justice Gavai remarked.
Justice Viswanathan also emphasized the need for clear procedures, stating, “There should be guidelines for demolition. First, issue a notice, give time for a response, allow legal remedies, and then proceed with demolition.”
The bench made it clear that it does not support illegal constructions but stressed the importance of due process in carrying out demolitions. The judges noted that they are not defending unauthorized structures that obstruct public roads, including religious buildings, but emphasized the necessity of proper guidelines.
During the hearing, the petitioners’ lawyers, Senior Advocates Dushyant Dave and CU Singh, pointed to instances in Delhi’s Jahangirpuri where properties were demolished despite being rented out for decades. In another case from Udaipur, Rajasthan, a house was demolished after a student living there was involved in a stabbing incident. “If a man’s son is a nuisance, demolishing his home is not the right way,” Justice Viswanathan observed.
The Supreme Court announced that it would revisit the matter on September 17, inviting suggestions on how to address the issue of demolitions. Justice Gavai noted that the Uttar Pradesh government had filed an affidavit stating that immovable properties could only be demolished following established legal procedures. “We propose to lay down some guidelines on a pan-India basis to address the concerns raised. We appreciate the stand taken by the state of UP,” Justice Gavai stated.
The hearing also witnessed a heated exchange between Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave. Mr. Mehta’s remark about “making it dirty” prompted a sharp response from Mr. Dave, who accused the Solicitor General of “hitting below the belt.” Justice Gavai intervened to calm the situation, urging both senior lawyers to maintain decorum in the courtroom.
The practice of ‘bulldozer justice’ has drawn significant criticism across the country, with many questioning the fairness of demolishing homes before criminal allegations are proven. Critics have also raised concerns about punishing entire families for the actions of one individual. The Supreme Court’s proposed guidelines aim to address these concerns by ensuring that demolitions are carried out legally and justly.
