Context:
The Supreme Court of India, invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, has issued guidelines to ensure that due process is followed in the demolition of properties belonging to citizens accused of crimes. This directive comes in response to recent instances where state authorities were alleged to have used demolitions as a punitive measure, referred to by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) as “bulldozer justice.”
Relevance:
GS II: Polity and Governance
Dimensions of the Article:
- What was the case background?
- SC Mandates Procedures on Demolition
- Demolition Laws and Practices in the Indian States
- Supreme Court’s Reasoning Behind the Guidelines
- Impact of the Supreme Court’s Verdict
- Conclusion
What was the case background?
- The SC judgment dealt with pleas that challenged the practice of demolition of homes of people for being accused of committing crime.
- This practice has been seen in states such as UP, MP, Uttarakhand, and Rajasthan and calls for accusations of bias and lack of due process.
- This order has been passed after the demolitions taken place in Ratlam (MP) and Udaipur (Rajasthan), demolitions supposedly being linked to complaints against family members who had indulged in communal or criminal activities.
SC Mandates Procedures on Demolition:
Period for Notice
- As per the judgement of this court, no demolition of a property can be made except after an order passed after notice of at least 15 days has been given to the owner of the property or the person occupying it.
- The notice should mention why the building is to be demolished and a “hearing” in which it also gives “personal hearing” opportunity to the property owner to raise objections.
Hearing and final order:
- This hearing is to be conducted by the authorities, and the whole process is to be videotaped.
- The final demolition order would include the above-mentioned arguments by the owner, reasons for destruction, and whether the demolition is a complete one or a partial one.
- The Court emphasized demolitions as a last resort and granted only when the demolition was absolutely necessary.
Post-order process:
- After issuing the final order for the demolition, 15 days would elapse before the demolition begins so that the owner will have time to demolish or appeal in court.
- The authorities will also prepare video evidence and draft an inspection and demolition report containing details about all those involved.
Demolition Laws and Practices in the Indian States
- Rajasthan: The provisions of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act state that authorities can impound properties on public land, but only after giving a written notice stating reasons for the impoundment and with an opportunity for representation.
- MP: The MP Municipalities Act allows demolition of unauthorized structures only after the owners are served notice.
- UP: The UP Urban Planning and Development Act demands at least 15 days notice before demolition of unauthorized construction on the owner, and once an order issued it becomes definite and court can’t further proceed with the same
- Delhi: Delhi Municipal Corporation Act allows demolition of unauthorized construction without providing “reasonable opportunity” to owner to present objection against the same.
- Haryana: As does Delhi’s DMC Act, the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act grants owners a brief time frame to appeal demolitions but has only 3 days in which to comply with demolitions orders.
Supreme Court’s Reasoning Behind the Guidelines
- Judicial vs. Executive Roles:
- The Supreme Court emphasized that it is the judiciary’s responsibility, not the executive’s, to determine guilt. The court criticized the practice of demolishing an accused’s property without a judicial trial, labeling it as an overreach of executive power.
- Need for Transparency and Accountability:
- The Court stressed the importance of transparency in public office, particularly criticizing the misuse of authority where demolitions are carried out simply because an individual is accused of a crime. It highlighted the urgent need for public officials to be held accountable for such actions.
- Protection of Constitutional Rights:
- The demolitions were noted to affect not only the accused but also other family members, infringing on their constitutional right to shelter as protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. The guidelines issued by the Supreme Court aim to protect these individuals from unjust loss of their homes.
Impact of the Supreme Court’s Verdict
- Path Forward for Affected Families:
- The ruling has given hope to affected families that there will be a shift towards restitution by local authorities, possibly through compensation or restoration of demolished properties.
- Challenges in Implementation:
- Despite the verdict advocating for transparency and accountability, there are challenges in ensuring that compensation effectively reaches those adversely affected by prior actions.
- The future policies, therefore, need to robustly address restitution issues to ensure fair outcomes for victims of unwarranted demolitions, sometimes referred to as “bulldozer justice.”
Conclusion
- Safeguarding Rights and Enforcing Accountability:
- By emphasizing the protection of the right to shelter and the necessity of accountability in government actions, the Supreme Court seeks to curb the misuse of power in the form of “bulldozer justice” and uphold constitutional limits.
- Continued Struggle for Justice:
- For many who have already lost their homes, the journey towards justice continues. Resolving issues around restitution remains critical, and the fulfillment of the Court’s directives in practice is pivotal to restoring faith in administrative and judicial processes.
-Source: Indian Express
