Top court’s move comes amid serious worry about misuse of power and bias in bulldozer actions
NEW DELHI – The Supreme Court has sought a response from the Madhya Pradesh government to a plea seeking contempt proceedings for the alleged illegal demolition of the petitioner’s house in violation of the Supreme Court’s directions.
The petitioner Imroz Khan, a resident of Sehore district, approached the Supreme Court challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s refusal to initiate contempt proceedings. According to the petitioner, his house was demolished following the registration of a false case alleging unlawful religious conversion. The court issued a notice to the state on Tuesday and asked it to explain why a bulldozer was used on the house despite a legal stay.
Imroz Khan’s lawyer, senior advocate Dr S Muralidhar, told the bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chand Rankine, “This is a clear example of the state acting without regard for the law.”
According to the petition, Imroz has lived in the house since 2018. He said that after the false case was filed, officials arrived with a bulldozer to destroy the home. Fearing this, he approached the high court and sought protection.
The high court issued an order telling authorities not to demolish the house. Despite this, the demolition went ahead.
A neighbour who witnessed the incident said, “We kept telling the officials there was a court order. They did not listen. They behaved like they had already decided to break it because of his Muslim identity.”
After the demolition, Imroz went back to the high court with a contempt petition, saying the order had been violated. The petition was dismissed, leaving him with no option but to move the Supreme Court.
A family member told reporters, “We kept showing the papers to save our house. No one cared. The court had protected us, but the officials ignored it.”
The Supreme Court said the demolition raised serious legal concerns and issued a notice to the Madhya Pradesh government. The petition argues that bulldozer actions without due process violate several constitutional protections.
Imroz has asked the Supreme Court to:
• Cancel the orders that led to the demolition
• Start contempt proceedings
• Award compensation
• Punish the officials responsible
A local activist commented, “This bulldozer pattern is being used mostly against Muslims. It is becoming a tool of fear. When even court orders are ignored, where will common people go?”
The case has caused strong concern among Muslims in Madhya Pradesh, many of whom say that bulldozer actions have become a way to target them without trial.
Another resident in Sehore said, “If a high court order cannot save a Muslim family’s home, then what is the meaning of justice? This is not law. This is intimidation.”
As the Supreme Court waits for the state’s reply, the case has opened a wider conversation on whether bulldozers are being used as punishment rather than through legal process, especially against Muslim families.
