- If the executive acts as a judge and inflicts penalty of demolition on the citizen on the ground that he is an accused, it violates the principle of separation of powers,
- Such excesses at the hands of the executive will have to be dealt with the heavy hand of the law.
- ‘Bulldozer Reminds Of Lawlessness’, says SC as it rules demolition of properties on mere criminal grounds as unconstitutional
NEW DELHI — The Supreme Court on Wednesday, while hearing petitions against the bulldozing of homes and private properties of accused persons by states, ruled that it is unconstitutional to demolish a person’s house without following the due process of law merely because they are allegedly involved in a crime.
A Bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan, while reading out the verdict, said: “We have concluded that if the executive in an arbitrary manner demolishes the house of a citizen only on the ground that they are accused of a crime, then it acts contrary to the principles of rule of law. If the executive acts as a judge and inflicts penalty of demolition on the citizen on the ground that he is an accused, it violates the principle of separation of powers, the Indian Express reported.
“The chilling sight of a bulldozer demolishing a building, when authorities have failed to follow the basic principles of natural justice and have acted without adhering to the principle of due process, reminds one of a lawless state of affairs, where “might was right”. In our constitution, which rests on the foundation of ‘the rule of law’, such high-handed and arbitrary actions have no place. Such excesses at the hands of the executive will have to be dealt with the heavy hand of the law. Our constitutional ethos and values would not permit any such abuse of power and such misadventures cannot be tolerated by the court of law,” the Court pronounced.
It added: “We are of the view that in such matters, the public officials who take the law in their hands should be made accountable for such high handed actions. For the executive to act in a transparent manner, so as to avoid the vice of arbitrariness, we are of the view that certain binding directives need to formulated. This will ensure that public officials do not act in high handed, arbitrary and discriminatory manner.”
The apex court also laid down guidelines, including making issuing of a notice mandatory before carrying out demolitions.
Earlier, while reserving its judgment, the Bench had promised to protect even convicted criminals from state-sponsored punitive demolition of their legal private property.
The court was hearing applications challenging house demolitions carried out by the state government in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. In both cases, demolitions took place after Muslim tenants allegedly committed crimes that triggered communal tensions.
The applications were tagged with a petition filed by the Jamiat-Ulama-i-Hind challenging demolitions carried out in Jahangirpuri in Delhi in 2022. Since then, demolition drives carried out in other states have been challenged as well. This is what local laws in these states say about demolitions.