NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has directed a halt to the demolition of properties, including those belonging to individuals accused of crimes, until October 1, 2024, unless prior permission is obtained from the court.
This decision follows concerns over the use of bulldozers for demolitions, which the court has deemed contrary to constitutional principles.
In a ruling on Tuesday, a bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan emphasised that even a single instance of illegal demolition is against the "ethos" of the Constitution.
The court noted that glorification and grandstanding of such demolitions cannot be permitted. "Even if there is one instance of an illegal demolition, it is against the ethos of our Constitution," the bench remarked.
The court's intervention came in response to petitions from organisations including Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, which had sought directives to prevent further demolitions of properties owned by those accused of rioting and violence. The petitioners highlighted that such actions had been occurring across various states, including Uttar Pradesh.
The Supreme Court clarified that its order would not apply to unauthorised structures on public roads, footpaths, railways lines, or public places such as water bodies.
"Stand over to October 1 at the request of the Solicitor General. However, we direct that till the next date, no demolition without seeking leave of this court," the bench stated.
The court expressed its disapproval of the way properties had been demolished in some cases and questioned whether such actions should occur in the country.
It also referred to the statements made following its September 2 hearing, during which it had indicated that it would establish guidelines for the use of bulldozers in demolitions.
"After that order, there have been statements that the bulldozer will continue and it all depends on whose hands the steering is," the bench observed.
In a related matter, the court had previously criticised law enforcement agencies in Gujarat for attempting to demolish an accused person's home without following due legal procedures.
"In a country where actions of the State are governed by rule of law, the transgression by a family member cannot lead to demolition of their legally constructed house or it would be equivalent to running bulldozer over the laws," the bench had said in its September 12 order.
The Solicitor General, Tushar Mehta, argued that the narrative surrounding the demolitions was being exaggerated. He claimed that affected parties had not approached the court because they were aware that their constructions were illegal.
"Let them bring to your lordships' notice one instance of demolition where the law is not complied with," Mehta said.
The Supreme Court indicated that it would consider laying down nationwide directives to ensure that demolitions do not proceed without proper legal justification and adherence to due process.
The bench emphasised that the executive "can't be a judge" in such matters and that the directives would apply across India.
The bench said it had made it clear on September 2 that the court will not protect any unauthorised construction on a public road or public place.
Mehta said in one of the matters, a footpath was encroached upon, and notices were issued before it was cleared.
"For footpath, we will say not even a notice is needed. Demolish forthwith even if there is a religious structure of any religion," the bench said.
One of the advocates appearing for the petitioners referred to the September 12 order passed by a coordinate bench (a bench of identical strength) which had said alleged involvement in a crime was no ground for demolition of a property.
"Moreover, the alleged crime has to be proved through due legal process in a court of law. The court cannot be oblivious to such demolition threats inconceivable in a nation where law is supreme. Otherwise, such actions may be seen as running a bulldozer over the laws of the land," the coordinate bench of the top court had said in its September 12 order.
During the hearing, Mehta referred to the magnitude of the order passed today and said there would not be any demolition in the entire country.
"You can have it (the matter) on 24 (September). For one week, you can stay your hands off," the bench said.
"If somebody wants to face contempt, let him face a contempt," it said.
Mehta said the court can consider ordering no demolition except in cases of unauthorised construction after following the procedure established by law.
"Heavens will not fall," the bench told him dismissively.
When counsel for some petitioners referred to individual cases, the bench said, "We are here to first lay down the directions as was done by this court in Vishaka (which laid down guidelines against sexual harassment at workplace)".
While hearing these petitions on September 2, the apex court had questioned how can anybody's house be demolished just because he was an accused.
Mehta, appearing for Uttar Pradesh, had said no immovable property can be demolished solely on the ground that its owner or occupant was involved in a criminal offence.
The top court was hearing petitions filed by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind and others seeking directions to various states to ensure no further demolition of properties of those accused in cases of rioting and violence takes place.
It had also said no demolition should be carried out without following the due process of law and sans prior notice.
(With inputs from PTI)
