In recent years, authorities have resorted to summary demolition of houses of persons accused of crimes or even assumed to be involved in cases of communal tensions. After several such cases of arbitrary demolitions, especially in states like Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, UP and Delhi, the Supreme Court of India delivered a judgement against such demolitions on 13th November 2024. The Court observed that such demolitions violate the rule of law and the principle of separation of powers, as only the judiciary can determine guilt, and not government officials belonging to the executive. The Court has set comprehensive guidelines for legal demolitions, the Court mandated proper notice periods, due process requirements, and accountability measures for officials.
Punishment of a person accused of a crime without actually convicting him on the basis of a trial in which solid evidence is presented and the accused has been given a fair chance to defend herself or himself is totally against the principles of natural justice. The authorities responsible for maintaining law and order often do not wish to investigate crimes properly or are prejudiced. In the face of public anger against lawlessness and crime, the authorities want to demonstrate that they have acted swiftly and effectively, and resort to demolitions of the homes of the accused. In extreme cases, it can also happen that the authorities do not wish to apprehend the actual criminals or wish to protect them and the well-connected and powerful criminal overlords at whose behest crimes have been committed.
It may be noted that the people whose homes have been demolished in recent years in many cases happen to belong to the Muslim faith. It is worth noting that the top court had pronounced this landmark judgment in a batch of petitions that were filed by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind and various other petitioners who were pained by this ruthless bulldozing of houses due to which for one alleged criminal act of a person his whole family was made to undergo worst punishment for no fault of theirs which definitely cannot be ever justified. It may be reiterated that there is no provision in any legal code for demolition of houses of accused persons under any circumstances as a punishment, and certainly no justification whatsoever for depriving other family members of an accused of their right to shelter.
While delivering the judgement, the bench underscored that even if an individual is convicted of a heinous crime, the house of the convict cannot be demolished without following due process. The Court also held that the public officials who demolish the properties in such a manner should be held squarely accountable. The Court also observed that such actions amount to imposing “collective punishment” on the family of the accused/convict which is totally unjustified and unacceptable. The Supreme Court laid down certain important guidelines on demolitions including, among others
- The executive cannot act as a judge, and that “bulldozer justice” is an abuse of power
- Due notice of 15 days has to be given digitally logged with the collector or district magistrate
- Due process has to be followed – nature of unauthorised construction to be specified, grounds for demolition to be specified, date of personal hearing to me mentioned
- Judicial oversight – minimum of 15 days must be given to challenge demolition order judicially
- Presumption of punitive intent if even a single structure is chosen suddenly or similar violations nearby are ignored
- Humanitarian considerations (consideration for women, children and the elderly, time has to be given to collect possessions, and overnight evictions must be avoided)
Thus, on the face of it, the Supreme Court judgement was fair and balanced and did away with the gross arbitrariness and injustice of “bulldozer justice.’’ It was expected that the authorities would follow these directions and guidelines issued by the topmost court of the land. Nevertheless, many instances of gross violations have been reported even after this judgement was delivered.
Despite these clear cut instructions and guidelines of the topmost court of the land, on March 24, 2025, the Nagpur Municipal Corporation demolished a house registered in the name of the wife of a person accused of rioting. The demolition was initiated after Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis warned of “bulldozer action” against those accused in the recent Nagpur violence, clearly disregarding the Supreme Court ruling.
When the High Court stayed the demolition on the same day, the Municipal Commissioner of Nagpur actually claimed that civic officials were unaware of the Supreme Court directive prohibiting demolition of a property solely on the basis of the owners’ alleged involvement in a criminal case! This led the High Court to criticise the Maharashtra government for not circulating the Supreme Court’s orders. But the questions to be asked are, how dare the Chief Minister of a large state speak of imposing “bulldozer justice” when it has been expressly forbidden by the highest court of the country? How is it even possible that state government and local government can be even unaware of the rulings of the Supreme Court?
On 2nd May 2025, the Uttarakhand High Court came down heavily on the Nainital administration for failing to adhere to the Supreme Court’s guidelines on demolition and removal of encroachments after it issued a demolition notice against the house of Usman, a 72-year-old man accused of raping a 12-year-old girl. Despite this, in Uttarakhand itself, in the town of Rudrapur, on 7th May 2025, authorities demolished the house of the man whose son is suspected to have murdered a 38-year-old woman. This was done even while the case was still being investigated, and despite the clear warnings issued by the Supreme Court and the Uttarakhand high court against punitive demolitions of accused.
What was done in Kashmir was even worse. On 2nd May 2025, in Murran, a village in the Pulwama district of south Kashmir, the security forces ordered the villagers out of their homes, directing them to assemble in a nearby mosque. Around 10 pm at night, massive explosions were heard as explosives to blow-up nine houses allegedly linked to militant activities. And not only the houses of the families of the alleged militants, another 10 houses of the neighbours were also badly damaged. Similarly, in Wandina village in Sophian district, the security forces targeted alleged militant, Adnan Shafi’s house and blasted it with explosives. Here too, about 10 other houses in the neighbourhood were also badly damaged.
“If one person is a terrorist, how can ten families be punished for that? What about the rest of us? Are we not citizens too?” – these were the questions which were plaintively asked by the families rendered homeless for no fault of theirs. The recent actions resulting in colossal damage to adjoining houses demonstrates that the authorities are still practicing the dreaded and despised colonial dictum of extended collective punishment.
It is clear that the authorities are openly flouting the directives against resorting to “bulldozer justice”. Resorting to “bulldozer justice” is totally condemnable and cannot be justified on any count – even on the grounds of supposedly controlling terrorists or teaching rapists or murderers a lesson. In fact, there is absolutely no provision in law for demolition of houses of accused as a punishment. Damaging the houses of others in the vicinity, as was done recently in Pulwama and Sophian in Kashmir, to impose collective punishment colonial style – is far worse. It must be demanded that such demolitions stop immediately and never be resorted to in the future, and the authorities must be actually made to pay for such demolitions and for imposing collective punishments.
Source of image: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/bulldozing-laws-of-country-supreme-court-again-slams-bulldozer-justice-101726186377196.html
By BA and Venkatesh Sundaram
