Should Demolitions Be Glorified In Our Country? Supreme Court Objects To Minister's Comment 'Bulldozer Use Will Continue'

While staying demolition actions in the country without its permission, the Supreme Court today took a veiled dig at a Minister from Uttar Pradesh, who reportedly commented that "bulldozer use will continue", despite the Court's earlier observation that authorities can't demolish a person's house just because he is an accused.

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan passed the interim order staying demolitions, after the petitioners alleged that authorities were razing down the houses of accused persons as a mode of punishment. The order shall stay in force till October 1, ie the next date of hearing.

However, it has been clarified that the stay won't be applicable to encroachments on public roads, footpaths, railway lines, waterbodies, etc.

The Court was dealing with a batch of petitions challenging the alleged actions of various state governments demolishing the buildings of persons accused of crimes as a punitive measure.

Pursuant to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta pressing that a narrative was being built to prejudice the court, without the persons whose houses were demolished approaching it, the bench clarified that it is not influenced by the "noise outside".

When the SG continued to insist that demolition actions were only taking place in accordance with law, and alleged that the Court was inclined to pass the interim order only because of the narrative built, Justice Gavai remarked, "narrative is not influencing us, but the executive can't be a judge. After our order, there have been statements that bulldozer [use] will continue and it all depends in whose hands hearing is...".

In similar vein, Justice Viswanathan said, "Outside noise not influencing us. We won't get into question of which community...at this point". Displeased at the statements made pursuant to the last hearing, the judge also posed to the SG, "you yourself said it should not have happened...after 2nd September, there have been glorification, grand standing and justification. Now, whether this should happen in our country? If so, what should be the sanction? Whether Election Commission can be noticed so that some kind of thing can be laid down...".

For context, days after the hearing before the Supreme Court on September 2, during which the Court expressed an intent to lay down pan-India guidelines was expressed, a senior minister in Uttar Pradesh (stated to be a former trusted bureaucrat of Prime Minister Narendra Modi) asserted that the use of bulldozers would continue in the state. Not only this, the Minister justified and defended the use of bulldozers by the state government.

Case Title: Jamiat Ulama I Hind v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 295 of 2022 (and connected matters)