‘Bulldozer Justice’: Top court bans demolition of family homes over alleged involvement in crimes

The Supreme Court on Sep 12 ruled that government officials who engage in "bulldozer justice" are breaking the law and that just because an accused or even a convicted criminal lived at a particular property does not justify its demolition.

The country’s top court pointed out that this practice amounts to "running a bulldozer over the laws of the land."

This is the second time this month that the apex court has ruled against the destruction of an accused person's property.

On Sep 2, a Supreme Court panel ruled that the law barred the demolition of even convicts' family shelters and decided to create uniform criteria that would be adhered to by all states in order to stop arbitrary demolitions.

The government of Uttar Pradesh started the practice as a punitive measure against those who were accused, and other states like Rajasthan, Gujarat, and Madhya Pradesh followed suit.

Judges Hrishikesh Roy, Sudhanshu Dhulia, and SVN Bhatti strongly disapproved of the practice on Sep 12, when they heard a case of a Gujarati family whose home had been threatened with demolition by municipal authorities.

It said the house could not be demolished as a means to punish the entire family for the claimed violation committed by one member.

"The court cannot be oblivious to such demolition threats, inconceivable in a nation where law is supreme. Such actions may be seen as running a bulldozer over the laws of the land," the court said.

“In a country where actions of the state are governed by the rule of law, the transgression by a family member cannot invite action against other members of the family or their legally constructed residence. Alleged involvement in crime is no ground for demolition of a property. Moreover, the alleged crime has to be proved through due legal process in a court of law,” it added.

The bench decided to consider the plea, sent a notice to the government of Gujarat, and stopped the local government from taking any further action regarding the property.

Senior attorney Iqbal Syed, on behalf of the petitioner, presented the bench with the property's revenue record, demonstrating that the house the family had been residing in for the previous 20 years was built legally.

He also mentioned the 2004 Gram Panchayat resolution that authorized the construction of the residential dwelling.

Once a criminal complaint was filed against one of the family members, the municipal body allegedly threatened to demolish the residence. The petitioner claimed that while the accused individual should face legal action, the entire family should not be held accountable.

The petition said, “But the Nagar Palika or others in the shadow of the Nagar Palika should have no reason to either threaten or to take any steps, such as using a bulldozer, to demolish the legally constructed and legally occupied house/residence of the petitioner.”

The Supreme Court granted temporary relief during a brief hearing and rescheduled the hearing for four weeks later.

"In the meantime, status quo in respect of the petitioner’s property is to be maintained by all concerned,” it said.