No demolition without our permission for two weeks, says SC while hearing plea against ‘bulldozer justice’

The bench clarified that the direction will not apply to removal of unauthorised constructions on public streets, footpaths, railway lines or water bodies.

“Even if there is one instance of illegal demolition, it is against ethos of the Constitution,” remarked Justice Viswanathan as the bench was hearing pleas which alleged that some states were carrying out demolitions of houses of persons accused of involvement in crimes.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta objected to the court passing such a direction, saying it will tie the hands of statutory authorities. He submitted that those whose constructions were demolished were already issued notices in the past and it so happened that they committed other crimes in the meanwhile, but it is not correct to say the demolition is linked to their involvement in the crime.

However, the bench questioned the timing and asked why the authorities suddenly acted in 2024 only. Fixing the matter for hearing next on October 1, it said that “heavens will not fall” if the demolitions are not carried out for two weeks.

“Stay your hands. Nothing will happen in 15 days,” said Justice Gavai. The judge said the court had already made it clear that it will not come in the way of removing unauthorised constructions, and added, “but the executive can’t be judge.”

Mehta also said there is an attempt to build a narrative that a specific community is being targeted but Justice Viswanathan said “outside noise (is) not influencing us” and “we won’t get into the question of… which community… at this point”.

Hearing the matter on September 2, the SC had said it will lay down pan-India guidelines to take care of concerns in this regard.

The main plea in the matter related to the demolition drive against unauthorised constructions in Delhi’s Jahangirpuri area soon after communal violence in 2022. The petitioners pointed out that many state governments were increasingly resorting to the use of bulldozers to demolish properties of people accused in crimes.

During the hearing, the Supreme Court also addressed the contentious issue of alleged illegal demolitions in Jaipur and Bhilwara, Rajasthan.

The petitioners raised concerns about the urgency to halt these demolitions following the Court’s previous order dated September 2.

Senior counsel C U Singh, appearing on behalf of the applicants, pointed out recent incidents in Bhilwara and Jaipur, where demolitions were carried out despite the Supreme Court’s directions. The petitioners alleged that these actions were taken in violation of the Court’s previous order, which had sought to prevent any unlawful
demolitions connected with criminal cases.

The State of Rajasthan, represented by Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta and Additional Advocate General Shiv Mangal Sharma, opposed these claims. They argued that the applicants had not filed formal applications concerning these incidents and emphasised that such contentions could not be raised without proper procedure.

The Court permitted the applicants to file individual applications detailing their grievances regarding the alleged illegal demolitions.

Additionally, the Court referenced earlier matters involving similar allegations, of State of Uttar Pradesh, State of Madhya Pradhesh and in Rajasthan such as the Udaipur bulldozing case, where the applicant, Rashid Khan, alleged that his house was unlawfully demolished.

While the Court declined to provide interim relief in that case, it allowed Khan to intervene and raised the issue of broader national guidelines. The State of Rajasthan had justified its actions by claiming that Khan’s house was built illegally on encroached forest land, and proper legal procedures were followed.