4 min readApr 3, 2025 01:18 PM IST
First published on: Apr 3, 2025 at 01:09 PM IST
Written by Anubhav Kumar
“That is the law. And no Spartan, subject or citizen, man or woman, slave or king, is above the law. Wherever law ends, tyranny begins.” In his exposition on “Rule of law”, John Rawls has not only theorised the concept but has also cautioned against what lies beyond. Unfortunately, today our country is dallying with what lies beyond the rule of law, as the executive of the day seems to not only have utter disregard for the principles of law but is also seen to be actively developing its “jurisprudence of bulldozer justice”.
Recently, the Supreme Court pulled up the authorities for carrying out the demolition of houses in Prayagraj, which “shocked the conscience” of the apex court. In its ruling, the Court said that the “demolition was carried out in violation of due process and the right to shelter under Article 21 of the Constitution.” The bench comprising Justice Oka and Justice Bhuyan went on to even observe that, “There is something called the right to shelter, something called due process”, while directing a compensation of Rs 10 lakh each to the six individuals whose houses were illegally demolished.
This is not one odd instance of arbitrary state action; rather, in the last few years, the country has witnessed multiple instances of state-backed demolition of houses as a punitive measure, in an arbitrary manner. Upon examining every instance of demolition, one can easily figure out a common thread and the backing such action gets from the executive of the day.
“Bulldozer justice”, built on the populist idea of quick justice, is nothing but a reflection of lawlessness. Demolition of the property of one who is merely an accused (not even a convict) in a crime lies outside the framework of the rule of law. This was established in another SC judgment delivered last year, wherein the court not only held that the executive cannot demolish the houses/properties of persons only on the ground that they are accused or convicted of a crime but also said that in doing so, the executive assumes the role of the judiciary as it pronounces on the guilt of a person. Further, the Court also laid down pan-India directions regarding the arbitrary exercise of power by the officials of the state. Whether or not directions are the right solution is an academic exercise to be undertaken separately.
A vibrant democracy and healthy constitutional ethos ensure state accountability. However, in all these cases, there seems to be hardly any accountability of the state. One may argue that there are provisions of hearings, personal notices and other existing mechanisms as “safeguards” but their complexity reduces them to merely “mechanical exercises”. This is important as such arbitrary exercise of power has a direct impact on the lives of citizens belonging to certain socio-economic classes, regions and communities.
In such critical junctures, the courts take up the responsibility of safeguarding fundamental rights. Article 21, according to many interpretations of the apex court, protects the right to shelter and livelihood and access to rehabilitation under existing schemes.
In this context, the recent judgment awarding compensation is a welcome development as apart from factoring in the law, it is also empathetic in its recognition of the “humane” element of owning and building a house in this country. As the poet Bashir Badr noted, “Log toot jaate hai ghar banane mein”. The courts, therefore, are expected to play a proactive role in ensuring that the citizens’ rights are safeguarded, and a long-term solution is identified, apart from the pan-India directions, whose mitigating effect on “bulldozer justice” is yet to be seen.
The writer is advocate, Supreme Court
This is not one odd instance of arbitrary state action; rather, in the last few years, the country has witnessed multiple instances of state-backed demolition of houses as a punitive measure, in an arbitrary manner. (File Photo) 
Share
