Supreme Court halts political stunt on bulldozer demolition

New Delhi: Since 2017, the use of bulldozers has evolved into a potent political symbol in Indian politics, especially in Uttar Pradesh.

This transformation began when Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath invoked the industrial machine as a symbol of power. Traditionally used across India to remove illegal constructions, bulldozers have more recently been deployed as an extra-judicial tool, symbolising a firm stance against the alleged criminals.

The political use of bulldozers expanded beyond Uttar Pradesh, with various states adopting it to deliver similar messages. However, critics argue that this practice has communal undertones, undermining the rule of law, and paving the way toward an authoritarian society. In such a society, the rights, safety, and liberty of individuals could be subject to the arbitrary actions of the state.

The Supreme Court of India, on September 17, intervened in a case filed by Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind and others, addressing these "bulldozer actions" across different states. The Apex Court issued an interim order prohibiting any further demolitions without its express permission. However, the Court clarified that this stay would not apply to encroachments on public roads, footpaths, railway lines, or other public spaces like water bodies.

A bench, comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and K.V. Viswanathan, emphasised the need for judicial oversight, particularly concerning accusations that demolitions were being used as punitive measures against individuals accused of crimes.

During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta expressed concerns about restricting statutory authorities, arguing that halting demolitions could hinder law enforcement. The Court, however, maintained that "heavens won't fall" if demolitions were paused for two weeks, invoking its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution.

Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court to issue any order necessary to achieve complete justice in any case.

Justice Gavai underscored that the executive could not act as both judge and enforcer, adding that any instance of illegal demolition goes against the Constitution's ethos.

The bench's ruling followed submissions by senior advocates CU Singh and MR Shamshad, who reported ongoing demolitions despite previous Court concerns. One example highlighted involved an individual accused of stone-pelting, whose house was demolished the same night, raising questions about the timing and motivation behind the demolition.

Mehta countered that notices for demolition had been issued as far back as 2022, unrelated to the crimes allegedly committed by the accused. However, the Court questioned why the demolitions occurred only in 2024, indicating possible misuse of power. Justice Viswanathan pointed out that until the next hearing, no demolitions should proceed without court approval.

The Solicitor General also raised the issue of a narrative suggesting that a particular community was being targeted by these actions. The bench refuted this notion, stating that outside influences do not sway judicial decisions. Nevertheless, Justice Gavai noted that certain public statements, including from ministers, appeared to endorse and justify the continuation of bulldozer actions, even after the Court's previous warnings.

Justice Viswanathan questioned the propriety of such public declarations, asking whether the Election Commission should be involved and promising that the Court would issue comprehensive guidelines to prevent further misuse of power.

Case background

In 2022, a series of petitions were filed in the Supreme Court concerning a demolition drive scheduled for Delhi's Jahangirpuri area, which was ultimately stayed. Petitioners sought a ruling prohibiting authorities from using bulldozers as a form of punishment. One petition, filed by CPI(M) leader Brinda Karat, challenged the demolition conducted by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation following communal violence during Shobha Yatra processions in April 2022.

Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind also argued that several homes in Jahangirpuri had been demolished after the riots, alleging that the owners were accused of instigating the violence.

Political reactions

Politicians across the spectrum have weighed in on the use of bulldozers in political messaging. The Uttar Pradesh chief minister remarked, "Not everyone’s hands can fit on a bulldozer," in a speech in Lucknow. Similarly, UP power minister AK Sharma defended the use of bulldozers, describing them as tools to eliminate "goondaism" and the "mafia raj."

On the other side, Akhilesh Yadav, leader of the Samajwadi Party, criticised the bulldozer politics, suggesting that it distracts from more pressing governance issues. AIMIM Chief Asaduddin Owaisi condemned the Haryana government's demolition of homes in Nuh, following communal violence, while Delhi's former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia accused the government of using bulldozers as an extortion tool.

Following the Supreme Court's recent interim order halting bulldozer demolitions, Akhilesh Yadav hailed it as a victory against "destructive" politics. Bahujan Samaj Party leader Mayawati also welcomed the Court's decision, stating that bulldozers should not be seen as symbols of the rule of law.

Moulana Arshad Mandi, president of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, expressed optimism, anticipating a favorable final judgment from the Supreme Court. Similarly, Asaduddin Owaisi praised the decision on social media, emphasising that due process of law must be followed and denouncing the use of bulldozers as tools for collective punishment.