SC halts 'bulldozer justice' till Oct 1, says illegal demolition against ethos of Constitution

New Delhi: There will be no demolition of properties, including of those accused of crime, till October 1 without its permission, the Supreme Court said on Tuesday while observing that even one instance of illegal demolition was against the "ethos" of the Constitution.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan clarified that its order will not be applicable to unauthorised structures on public roads, footpaths, railways lines or public places like water bodies etc.

"Stand over to October 1 at the request of the Solicitor General. However, we direct that till the next date, no demolition without seeking leave of this court," the bench said.

"Even if there is one instance of an illegal demolition… it is against the ethos of our Constitution," the top court observed while hearing pleas which alleged that properties of accused were being demolished in several states illegally.

The bench also referred to statements made after the September 2 hearing in the matter during which the apex court had said it proposes to lay down certain guidelines on the issue that would be enforceable across the country.

"After that order, there have been statements that the bulldozer will continue … and it all depends in whose hands the steering is," the bench said, adding it was refraining from saying anything further on that.

"Mr Mehta (solicitor general), after these directives are laid down, we will seek your assistance on this glorification and grandstanding… You will assist us on how to stop this. If necessary, we will ask the Election Commission also," the bench said.

Referring to the glorification, grandstanding and justification of the demolition action, the bench said, "Now, whether this should happen in our country… Whether the Election Commission can be noticed so that some kind of a thing can be laid down?" At the outset, a counsel appearing for the petitioners said even after the September 2 hearing demolition was carried out in the country.

Countering his submission, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said a "narrative" was being built over the demolition of properties.

He said there was a petition before the apex court which alleged that because the person belonged to a particular religion, his property was demolished.

"Let them bring to your lordships' notice one instance of demolition where the law is not complied (with)," the law officer said.

He said the affected parties have not approached the court because they know that they have received notices and their constructions were illegal.

When Mehta argued about the narrative being built over the demolition action, the bench said, "Rest assured that outside noise is not influencing us." The bench said it will hear the matter on October 1, and till then no demolition shall be done without its leave.

"This is the result of narrative which is being built," Mehta said.

The bench said the immediate priority was to streamline the procedure so that neither the authorities nor any individual can take advantage of any lacunae.

Observing that the executive "can't be a judge", it said the directives to be passed by the court after hearing the parties would apply pan-India.

The bench said it had made it clear on September 2 that the court will not protect any unauthorised construction on a public road or public place.

Mehta said in one of the matters, a footpath was encroached upon, and notices were issued before it was cleared.

"For footpath, we will say not even a notice is needed. Demolish forthwith even if there is a religious structure of any religion," the bench said.

One of the advocates appearing for the petitioners referred to the September 12 order passed by a coordinate bench (a bench of identical strength) which had said alleged involvement in a crime was no ground for demolition of a property.

"Moreover, the alleged crime has to be proved through due legal process in a court of law. The court cannot be oblivious to such demolition threats inconceivable in a nation where law is supreme. Otherwise, such actions may be seen as running a bulldozer over the laws of the land," the coordinate bench of the top court had said in its September 12 order.

During the hearing, Mehta referred to the magnitude of the order passed today and said there would not be any demolition in the entire country.

"You can have it (the matter) on 24 (September). For one week, you can stay your hands off," the bench said.

"If somebody wants to face contempt, let him face a contempt," it said.

Mehta said the court can consider ordering no demolition except in cases of unauthorised construction after following the procedure established by law.

"Heavens will not fall," the bench told him dismissively.

When counsel for some petitioners referred to individual cases, the bench said, "We are here to first lay down the directions as was done by this court in Vishaka (which laid down guidelines against sexual harassment at workplace)".

While hearing these petitions on September 2, the apex court had questioned how can anybody's house be demolished just because he was an accused.

Mehta, appearing for Uttar Pradesh, had said no immovable property can be demolished solely on the ground that its owner or occupant was involved in a criminal offence.

The top court was hearing petitions filed by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind and others seeking directions to various states to ensure no further demolition of properties of those accused in cases of rioting and violence takes place.

It had also said no demolition should be carried out without following the due process of law and sans prior notice.