Officials of the state who carry out or sanction such unlawful action must be proceeded against for disciplinary action, the top Court said.
“Justice through bulldozers” is unknown to any civilized system of jurisprudence and simply unacceptable under the rule of law, the Supreme Court recently said while criticizing the trend of punitive demolition of constructions in the country [In Re Manoj Tibrewal Akash] .
The Bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra stressed that the State must follow due process of law before taking action to remove illegal encroachments or unlawfully constructed structures.
“Justice through bulldozers is unknown to any civilized system of jurisprudence. There is a grave danger that if high handed and unlawful behaviour is permitted by any wing or officer of the state, demolition of citizens’ properties will take place as a selective reprisal for extraneous reasons. Citizens’ voices cannot be throttled by a threat of destroying their properties and homesteads,” the top court said.
The observations have been made in one of the last judgments written by CJI Chandrachud before his retirement.
Citizens’ voices cannot be throttled by a threat of destroying their properties and homesteads. The ultimate security which a human being possesses is to the homestead.
Supreme Court of India
The Court made the observations in a case where a senior journalist wrote a letter to the top court in 2019 complaining that his ancestral residential house was demolished without notice by authorities in Uttar Pradesh.
While the authorities claimed that the house was on a road which was notified as a national highway, the journalist said demolition was a reprisal for a newspaper report that contained allegations of wrongdoing in relation to the road’s construction.
Finding the entire process followed by the State to be high handed, the Court directed the State of Uttar Pradesh to pay ₹25 lakh compensation as an interim measure to the victim.
Such high-handed and unilateral action by the State government cannot be countenanced, the Court said as it went on to comment on what has come to be known as “bulldozer justice” – where the authorities demolish the properties of those alleged to be involved in criminal offences.
The Court said while the law does not condone unlawful occupation of public property and encroachments, the ultimate security which a human being possesses is his house.
It went to explain that there are municipal laws and town-planning legislation which contain adequate provisions for dealing with illegal encroachments.
The safeguards which are provided in the laws must be observed, the Court stressed.
Calling “bulldozer justice” unacceptable, the top court called for action against officials who carry out or order such punitive action.
