Supreme Court’s guidelines on ’Bulldozer Justice’

Introduction

In a recent and landmark judgment[1], a division bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India condemned the actions of using bulldozers upon properties of individuals accused of crimes and held that the properties or houses of people accused of crimes cannot be demolished by the state government only on this ground. Additionally, the court noted that if such actions take place without following the due process of law, the family or the kin of the accused who have suffered due to such actions of the state machinery shall be entitled to due compensation and the executive officers responsible for taking such actions shall be liable to face initiation of contempt proceedings in addition to prosecution.

Supreme Court’s Analysis and Decision upon the usage of bulldozers

While laying down the present judgment and holding that arbitrary demolition of houses of accused/convicts not only acts contrary to the principles of rule of law but also leads to overreaching of the executive’s powers by acting as judiciary which violates the revered principle of ‘separation of powers’ guaranteed as a part of basic structure of India’s constitution, the court relied upon the following principles :-

• Principle of presumption of innocence and natural justice- The division bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court noted that any individual accused in an offence is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty and therefore every trial must be fair and just. Additionally, it is one of the basic features of any legal system that an accused must be given a chance to represent himself in his/her trial to get an unbiased judgment, and therefore any act of demolition of the accused’s house or residence is purely illegal and unconstitutional.
• Principle of Separation of Power- While noting that the executive cannot pass decisions determining the guilt of any accused, the court noted that the Indian legal system is based upon a strict system of separation of powers and therefore in case any executive authority demolishes the house or settlement of an accused without considering his/her guilt, this would clearly amount to overreach and render the act ultra – vires and be contrary to the ‘due process of law’ which the executive is meant to uphold and ensure its implementation.
• Right to shelter- While noting that ‘Right to Shelter’ is already an intrinsic part of Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the court held that it would be absolutely anarchic if the women and children in the household of those accused in a criminal activity are stripped of their shelter and houses by the authority and forced to face consequences of those activities with which they have no connection. Therefore the executive has overstepped its power by imposing collective punishment on the entire family.

Directions by the Court

The following directions were laid down by the court namely: –

• No demolition of residential properties shall be permissible without delivering a show- cause notice returnable either within the time frame provided under the municipal laws or 15 – days from the date of service of notice whichever is later.
• Adequate time limit must be kept for the respondent to reply to such notices. However, in event the notice has not been contested, sufficient time should be granted to the respondent to vacate the premises and arrange for alternative accommodations.
• The process of demolition shall be videographed and the authority concerned shall prepare a demolition report giving the list of police officials and civil personnel involved in participating in such process. Due arrangements shall be made for preserving such videographs.
• The demolition report above made shall be forwarded to the municipal commissioner by email and be displayed on the digital portal.
• If the statutes provide for an appellate authority along with the time for filing the same, or even if it does not do so, the final order of the authority concerned will not be implemented for a period of 15 – days from the date of receipt thereof. The order shall also be displayed on the digital portal.
• The designated authority is also bound to give an opportunity of personal hearing to the person concerned and the minutes of meeting of such hearing shall also be prepared and duly recorded.
• Every municipal authority shall prepare a designated digital portal within three months from the date of judgment wherein details regarding service or pasting of notice, the reply thereof, the show cause notice and the order passed thereon shall be available.
• Additionally, the court has also clarified that the directions shall not be applicable on any unauthorized structure in any public place such as roads, streets, footpaths, abutting railway lines or any river body or water bodies or any such cases wherein there has been an order for demolition already made.

Conclusion

The present judgment of the Supreme Court is a trailblazer for the rights of the accused in India which has further re – affirmed the basic tenets of Indian jurisprudence including separation of powers, system of checks and balances especially concerning the powers of the executive and ensuring that the fundamental rights of the citizens including the right to life and right to shelter is not violated or infringed except the due process of law and the procedure laid down by it.

Moreover, in the present case the court has also rightly noted that no statute provides for any punishment in the form of demolition of residential structures of an individual which would amount to a collective punishment to not only the accused but also various other members residing in the same household including women and elderly. Therefore such disruption in the entire life of citizens through the way of arbitrary and illegal actions disguised under the protection of law and executive machinery cannot be permissible in a welfare state. Last but not the least, the present judgment has rightly paved a way for the future actions of the executive to duly correct their approach and ensure that the rights of the citizens are not infringed except the due process of law.

https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2022/12239/12239_2022_2_1501_57147_Judgement_13-Nov-2024.pdf

King Stubb & Kasiva,
Advocates & Attorneys

Click Here to Get in Touch

New Delhi | Mumbai | Bangalore | Chennai | Hyderabad | Mangalore | Pune | Kochi
Tel: +91 11 41032969 | Email: info@ksandk.com