New Delhi: The Supreme Court Tuesday put a temporary stop to unauthorised demolitions across the country, which were being carried out without the court’s permission.
Acting on a petition filed by Muslim organisation Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind regarding the culture of illegal demolitions and the turning of extra-legal forms of punishment by the State into a norm, a bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and K.V. Viswanathan ruled, “Till the next date of hearing, we direct that there shall be no demolition anywhere across the country without seeking leave of this Court.”
However, the two-judge bench also clarified that its order would not apply to cases concerning unauthorised structures in public places, like roads, streets, footpaths, railway lines, or any rivers or water bodies.
Additionally, the court exempted cases where orders for demolition were given by a court of law. The matter will be heard next on 1 October.
The case
On 16 April, 2022, communal clashes erupted between Hindus and Muslims in Delhi’s Jahangirpuri during a procession on the occasion of Hanuman Jayanti, culminating in stone pelting and violence.
Days later, on 20 April that year, a demolition drive was carried out by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC), which also happens to be the respondent in the present case.
The drive purportedly aimed to remove “illegal encroachments” in the Block C area, where most of the demolition took place. The block has a large population of Bengali-speaking Muslims, hailing from parts of West Bengal, Assam, Bihar and areas close to the Bangladesh border.
Having lived in the locality for over 50 years, the inhabitants of the area were shocked to find several structures, including their homes and shops, razed to the ground overnight.
Significantly, NDMC’s action had followed a letter from Bharatiya Janata Party’s Delhi wing chief Adesh Gupta asking then North Delhi mayor Raja Iqbal Singh to identify “illegal encroachments” and constructions by persons arrested after the clashes, which had left eight police personnel and a local resident injured.
As previously reported by ThePrint, “the demolition drive”, which officials characterised as a “regular exercise” against illegal encroachments, targeting only temporary structures, started around 10 am and continued until Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Brinda Karat reached the spot and spoke to the officials on ground.
Subsequently, Jamiat moved the top court challenging the demolitions while contending that the NDMC had failed to provide sufficient notice to persons whose properties had been demolished.
The Supreme Court’s response
Acting swiftly on the plea, on 20 April, 2022, a bench of then Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana, along with Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli, ordered a stay on the demolition drive. “Status quo, as exists today, shall be maintained until further orders,” the bench had ruled.
Despite this, the NDMC did not stop demolishing the properties, causing Karat and several others to move the apex court only a day after the stay was ordered, challenging the NDMC’s actions as a violation of the 20 April order.
On 21 April, 2022, bench of Justices L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai extended the stay imposed by the court the previous day.
Subsequently, two more petitions pertaining to extra-legal demolitions carried out by the state governments of Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh were filed before the court.
On 2 September this year, a bench of Justices Gavai and Viswanathan acted on the plea, which was later tagged with similar matters, including pleas of persons whose houses were demolished after they were accused of committing a crime.
During the proceedings, the Uttar Pradesh government had argued that immovable properties can be demolished only in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law.
However, the court said, “We propose to lay down certain guidelines on ‘Pan-India Basis’ so that the concerns with regard to the issues raised are taken care of.” It also directed the lawyers in the case to give their suggestions for the framing of appropriate guidelines.
Subsequent pleas
The Rajasthan case related to the demolition of a minor Muslim boy’s house in Udaipur, after he was accused of stabbing his classmate. Consequently, the authorities claimed that the house was built on the forest department’s land and then razed it to the ground.
The other case dealt with an incident that took place in Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh, where three Muslim men were accused of spitting on Mahakal Yatra participants. The men were arrested and their houses were demolished by the authorities.
Similar incidents of extra-legal demolitions took place in Nuh, Bhopal, Mumbai, Moradabad, Bareilly and Ayodhya, and were flagged in the plea before the Supreme Court, adding that “this practice of immediate and retributive State action” based solely on “untested allegations is gathering traction “as populist and vigilante action often does”.
The petitioners said that there have been demolitions of houses of accused persons without due notice or proper procedure on the basis of executive orders alone, and added that such a practice was “completely illegal” and without jurisdiction.
The plea further said that without any judicial examination of the accused’s guilt, such arbitrary punishment was a blatant violation of the fundamental rights under the Constitution.
What the law says
While different provisions of state-specific legislations empower authorities to regulate land and property, and remove encroachments under a given set of circumstances in accordance with the laws, a 2024 report published by Amnesty International titled “If you speak up, your house will be demolished”: Bulldozer injustice in India” said, “These laws fall short of international human rights standards, as they rarely include adequate safeguards for protecting the human rights of owners and occupiers when demolishing properties.”
Some of the laws that empower removal of encroachments in certain states include the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1965, Uttar Pradesh Recovery of Damages to Public and Private Property Act, 2020, MP Prevention of Damage to Public and Private Property and Recovery of Damage Act, 2021, New Delhi Municipal Act, 1994, and UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973.
Notably, Section 343 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, and Section 30 of the Delhi Development Act, 1957, which also govern demolitions in the state, mandate authorities to serve notices to persons against whom demolition orders are made. Simply put, these laws accept the importance of providing a reasonable opportunity to persons, as has been reiterated by the top court in several cases.
Apart from this, in 2017, a report submitted by a panel formed by the Justice Gita Mittal-led bench to examine illegal constructions in Delhi had revealed that “90 percent [of the buildings] carry one kind of violation of the extant building bylaws or another”.
(Edited by Mannat Chugh)
Also Read: ‘Tareekh pe tareekh’ is not it. Here’s why India’s district courts are staring at massive pendency