India Tomorrow
NEW DELHI: Coming down heavily on the trend of demolishing houses of individuals accused of having committed crimes, the Supreme Court on Monday said that it would issue guidelines to tackle such issues. The next hearing is scheduled on September 17.
Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan questioned the legality of such demolitions based solely on criminal accusations.
“How can demolitions be justified just because someone is accused of a crime?” the Court asked.
“How can a house be demolished just because he is accused? It can’t be demolished even if he’s convict.” Justice Gavai said.
While Justice Gavai said that the Court won’t protect unauthorized constructions, he said that some guidelines are necessary.
The Court acknowledged Uttar Pradesh’s stance that demolitions should only occur if a structure is illegal and announced plans to establish nationwide guidelines to address these concerns. The Court invited suggestions from all parties to help frame these guidelines, with Senior Advocate Nachiketa Joshi tasked with compiling the inputs.
The Court’s remarks came during hearings of two petitions challenging recent demolitions allegedly conducted without proper notice and as a form of retribution. Rashid Khan from Udaipur and Mohammad Hussain from Madhya Pradesh filed the pleas. Khan, whose home was demolished on August 17, 2024, claimed the action followed communal unrest after his son, a schoolboy, was accused of stabbing a classmate. Hussain alleged that his house and shop were illegally razed by the Madhya Pradesh administration.
These petitions were part of a broader case initiated by Jamiat Ulama I Hind, addressing similar demolitions of Muslim homes in Haryana’s Nuh amidst local violence.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assured that demolitions would be confined to illegal structures and not conducted merely because someone is accused of a crime. He affirmed that the Uttar Pradesh government would adhere to legal procedures.
The Court indicated that the proposed guidelines could include mandatory notices, timeframes for responses, and opportunities for legal recourse before any demolition. “What you’ve suggested seems fair. We should have clear guidelines to ensure no arbitrary demolitions occur,” Justice Gavai commented. Justice Viswanathan added that these guidelines would help ensure transparency and prevent misuse of demolition powers.
Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, representing Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, recounted an instance of demolitions in Delhi’s Jahangirpuri, criticizing the handling and fairness of the process. He questioned the fairness of demolishing properties, including those owned by tenants, based on accusations against individuals associated with the properties.
The Court inquired whether the demolitions involved mobs or were conducted by officials. Dave confirmed they were carried out by officials.
Senior Advocate CU Singh and Advocate Fauzia Shakil, representing other petitioners, echoed similar concerns about the impact of demolitions on long-standing properties and the fairness of targeting properties linked to accused individuals.
The Court plans to continue hearing the matter in detail on Tuesday afternoon and has requested all parties to contribute suggestions for the guidelines. The Court urged a respectful and constructive approach, avoiding turning the proceedings into a contentious battleground.
Additionally, the Supreme Court granted permission for the National Federation of Indian Women to intervene in the case, represented by Advocates Nizam Pasha and Rashmi Singh.
