New Delhi: The Supreme Court has issued a pivotal directive halting bulldozer demolitions across India without prior permission, raising concerns over potential violations of Constitutional principles. A bench led by Justices B.R. Gavai and K.V. Viswanathan emphasized that even a single instance of illegal demolition undermines the core values of the Constitution.

The ruling came during hearings on petitions challenging the demolition of properties belonging to individuals accused of criminal activities. In its interim order, the Court firmly stated that properties cannot be demolished solely because the owner is accused of a crime, stressing that such actions must strictly adhere to municipal laws.

The Court clarified that its order does not extend to unauthorized structures on public roads, footpaths, or other public spaces, noting, “Demolitions in such areas will proceed without requiring the Court’s leave.” It further explained that demolitions related to violations of municipal laws, such as encroachments on public roads or water bodies, would continue under legal processes.

During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta voiced concerns that halting demolitions could impede statutory authorities. However, Justice Gavai countered, “Stay your hands. Nothing will happen in 15 days.” The Court also hinted at invoking its powers under Article 142 to ensure justice is delivered in this matter.

This decision follows growing criticism of what has been termed “bulldozer justice,” where authorities in several states were reportedly demolishing properties of individuals accused of crimes, bypassing due legal process. In one notable instance, Gujarat municipal authorities threatened to bulldoze the house of a family member of an accused named in an FIR. The Supreme Court bench underscored that actions by the State must adhere to the rule of law, adding that mere involvement in a crime does not justify demolishing a legally constructed home.

In earlier sessions, the Court raised concerns over the arbitrary nature of these demolitions and called for structured guidelines to regulate such actions. The bench has committed to issuing nationwide guidelines by October 1 to standardize the process for property demolitions under municipal laws. These guidelines are expected to include provisions for proper notice, adequate time to respond, and the opportunity to pursue legal remedies before any demolition occurs.

Senior Advocate C.U. Singh, representing victims of bulldozer demolitions, intervened on behalf of the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR), highlighting the alarming frequency of demolitions despite prior court orders. He cited an incident in Jahajpur, Rajasthan, where demolitions were conducted following allegations of stone-pelting, illustrating the misuse of executive powers. Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, representing Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, similarly pointed out that several homes were demolished in Delhi’s Jahangirpuri following the April 2022 riots, with authorities alleging the occupants had instigated the violence.

In the previous hearing, the Supreme Court issued notices to the Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh governments, responding to two interventions filed by APCR on behalf of victims. One case involved Rashid Khan from Udaipur, whose house was demolished due to allegations against his tenant's son. Another case involved Mohammad Hussain from Jaora, whose ancestral home was partially demolished after accusations were made against his son. APCR has proposed nationwide guidelines to prevent punitive demolitions, emphasizing due process, accountability for authorities, and compensation for victims.

A plea filed by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind after the Jahangirpuri demolitions urged the Supreme Court to issue directives to the Center and States, preventing the bulldozing of properties of accused individuals in criminal proceedings. The organization argued that such actions violate Constitutional rights and undermine the country’s criminal justice system, including the crucial role of the courts.

The case is scheduled for further hearing on October 1, when the Court is expected to finalize these guidelines, aiming to prevent future abuses and uphold the rule of law.