Yes, the Supreme Court made it clear on Thursday that its earlier decision has not banned all bulldozer actions. However, the Supreme Court also made it clear that demolition action cannot be used to target selected people. A contempt petition was filed in the Supreme Court alleging arbitrary bulldozer action. Hearing this, the Supreme Court said that the legality of every bulldozer action should be examined on the basis of its own facts. High Court is the right place for this.
The Supreme Court, while clarifying its stand on 'Bulldozer Justice', said that action can be taken against illegal construction and encroachment on government land, but no accused or his family can be selectively targeted. CJI Surya Kant's bench said that the bulldozer should operate within the ambit of the law and the Constitution. In this way, the bench of Chief Justice CJI Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana refused to hear the contempt petitions. The bench believed that the issues raised involved disputed questions of facts, which needed to be examined in detail.
'Bulldozers are needed against illegal encroachers, not against people'
During the hearing on the petition, Justice Joymalya Bagchi said that the use of bulldozers can be justified in cases of illegal encroachments, but he warned against its use in a discriminatory manner. He said, 'Yes, when the rule of law is being strangled with the connivance of officials and illegal encroachers, then the use of bulldozers becomes necessary. But people's image should not be tarnished in the name of law enforcement. This is against basic principles… The question is whether the person had clearance and whether the process of law was followed?'
CJI Surya Kant's bench said that in any demolition case, the main issue is whether the structure was legally authorized and whether the authorities followed the prescribed legal procedure before taking action. High courts are best suited to investigate different cases.
what was the matter
In fact, in the petitions filed in the Supreme Court, it was alleged that the officials had violated the security measures laid down in their important decision of November 2024 on the bulldozer action. However, the bench said that those allegations require investigation of facts, hence the High Court is the right forum to examine whether due process was followed.
The Supreme Court said that its decision of November 2024 should be read with the exceptions mentioned therein, and not as any separate legal provision. It also said that contempt proceedings are not the appropriate way to resolve disputes over facts in individual cases of bulldozer action. Accordingly, the Supreme Court transferred all the pending petitions to the concerned High Court and left every legal and factual issue open for fresh consideration. It also clarified that notices issued earlier by the Supreme Court in certain contempt cases will have no bearing on the High Court while deciding those cases independently.
What was claimed in the petition
The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to consider contempt petitions which claimed that the bulldozer action was taken in violation of a 2024 judgment of the court. During the hearing, senior advocate Huzaifa Ahmadi, appearing in the case related to the demolition of mosques in Somnath, said that there was no encroachment on public land in this case. He alleged that there was a 'serious violation' of the apex court's orders and said that the officials acted in disregard of the court's directions.
CJI Surya Kant made important comments
On this argument, CJI Surya Kant said, "The main complaint seems to be that the procedure is not being followed." You (the officer) will say that the procedure has been followed and the other party will deny it. Why don't we order to maintain the status quo and let the High Court decide on it. At the same time, senior advocate C.U., appearing in a contempt case related to Maharashtra. Singh claimed that many times demolition action is carried out after local leaders call for bulldozer action. He said there are many cases where such action is clearly taken as 'punitive action'.
What did Justice Bagchi say?
Singh argued that if the court finds that contempt has not taken place then the petition can be dismissed. He said, 'If the Supreme Court does not stand up for its own decisions, then I am sorry to say...' Justice Bagchi then said, "The decision cannot be considered as law." The instructions are given with certain conditions and limitations. These instructions are merely a reaffirmation of the statutory rights that already exist. He further said, 'This decision was given because the conscience of the court was shaken. It was the basis of the presumption of innocence. Yes, when the rule of law is weakened by the collusion of officials and illegal encroachers, then the use of bulldozers may be necessary.
What was the Supreme Court's order on bulldozer action?
Criticizing the 'bulldozer action', the Supreme Court had on 13 November 2024 issued guidelines for the entire country regarding demolition of properties. The Supreme Court had said that the executive cannot play the role of a judge, cannot declare an accused guilty and cannot demolish his house. While issuing several directions, the bench had said, 'The action of demolishing any property should not be taken without issuing a show cause notice.' This notice should be effective as per the period prescribed in the respective local municipal body laws or within 15 days from the date of service of the notice, whichever is later.'
