NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday reiterated its stance on ' bulldozer justice ' and said that mere accusations or even conviction of heinous crime can't be ground for demolition of property.
"We are going to make it clear that merely because somebody is an accused or convict, it can't be a ground for demolition," the top court said.
The bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan, however, observed that there can't be a different law for a particular religion, the bench said it will not protect any unauthorised constructions on public roads, government lands or forests.
"We will take care to ensure that our order does not help the encroachers on any of the public places," the bench said.
"If there are 2 structures in violation and action is taken only against 1. And you find in the background there is a criminal offense, Some solution has to be found for that some judicial oversight," it added.
The top court said that its guidelines would be applicable across the country and to all communities. "We are a secular country and any guidelines framed by court would be applicable to all communities, " it says.
During the hearing, Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for UP, MP, Rajasthan, told the top court that involvement in any offence or even conviction in criminal case cannot be a ground to undertake demolition
Solicitor general said that most demolitions carried out by authorities are genuine and only 2 percent could be part of what is called demolition justice.
Mehta further told the apex court that notice must be served and ten days time be given before demolition drive and pasting of notice on premises be done only when notice could not be served.
Earlier, the apex court put the brakes on 'bulldozer justice' by directing all state governments and their authorities not to carry out any demolition work till Oct 1 without taking its approval.
It added that people holding public office must stop glorifying the practice or engage in grandstanding on it. Raising serious concern over bulldozers being used as a punitive tool, which SC said was against the ethos of the Constitution and needed to be subjected to "judicial oversight", Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan said there was apprehension of its misuse by the executive, which could not act as the judge.
The term 'Bulldozer justice,' as referred to by the public, is a form of instant justice mechanism involving the razing of houses, shops, or any premises belonging to individuals accused of a crime.
Two aggrieved house owners from Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh approached the Supreme Court against their respective states for demolishing their homes and sought urgent hearings. In the Rajasthan case, a house was razed due to an alleged offense committed by the tenant's son, while in Madhya Pradesh, a bulldozer was used to demolish a joint family's ancestral house.
"We are going to make it clear that merely because somebody is an accused or convict, it can't be a ground for demolition," the top court said.
The bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan, however, observed that there can't be a different law for a particular religion, the bench said it will not protect any unauthorised constructions on public roads, government lands or forests.
"We will take care to ensure that our order does not help the encroachers on any of the public places," the bench said.
"If there are 2 structures in violation and action is taken only against 1. And you find in the background there is a criminal offense, Some solution has to be found for that some judicial oversight," it added.
The top court said that its guidelines would be applicable across the country and to all communities. "We are a secular country and any guidelines framed by court would be applicable to all communities, " it says.
During the hearing, Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for UP, MP, Rajasthan, told the top court that involvement in any offence or even conviction in criminal case cannot be a ground to undertake demolition
Solicitor general said that most demolitions carried out by authorities are genuine and only 2 percent could be part of what is called demolition justice.
Mehta further told the apex court that notice must be served and ten days time be given before demolition drive and pasting of notice on premises be done only when notice could not be served.
Earlier, the apex court put the brakes on 'bulldozer justice' by directing all state governments and their authorities not to carry out any demolition work till Oct 1 without taking its approval.
It added that people holding public office must stop glorifying the practice or engage in grandstanding on it. Raising serious concern over bulldozers being used as a punitive tool, which SC said was against the ethos of the Constitution and needed to be subjected to "judicial oversight", Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan said there was apprehension of its misuse by the executive, which could not act as the judge.
The term 'Bulldozer justice,' as referred to by the public, is a form of instant justice mechanism involving the razing of houses, shops, or any premises belonging to individuals accused of a crime.
Two aggrieved house owners from Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh approached the Supreme Court against their respective states for demolishing their homes and sought urgent hearings. In the Rajasthan case, a house was razed due to an alleged offense committed by the tenant's son, while in Madhya Pradesh, a bulldozer was used to demolish a joint family's ancestral house.
You may also like
Desperate Housewives star makes heartbreaking confession about aftermath of anal cancer
'I had family meeting about Ruud van Nistelrooy – he's why I'm a £70m player today'
De Jong returns to Barca squad for Champions League clash vs Young Boys
Hydrangeas will 'be even bigger' in spring if 'essential' tasks are done now
