Supreme Court Sets Guidelines for Demolitions, Emphasizes Judicial Oversight

In a landmark judgment issued on Wednesday, the Supreme Court of India firmly denounced the practice of executive authorities ordering the demolition of properties connected to criminal cases without adherence to legal procedures. The court stressed that such actions are “violative of the rule of law,” reinforcing that the role of a judge cannot be assumed by executive authorities. This ruling came as the court addressed several petitions challenging the demolition of properties allegedly owned by individuals named in criminal cases.

New National Guidelines for Demolition Procedures

Responding to the recurring use of bulldozers for demolishing properties linked to criminal proceedings, the Supreme Court has now established national guidelines to regulate such actions. The judgment mandates that demolitions may only proceed if strict statutory procedures are followed, including a 15-day advance notice to property owners. These guidelines aim to curb arbitrary actions that have increasingly raised concerns over executive overreach and due process.

The Supreme Court made it clear that the executive cannot substitute judicial functions, a principle it believes is essential for maintaining a fair and balanced legal system. “The state cannot take arbitrary action against the accused or convict without following the due process of law,” the court asserted.

Legal and Statutory Compliance Required

In its decision, the court insisted that demolitions should not be the first response, even in cases where encroachments or legal violations are evident. “Authorities must be able to show that demolition is the only recourse available even in cases where there are some encroachments,” the court noted. By insisting on this point, the court aims to prevent a punitive approach that bypasses judicial assessment.

The court further emphasized the importance of due process, requiring authorities to substantiate that demolition is a legally justified measure and not a preemptive punishment. This, the court said, is crucial to protecting civil rights and upholding the constitutional framework.

Upholding Civil Rights to Protect Constitutional Democracy

Throughout the judgment, the Supreme Court underscored the need to safeguard civil rights, particularly in cases where accusations have yet to be substantiated in a court of law. The justices expressed that violating the due process not only undermines the law but also risks fostering a climate of lawlessness. “Legal process cannot condone such action,” the court stated, reiterating that adherence to legal principles is fundamental to a constitutional democracy.