‘Unconstitutional, Abuse Of Power’: Supreme Court Bulldozer Verdict Explained In 5 Points

The Supreme Court on Wednesday condemned the practice of arbitrary demolitions in its ruling on petitions challenging bulldozer actions. The court emphasized that such actions violate constitutional principles and legal rights, asserting that executive powers cannot bypass judicial processes.

Nationwide guidelines introduced

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan also introduced nationwide guidelines to regulate the demolition of illegal structures. In its judgment, the bench remarked that it is distressing to witness women, children, and the elderly being forced onto the streets overnight, and noted that it would not harm the authorities to delay their actions temporarily. The Court explained that building a house represents socio-economic aspirations, symbolizing years of struggle and providing a sense of dignity; if this right is removed, the authorities must demonstrate that it was a last-resort measure, according to Bar and Bench’s report on the ruling. Here are five key takeaways from the judgment:

Executive power must be restrained: SC in bulldozer verdict

The Supreme Court emphasized that the executive must avoid overstepping its role by imposing punitive actions like demolitions. Justice Gavai highlighted that the executive does not have the authority to determine guilt and, based solely on accusations, to demolish someone’s property would undermine the rule of law. He cautioned against arbitrary actions that erode the separation of powers and lead to lawlessness.

Due process before demolition, using blldozer

The Court issued specific instructions requiring that no demolitions should proceed without due process. It directed that demolitions should not occur without prior notice, with at least a 15-day period from the notice’s issuance. Furthermore, the Court required the videographing of demolition procedures to ensure transparency and accountability. It clarified that these directions do not apply to unauthorized structures on public land or when there is a demolition order from a court.

Safeguarding the rights of accused

The Supreme Court bench underscored the constitutional rights of individuals, including those accused or convicted. It stated that under criminal jurisprudence, an accused person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and the demolition of a structure would unjustly punish all family members, which is unconstitutional. The Court also reiterated that its directions are not applicable in cases involving unauthorized construction on public land or court-ordered demolitions.

Accountability for high-handed officials

The Court stressed the need for accountability among public officials, stating that officials who overreach and act in a high-handed manner must be held accountable. The Supreme Court warned that those violating these guidelines could face contempt of court and prosecution, adding that such officials would be required to restore demolished properties at their own expense and pay compensation.

Protecting individual liberty, upholding rule of law, not bulldozer rule

The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of individual liberty as essential to a constitutional democracy. It stated that when a citizen breaks the law, the state is obligated to maintain order and protect them from unlawful actions, as failure to do so could lead to public distrust and lawlessness. The Court concluded that protecting individual liberty is vital for preserving democracy and insisted that arbitrary exercises of state power must be restrained so that citizens can trust that their property will not be taken away unjustly.

Read More: Supreme Court To Decide On ‘Bulldozer Justice’ Today | Key Developments In Hearing