India’s Supreme Court Prohibits Punitive Demolitions

India’s Supreme Court has declared that authorities are barred from demolishing residences solely because an individual faces criminal charges, simultaneously establishing stringent guidelines for any such actions. This judgment arises from multiple petitions that sought intervention against officials who have employed demolition as a punitive measure against those accused or convicted of offenses. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court stated, “The executive [the government] cannot become a judge and demolish properties. The chilling sight of a bulldozer demolishing a building reminds one of lawlessness where might was right.” It further instructed authorities to grant sufficient time to the affected party to challenge the order or vacate the premises. This ruling emerges amidst a series of incidents where state authorities, particularly in regions governed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), have utilized demolition as a tool to punish individuals accused of crimes. While illegal construction is cited as the reason, experts have questioned this rationale, asserting a lack of legal justification for such actions. Opposition leaders and activists contend that although Hindu families have been among the victims, these demolitions have predominantly targeted Muslims, especially following instances of religious violence or protests. The BJP denies these allegations, and state chief ministers have linked demolitions to their firm stance on crime. During the hearing on Wednesday, the Supreme Court used strong language to criticize this practice. “Such highhanded and arbitrary actions have no place in a constitutional democracy,” it declared, adding that officials “who took the law in their hands” should be held accountable. The court subsequently issued guidelines, making it mandatory for authorities to provide a 15-day notice to an occupant before an allegedly illegal property is demolished. The notice must explain the reasons for demolition. If the accused does not respond to the notice within 15 days, authorities may proceed with the action, but they are required to film the process, the court stated. It also warned that violating these guidelines would constitute contempt of court. The court has consistently voiced strong criticism against extrajudicial demolitions throughout the hearing. Earlier this month, it observed that razing properties merely because a person was accused of a crime was “simply unacceptable under rule of law.” It also noted that citizens’ voices could not be silenced by the threat of demolition. While the Supreme Court’s guidelines are viewed as a constructive step towards preventing such demolitions from becoming standard practice, observers emphasize that the effective implementation of the order will be crucial in halting the practice. Human rights group Amnesty International commended the ruling, stating that despite its delayed arrival, it represents a positive development in upholding human rights. In a statement, the organization declared, “This is a big win in ending the deeply unjust, widespread, unlawful and punitive demolitions, mostly targeting the minority Muslim community, by the Indian authorities which have often been peddled as ‘bulldozer justice’ by ruling party political leaders and media.”