The Supreme Court has given its verdict on the bulldozer action. The court said that an officer cannot become a judge. They should not decide who is guilty. Abuse of power cannot be allowed. The court has also given 15 guidelines.
A bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Viswanathan gave judgment on the case. The decision was reserved after a hearing on October 1.
Justice BR Gawai said-
Abuse of power cannot be condoned. When a citizen breaks the law we ask the government to create law and order and stop people from breaking the law. Failure to do so can erode public trust.
The Bulldozer Case: Critical Points of Decision
- A man always dreams that his house will never be taken away. Everyone dreams of having a roof over their house. Can the authorities take the roof of a person who is accused of a crime? This is the question before us. Accused or guilty, can his house be demolished without following the prescribed procedure? We considered the issue of justice in the criminal justice system. And also, that no pre-judgment can be made about any accused.
- It is wrong if an officer demolishes his house wrongfully because he is an accused. If the officer takes the law into his own hands then he should be prosecuted as it is illegal. The accused also has some rights. Governments and authorities cannot take arbitrary and unilateral action against an accused or guilty person without following the law. If any officer does so, there should be a system of action against him. This can also be compensation. An officer cannot be forgiven for acting with wrongful intention.
- It is absolutely unconstitutional to demolish a person's property if he is only accused. The authorities cannot decide who is guilty, they themselves cannot be the judge of whether someone is guilty or not. It has to cross boundaries. The intimidating aspect of bulldozer action shows that abuse of power cannot be tolerated. No such action can be taken against any criminal. Such action by the officer would be illegal and the officer would be guilty of taking the law into his own hands.
- Malicious intent is evident when one structure is suddenly selected for demolition and no action is taken on other structures. An impression is created that the proceedings are not on any construction but to punish the person whose case is before the court.
- A house is an issue of socio-economic fabric. It is not just a house, years of struggle, gives a sense of respect. If this is taken then the officer has to prove that demolition was the last resort. The rule of criminal justice is that a person is innocent until proven guilty. If his house is demolished, it means punishing the whole family. This cannot be allowed in the Constitution.
Supreme Court Guidelines:
- If bulldozer action is ordered, time should be allowed to appeal against it.
- When houses are demolished overnight, women and children are on the streets, it is not a good sight. They do not get time to appeal.
- Our guidelines do not address illegal encroachment, such as illegal construction along roads or riverbanks.
- No structure shall be demolished without a show cause notice.
- A notice shall be sent to the owner of the construction by registered post and it shall also be pasted on the wall.
- 15 days should be given after sending the notice.
- Collector and District Magistrate should also be informed.
- DM and Collector should appoint nodal officers to monitor such actions.
- The notice should state why the construction is being demolished, when the hearing will be held and before whom. There should be a digital portal, where complete information about notices and orders is available.
- Officers should conduct personal hearings and record them. Final orders should be passed and state whether demolition action is required or not. Also demolishing the structure is the last resort.
- The order should be displayed on the digital portal.
- After being ordered to demolish the illegal construction, the person should be given 15 days time to demolish or remove the illegal construction himself. Bulldozer action will be taken only if this order is not stayed.
- The demolition process should be videographed. It should be preserved and a report of the proceedings sent to the Municipal Commissioner.
- Failure to follow the guidelines will constitute contempt of court. The officer will be responsible for this and will have to rebuild the demolished structure at his own cost and also pay compensation.
- Our directives should be sent to all Chief Secretaries.
5 important things from the courtroom in the hearing on October 1…
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta: I have appeared on behalf of Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, but the bench has said that the guidelines will be for the entire country, so I have some suggestions. Many things have been taken into consideration. If a man is guilty of a crime it is not a ground for bulldozer proceedings.
Justice Gawai: Could this be the basis for Bulldozer's action if he is guilty?
Solicitor General: not You said notice should be given. Most municipal laws provide for the issuance of notices on a case-by-case basis. You can see that the notice has been sent by registered post. The notice must state which law has been violated.
Justice Gawai: Yes, even states may have different laws. We are a secular country, whatever guidelines we make will be for the entire country.
Justice Viswanathan: There should be an online portal for this. Digitize it. The officer will also be safe. The status and service of sending notices will also be available on the portal.
Important comments of the Supreme Court in the last 3 hearings on bulldozer proceedings
- September 17: Center said – Don't tie hands, Court said – Sky will not burst The Supreme Court had said on September 17 that the bulldozer action will not take place till October 1. Not a single bulldozer should be prosecuted in the country till the next hearing. When the Center questioned this order, the hands of constitutional institutions cannot be tied in this way. After that, Justice BR Gavai and Justice K.V. Vishwanathan said – if the proceedings are stopped for two weeks, the sky will not explode.
- September 12: Supreme Court says- bulldozer action on law The Supreme Court had also said on September 12 that the action of bulldozer is tantamount to running a bulldozer on the law of the land. The matter was before a bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice SVN Bhati. In fact, a family in Gujarat was threatened with bulldozer action by the municipality. The petitioner is a co-owner of land at Kathalal in Kheda district.
- September 2: Court says – Encroachment is not protection The Supreme Court said during the hearing on September 2 that even if someone is guilty, this cannot be done without following due process of law. However, the bench also made it clear that it would not give any protection to encroachment on public roads, but the parties involved in the matter should give directions. We can issue guidelines for the entire country.
Image Credit: (Divya-Bhaskar): Images/graphics belong to (Divya-Bhaskar).
