New Delhi: The Supreme Court chastised the Uttar Pradesh government on Wednesday for demolishing the residences of a lawyer, a professor, and three others in Prayagraj in 2021, stating that such measures send a "shocking and wrong signal," Live Law reported.
“There is something called as Article 21,” the bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and N Kotiswar Singh said, referring to the provision in the Constitution that guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.
“Prima facie, this action sends shocking and wrong signal and this is something that needs to be corrected,” PTI quoted the bench as saying. “You are taking such drastic action of demolishing homes...We know how to deal with such hyper technical arguments.”
The bench referred to its November order, which outlined the procedure to be followed before such demolitions. Oka stated that the court will require the state to reconstruct the demolished structures. “That is the only way to do this,” he added.
There are no provisions in Indian law that allow for the destruction of property as a form of punishment. Nonetheless, the practice has become widespread, particularly in areas run by the Bharatiya Janata Party, Scroll.in reported.
In its November 13 order, the Supreme Court ruled that state officials cannot demolish citizens' dwellings just because they have been accused or convicted of crimes.
The court, which was hearing a batch of petitions requesting its intervention against punitive demolitions by state governments, also issued guidelines ns to prevent cases of "bulldozer justice".
The bench made the statements on Wednesday while hearing a petition brought by advocate Zulfiqar Haider, Professor Ali Ahmed, two widows, and another person.
The group had petitioned the Supreme Court, challenging the Allahabad High Court's dismissal of their case against the demolition of their homes in 2020. According to Live Law, the petitioners alleged that the state administration mistakenly linked their estate to gangster-politician Atiq Ahmed. Ahmed was killed in April 2023.
The suit claimed that the authorities issued demolition notifications late at night in March 2021 and razed their homes the next day without providing them the opportunity to appeal the order.
According to the petition, the petitioners held the land leases and had filed to convert their rights to freehold property.
During the Supreme Court proceedings, Attorney General R Venkataramani, representing the state government, stated that the petitioners were given ample time to answer the notices. However, the judge questioned the way in which the notice was given and pointed out contradictions in the state government's claims regarding sending it.
According to Live Law, Venkataramani then suggested that the case be returned to the High Court for further review.
However, the bench stated that referring the plea to the High Court would result in unnecessary delays. The Supreme Court will hear the case again on March 21.