The Supreme Court of India took a firm and uncompromising stance on the controversial "bulldozer" actions carried out by local authorities, emphasizing that the executive branch cannot overstep its authority and override judicial processes. This significant ruling came on Wednesday as the Court was hearing petitions that sought to halt demolitions targeting individuals accused of crimes, highlighting that such actions, often executed without proper legal procedures, are in violation of constitutional principles. The bench, consisting of Justices BR Gavai and KV Vishwanathan, made it abundantly clear that no person should be considered guilty without a fair trial, reaffirming the fundamental right to due process.
The Court was unequivocal in its assertion that arbitrary demolitions of citizens' homes based on mere accusations violated constitutional rights and the separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive. It reiterated that the executive cannot assume the role of adjudication, underlining that such arbitrary actions compromise the integrity of the justice system. By emphasizing the necessity of a fair trial, the Court reaffirmed that guilt cannot be presumed outside of judicial proceedings, ensuring that even the accused, until proven guilty, are afforded protections under the law.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court warned that the overreach of the executive could cause irreparable harm to foundational legal principles, including the protection of individual rights and the proper functioning of the judiciary. It made it clear that demolitions and punitive measures carried out without judicial scrutiny or approval disrupt the core values of justice and the rule of law, which rely on impartial and transparent proceedings. The Court highlighted the importance of adhering to procedural justice and ensuring that actions taken by the state are based on sound legal reasoning and judicial consent.
Furthermore, the Court emphasized that government officials who act beyond their legal mandate in carrying out demolitions or other such actions would be held accountable for violating the law. The justices pointed out that the abuse of power in these instances, especially when carried out without a judicial order, is not only unjust but also detrimental to the public trust in the legal system. The Court made it clear that criminal law safeguards are designed to protect the rights of those accused of crimes, and such protections must be upheld in all instances, whether the individual is accused or even convicted.
The Court's concern extended to the collective impact of these bulldozer actions, questioning how authorities could justify demolishing homes or displacing entire families based on the accusation of a single individual. The justices raised concerns about the fairness of punishing entire communities for the actions of one person, reinforcing that such measures are disproportionate and undermine the principle of justice. The Court stressed that only judicial authorities have the legitimate right to determine the appropriate legal consequences of a crime, and any actions taken without this authority are unlawful and unconstitutional.
To safeguard against future violations and ensure that demolitions are carried out in a lawful and just manner, the Supreme Court issued strict guidelines that must be followed in all cases of demolition. One of the key provisions is that a 15-day notice must be issued before any demolition can take place, allowing the affected parties time to respond and present their case. This notice must be clear, stating the reasons for the demolition, the date of the hearing, and all relevant details, which will be recorded and tracked via a new digital portal.
This portal, which will be set up within the next three months, is intended to provide transparency and allow citizens to track the notices issued for demolitions. It will include crucial details such as the date the notice was posted at the site and the specific reasons for the demolition. Additionally, a personal hearing will be provided to the property owners or occupiers, giving them an opportunity to present their case and challenge the decision if necessary. The Court further mandated that officials must assess whether the offense in question is compoundable or if partial demolition is a viable alternative. Moreover, any order for demolition must include a clear and detailed explanation as to why the demolition is considered necessary.
The Court also made it clear that officials who violate these newly established guidelines will face serious consequences, including prosecution for contempt of court. Those responsible for overstepping their authority and violating the due process protections outlined by the Court will be held accountable and required to make restitution for any harm caused by such actions. This ruling emphasizes the importance of procedural fairness and strengthens the Court's commitment to holding authorities accountable for any misuse of power.
In doing so, the Supreme Court has sent a strong message that the rule of law must be respected at all levels of government and that the rights of citizens must be protected, especially when they are accused of crimes. The decision reaffirms the Court's pivotal role in ensuring justice and fairness, providing a robust framework to safeguard individuals from arbitrary state actions. By upholding the constitutional protections guaranteed to all citizens, the Court has reinforced the importance of maintaining judicial oversight over executive actions, ensuring that no one is deprived of their rights without due process.
