Supreme Court’s Observations On Bulldozer Actions

INTRODUCTION

Demos have recently been raised over the use of bulldozers in legal actions especially in situations where there are violations of the laws through construction or encroachment into someone else’s property. This has been most evident in states such as Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Delhi where bulldozer demolitions have been used as a tool for responding to anything from unauthorized structures construction to order evoking disruptions. However, the approach has incited a lot of debate with legal consequences that have made the Supreme Court of India imminent to make several observations on the subject. With bulldozer actions, perceived as quick justice /political oppression instrument, issues of legal procedures, human rights, and the constitution and the justice system have been put to question.
The Supreme Court of India has in the recent past made one of the most important decisions regarding the much-debated practice of what has been referred to as ‘Bulldozer actions’ whereby the houses of accused/criminals are brought down by the authorities without even a semblance of due process of law. This practice has increased concerns on illegality, human rights and the enforceability of the rule of law more especially in communal clashes and cases driven by political tunes.

UNDERSTANDING BULLDOZER ACTIONS

The word ‘Bulldozer actions’ refers to the demolitions that is being carried out by the state administration in the guise of anti-encroachment operations. They have become frequent and infamous particularly in the BJP ruled states where people consider it as vengeance against criminals especially the lower-class individuals. This practice has been criticized inasmuch as it is capable of being classified as collective punishment because family members of the accused persons can be arrested irrespective of the charges they have against them.
 As much as demolition is legal means of dealing with the illegal structures to enhance urban planning and activities provided by the laws in the municipalities the way it is done remains questionable. Often, it has been claimed that such demolitions have been aimed at specific groups of people or at the opposition political parties, hence producing sectarian output of selective justice. That has been singled out for criticism for sidelining the legal procedures and individual rights that deny the individuals their due legal process. 
This action of the Supreme Court comes ahead of several petitions that challenged such demolitions especially after the communal riots in Jahangirpuri, Delhi in April 2022. In such a fashion, houses were being demolished on the basis that the people from such houses were responsible for the tension, this raised a lot of questions with regard to the legal and moral basis of such an action.

SUPREME COURT OBSERVATIONS

In writ petitions on September 2, 2024, a two- Bench Combination of Justices B. R. Gavai and K. V. Viswanathan formulated the issues on which the court has concerns with regard to demolishing homes without evidence. Justice Gavai reacted sharply to this point by asserting the following: “How can a house be demolished just because he is accused? It cannot be demolished even if he is a convict.” This statement goes along the proposition that right to shelter is a part of right to life which is guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of Free India.
 Justice Viswanathan also pointed out the necessity of some more rules for making the demolition look legal and therefore, presumed to be fair. He said this while agreeing that what may be needed for constructions without permit, may need some action however the procedure to follow must be legal, necessary notices to be provided or a hearing to be granted before any tearing down takes place. The Court’s plan to offer common guidelines for all the states of India evidences its understanding of the circumstances that called for the harmonization of the practices and promotion of citizens’ rights by the Indian states. 

POLITICAL AND SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS

These observations have led to other social issues by the Supreme Court which recognizes bulldozer actions as the risk to civil liberties or social justice. Critics call it as “bulldozer justice” because it erases constitutional rights and fosters environment of fear among marginalized communities including Muslims which was also affirmed by Rahul Gandhi, an Indian politician. Gandhi thought the bulldozer was an example of ‘appalling destructiveness’ that steamrolls civil rights that target the ‘backward and needy’.
In this case, politics is an important factor since these demolitions are regarded as a way of asserting a forceful control over the people and keeping the dissatisfied citizens in check as regards demonstrations of dissent. Despite the outcomes which include state’s ability to prevent personal attacks on powers by state, and public confidence in judiciary through high court intervention, it raises concerns such as efficiency of state officials and need for system reforms.

THE NEED FOR GUIDELINES

The fact that the Supreme Court has agreed to set parameters to bulldozer actions is a move that will help check those exercising the power of demolitions in a lawful manner. The proposed guidelines are expected to address several key issues:

1. Identification of Unauthorized Structures: Some guidelines must be set so that the unauthorized constructions could be distinguished from actual homes. It will also reduce cases of forceful demolition that lacks merit and other political induced reasons.
2. Issuance of Notices: Having proper structures, which require authorities to present proper notices to occupants before the demolition process is initiated, one is afforded legal battle with a chance to challenge the allegations against him or her.
3. Right to a Fair Hearing: Some sort of a fair hearing should be accorded to anybody who is subject to the process of demolition, in order to achieve some justice and fairness.
4. Transparency and Accountability: The guidelines should encourage the demonstration of accountability in the process of demolition by documenting activities done accompanied by rationale.
5. Protection Against Retaliatory Actions: There is the need to ensure that the guidelines prohibit demolitions as a way of punishing individuals that have been found or deemed to have committed some crime as a way of emphasizing on the fact that punishment can only be served after following legal processes.

CHALLENGES AHEAD

The supremacy of the Supreme Court on the improvement of the guideline is quite laudable though the question of how the laid down guidelines will be put into practice remains a challenge. Local government may be relatively insulated against change especially where there is politics or even the use of ‘bulldozer’ actions where politically sensitive issues are an element involved. Further, the judiciary must enhance its sensitivity in order to protect such principles from being eroded under the guise of technicalities or political situations. 
In the same regard, the Court’s observations also seem to direct to the social effects of bulldozer actions. Therefore, the action of demolishing a house due to the incidence of any communal violence projects concern justice and equity for the disadvantaged groups in the societies. The judiciary has the duty of safeguarding these rights and therefore this development is a positive step towards improving the rule of law as people today are disputing political systems in the current society.

CONCLUSION

The observations of the Supreme Court in the bulldozer actions are effective to say the least in the fight for justice and human rights in India. But, by acknowledging the necessity of rules regulating the operation that aims to demolish homes, the Court has firmly challenged state sovereignty and the degeneration of citizens’ rights. As the judiciary proceeds with this endeavour, it is critical that the organ truly and genuinely desire to dispense justice, equity and fairness to all individuals in the country in their interaction with the state. The setting of such standards could therefore be seen as an important means of preventing an abuse of power and an endorsement of the laws in the Indian context.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS(FAQs):
1. What is "bulldozer justice"?
“Bulldozer justice” is the process of knocking down the house, and other belongings of people with an allegation of various crimes, without following the law. This term is commonly used to refer to measures of collective punishment by state authorities especially in some states in India where state agencies use mechanical diggers to demolish homes especially of the poor people belonging to the lower caste.
2. What has Supreme Court said on the issues of pulling down houses of such persons?
The Supreme Court of India said that no building could be can be brought down on the roles of an owner whenever he is accused of some crime The court was very clear there saying that even if a person is guilty, house cannot be bulldozed without following the legal provisions. B. R. Gavai and K. V. Viswanathan emphasized on the procedure of due process and natural justice and pointed out that the act of demolition has to follow constitutional procedures.
3. What are the implications of the Supreme Court's observations on bulldozer actions?
The observations made by the Supreme Court are to safeguard the rights of people against such act of the state, which upholds the view that the punishment for crime is not to extend to innocent members of a family or a home. The Court has envisaged to frame the common national standards on the identification of unauthorized structures and the fairness of hearings before any demolition, thus aiming at the proper enforcement of rule of law and minimizing human rights abuses allegations.
4. What are the proposed guidelines expected to address?
The proposed guidelines by the Supreme Court are expected to cover several key areas, including:
- Establish clear checks that would help recognize structures that are erected without permits.
- That property owners should be served with notices before demolition is carried out.
- As a way of giving a fair hearing to the affected individuals the right must be upheld.
- Engaging in the formulation of positive approaches towards the promotion of transparency and accountability in the process of demolition of existing buildings.
- Banning demolitions as a way of punitive actions against persons who are suspected of having committed offenses.
5. When the Supreme Court will resume its hearings on the given issue?
The Supreme Court has listed the next date for hearing on this matter for 17th September 2024 in which the apex court will hear from various stakeholders about formulation of guidelines to regulate bulldozer operations throughout India.

REFERENCES
1.    LIVE LAW
2.    INDIA TODAY
3.    THE HINDU
4.    THE WIRE