Why in the News?

On November 13, 2024, the Supreme Court criticized states for using bulldozers to demolish homes of accused individuals, condemning it as a display of “might is right” that leaves families destitute.

What guidelines has the Supreme Court laid down to regulate future demolition actions?

• 15-Day Notice Requirement: The authorities must issue a prior notice of at least 15 days to the occupants of a property before demolition.
  • The notice must include details of the unauthorized construction, violations, and grounds for demolition, providing the affected party an opportunity to challenge the action.
• Fair Opportunity to Contest: Occupants must be given a fair chance to contest the demolition before the designated authority. The authority must provide reasoned conclusions in its final order, ensuring transparency and accountability in the decision-making process.
• Videography of Demolitions: All demolitions must be videographed to ensure that the process is carried out lawfully and without excessive force. This acts as a safeguard against abuse of power.
• Penalty for Non-Compliance: Public officials who fail to comply with these guidelines will face contempt action and prosecution, with personal liability for restitution of demolished property.
• Exceptions: The guidelines do not apply in cases of encroachment on public property or where demolition is ordered by a court, ensuring that the ruling does not interfere with lawful orders.

What are the implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling on demolitions linked to criminal accusations?

• Protection of Fundamental Rights: The ruling safeguards individuals’ fundamental rights, particularly the right to life and property under Article 21 of the Constitution.
  • The Court emphasized that an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty and that demolishing a property without due process violates the constitutional guarantee of fair treatment.
• Accountability of Public Officials: The ruling holds public officials accountable for actions that undermine justice and fairness. Violations of the prescribed guidelines will result in contempt charges and personal liability for restitution, reinforcing the responsibility of the state to adhere to the rule of law.
• Prevention of Arbitrary Executive Action: By limiting the state’s power to demolish properties, the Court has curtailed arbitrary executive actions that could be seen as collective punishment. The executive must now act within the bounds of natural justice and due process.

How the Ruling Addresses Concerns About Selective Targeting and Discrimination in Demolitions?

• Addressing Communal Bias: The Court acknowledged concerns that demolitions were being carried out with a communal bias. By invoking Article 142 to issue binding directives, the Court seeks to curb discriminatory practices, ensuring that no group or individual is targeted based on religious, social, or other factors.
• Prevention of Selective Targeting: The Court emphasized that demolitions should not be selective or targeted. It pointed out that if one structure is chosen for demolition while similar structures remain untouched, it could indicate mala fide intent.

Way forward: 

• Strengthen Oversight Mechanisms: Establish independent bodies to monitor demolition actions and ensure compliance with the Supreme Court’s guidelines, preventing misuse of power and ensuring transparency in the process.
• Ensure Comprehensive Legal Reforms: Advocate for legislative changes that reinforce the principles of due process, protecting individuals from arbitrary state actions and ensuring fair treatment for all, particularly marginalized communities.

Mains PYQ:

Q Examine the scope of Fundamental Rights in the light of the latest judgement of the Supreme Court on Right to Privacy. (UPSC IAS/2017)

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now