Font size:
Print
SC issues Guidelines to Curb Illegal Demolitions
Context:
The Supreme Court has issued guidelines to curb illegal demolitions, specifically addressing cases where homes and private properties are demolished simply because occupants are accused of crimes.
More in News:
- These guidelines were issued following cases from Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh where demolitions took place after Muslim tenants were accused of crimes that led to communal unrest.
- Similar cases from other states, including the Jahangirpuri demolitions in Delhi, were also cited.
Supreme Court Guidelines on Illegal Demolitions:
- Mandatory Notice Period: The SC has made it mandatory for authorities to issue a 15-day notice before any demolition. This allows tenants time to either challenge the order legally or manage their affairs before eviction.
- Clear Justification and Hearing Date: The notice must specify the reasons for demolition and provide a hearing date where the tenant can contest the action.
- Penalties for Non-Compliance: Violating these guidelines could result in contempt proceedings. Officials responsible for illegal demolitions may be held personally liable to pay restitution and compensation.
- Protection of Fundamental Rights: The SC emphasised that these demolitions violate rights under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to shelter. The court condemned punitive demolitions, especially as they infringe on the presumption of innocence and unfairly affect uninvolved tenants.
Recent controversial cases of Demolition and State Laws on demolition process:
Rajasthan:
- Case: Udaipur Municipal Corporation demolished a tenant’s house allegedly encroaching on forest land after the tenant’s son was accused of a crime.
- Notice Requirements: Notice was issued the night before the demolition.
- Legal Provisions:
- Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 (Section 245): Imposes penalties for public land encroachment but mandates written notice, a chance for representation, and a hearing.
- Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 (Section 91): Only a Tehsildar can issue an eviction order for illegal forest land occupancy.
Madhya Pradesh:
- Case: Ancestral home demolished after the owner’s son was accused of a religiously sensitive crime.
- Notice Requirements: Demolition occurred on the same day as the FIR, allegedly without prior notice.
- Legal Provisions: Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 (Section 187): Allows demolition of unauthorised structures but requires prior notice and an opportunity for the owner to show cause.
Need for Supreme Court Guidelines:
- Due Process Violations: Demolitions in cases from Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and Delhi were often carried out without adequate notice or a fair hearing, depriving tenants of the chance to legally contest these actions.
- Protection of Fundamental Rights: These actions violated Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to shelter. Demolitions conducted without due process undermine this fundamental right.
- Presumption of Innocence and Fair Treatment: Many demolitions were based on unproven criminal allegations, punishing tenants and uninvolved residents alike, which contravenes the presumption of innocence.
- Concerns over Targeted Actions: Demolitions frequently followed communal tensions, raising concerns about potential misuse of state power to target specific communities without clear legal justification.
Impacts and Significance of the Verdict:
- Enhanced Legal Protections: The mandatory 15-day notice and hearing requirement allow tenants time to prepare or legally challenge eviction, ensuring procedural fairness.
- Reduced Arbitrary and Punitive Demolitions: The guidelines deter the use of demolitions as punitive measures in communal or criminal contexts, promoting impartial treatment and protecting vulnerable communities from discrimination.
- Accountability for Officials: By establishing penalties, including contempt proceedings and personal liability for restitution, the guidelines promote adherence to lawful processes.
- Policy Influence and Consistency: States may revise demolition procedures to align with these standards, creating more uniform, transparent, and fair practices across India.
- Reinforcement of Constitutional Rights and Rule of Law: This verdict strengthens the protections under Article 21 and restricts arbitrary state action, affirming that punitive demolitions targeting specific groups are unconstitutional.
- Judicial Safeguards for Vulnerable Groups: By upholding the right to shelter and presumption of innocence, the Supreme Court’s guidelines foster public trust in the judiciary’s role as a guardian of rights, particularly for marginalised communities.
