Supreme Court Safeguards Citizen Rights: Strict Guidelines for Building Demolitions Across India

A series of petitions filed before the Supreme Court of India raising concerns over the demolition of residential and commercial properties by state authorities (Bulldozer Justice) targetting, specifically the properties belonging to the accused. The petitioners argued that these demolitions were carried out without due process of law, targeting individuals accused of criminal offenses or convicted in the crime.

Background:
In the backdrop of many demolitions the petitions sought directives from the Apex Court to prevent such arbitarary use of power in demolition of properties belonging to accused individuals in criminal proceedings. Additionally, they requested strict action against state officials involved in such illegal demolitions.

The Apex Court while hearing the matter initially issued an interim order on September 17, 2024, prohibiting the arbitrary use of power in demolishing the properties across the country without its permission. This order, however, excluded unauthorized structures in public places or cases with existing court-ordered demolitions. After receiving suggestions from involved parties, the court moved to establish guidelines on Pan-India basis to address the concerns raised.

The judgment delivered by the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of upholding the rule of law and the doctrine of separation of powers in a democratic society. It recognized that even those accused or convicted of crimes possess fundamental rights and that arbitrary actions by the state, such as demolishing properties without due process, are unacceptable.

The court also acknowledged the significance of the right to shelter as a facet of the right to life and the potential for collective punishment when families are dispossessed due to the alleged actions of one member and has observed that "For an average citizen, the construction of a house is often the culmination of years of hard work, dreams, and aspirations. A house is not just a property but embodies the collective hopes of a family or individuals for stability, security, and a future. Having a house or a roof over one's head gives satisfaction to any person. It gives a sense of dignity and a sense of belonging. If this is to be taken away, then the authority must be satisfied that this is the only option available."

Drawing upon these principles and considering the arguments presented by both sides, the Supreme Court issued specific guidelines for building demolitions:

A. Notice
Demolitions must be preceded by a show cause notice, providing at least 15 days for a response.
Notice must be served via registered post and displayed on the structure.
Digital intimation of notice service to the Collector/District Magistrate is mandatory to prevent backdating.
Details of violations, grounds for demolition, required documents, and the date and authority for the personal hearing must be included in the notice.
Municipal authorities must establish digital portals for transparency and information access.

B. Personal Hearing
The designated authority must provide a personal hearing and record the minutes.

C. Final Order
The final order must address the noticee's contentions, justifications for demolition, options for compounding, and the rationale for choosing demolition as the final course of action.

D. Opportunity for Appeal and Judicial Scrutiny
A 15-day period must be provided for appealing the order or seeking judicial intervention.
The owner/occupier should be given 15 days to rectify the unauthorized construction.
Demolition can only proceed after these periods expire, without any stay orders from higher authorities.

E. Demolition Proceedings
Demolition must be video-recorded, with a report detailing involved personnel and the process.

This report must be submitted to the Municipal Commissioner and uploaded to the digital portal.
The court emphasized that any violation of these guidelines would result in contempt proceedings and potential prosecution.
Additionally, officials responsible for illegal demolitions would be personally liable for restitution and damages.

Consequences of Non-Compliance
The court asserted that non-compliance with these directives would lead to contempt of court proceedings and potential prosecution of the involved officials. The Court underscored the responsibility of authorities to uphold the rule of law, emphasizing that arbitrary demolitions without due process contradict constitutional principles.

The judgment also stressed the accountability of public officials, emphasizing the need to fix responsibility for unlawful actions and ensure an answerable administration and the court has held that "94. The officials should also be informed that if the demolition is found to be in violation of the orders of this Court, the officer/officers concerned will be held responsible for restitution of the demolished property at his/their personal cost in addition to payment of damages."

This judgment reaffirms the importance of due process and the rule of law in India, even when dealing with individuals accused or convicted of crimes. It highlights the judiciary's role in safeguarding fundamental rights and preventing the arbitrary exercise of state power. The guidelines set forth by the court provide a framework for ensuring that building demolitions are conducted fairly and transparently, protecting the rights and dignity of all citizens.

Coram: Justice B.R. GAVAI, and Justice K.V. VISWANATHAN.
Case: WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.295 OF 2022.
Date of Judgment: 13-011-2024