Façade of justice
Law is a tool to ensure justice, but it is just a tool, which can be used for good or bad! The entire concept of ‘Rule of Law’ stands crucified when legal provisions are misused by the State, almost with a sense of vengeance, to unleash great injustices upon citizens. The question is: where does the Indian citizen seek recourse if he/she is struck hard by lawfully justified injustices? Of course, the Supreme Court of India is an option, but it is no less a tragedy that the apex court, already overburdened with cases, is forced to intervene in matters that could have been avoided with a small degree of conscience and empathy on the part of the authorities. The Supreme Court’s harsh rebuke of the notorious “bulldozer justice”, perpetrated mostly by BJP-ruled states, brings a sense of relief, but the apex court cannot be expected to address the range of injustices carried out under the garb of lawfulness on a case by case basis. It has, therefore, proposed to lay down some guidelines on a pan-India basis.
Last month, we saw the demolition of the house of Rashid Khan in Udaipur, Rajasthan, on a strictly brief notice. Rashid, in his own words, is “a poor auto driver” who manages “to make ends meet for my(his) family with difficulty.” He toiled hard for years and took a loan from acquaintances to somehow buy the single-storey house for a sum of Rs 17 lakh. Just five years down the line, on August 17, 60-year-old Khan saw his house, as also his dreams, razed to the ground—all thanks to the "bulldozer justice" unleashed by the authorities. The pretext under which the house was bulldozed is encroachment of the forest land. Coincidently, or most likely otherwise, the order by the district administration and the state forest department came just a day after a 15-year-old son of one of the tenants living in the house had stabbed a Hindu boy, leading to widespread demands of bulldozer justice by a mob gathered outside the hospital in which the stabbed boy was being treated. Notably, Khan has nothing to do with the stabbing incident, and even the notice for demolition was served to the tenant, and not Khan. Adding further to the streak of coincidence, Khan’s demolished house was just one among the many houses built on the same forest land—all waiting for approval or regularisation, as claimed by Khan in a memorandum. Nevertheless, Udaipur’s district collector, Arvind Kumar Poswal, claimed that “all rules have been followed”—and one must trust what he says! This is not an isolated incident, of course. Bulldozer justice has been a buzzword for the last few years. Pioneered by Uttar Pradesh, the concept has been pompously copied by other BJP-ruled states. Recently, the house of a Muslim was demolished in Madhya Pradesh after he was allegedly indulged in violence during a protest in Chhatarpur. And who can forget the 2022 Jahangirpuri demolition drive.
The bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan minced no words in saying :"How can a house be demolished just because he is accused? It can't be demolished even if he's convict.." In response to this irrefutable observation, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh, agreed that "no immovable property can be demolished because the owner/occupant is involved in offense." He, however, defended the state government’s actions, saying, “notices for violations were sent to the persons, and since they did not respond, the unauthorised constructions were demolished following the process in the municipal laws”.
Incidentally, the thin veil of these well-crafted arguments doesn’t seem capable of hiding the disturbing reality of highly erroneous “bulldozer justice” and apparent targeting of individuals belonging to a minority community. Justice is meant to be blind—to be dispensed impartially, without fear or favour. However, when the machinery of the state is used to bulldoze homes and lives based on accusations, before any court of law has pronounced guilt, it violates the very essence of justice. The rule of law is replaced by the rule of the mob, and the state, instead of being a protector of rights, becomes an instrument of oppression. The Supreme Court’s decision to potentially establish nationwide guidelines on demolitions is a crucial step toward reining in this dangerous trend. State government’s must bring positive changes in their intent as well. Vengeful demolitions are not just contrary to law, but also criminal in nature. Following due probe, commensurate compensations must be paid to the individuals whose houses have been unduly demolished.
