‘Bulldozer justice’: Supreme Court declines to entertain contempt petitions, asks aggrieved parties to approach high courts

The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to entertain a batch of contempt petitions alleging that demolitions were carried out in violation of its 2024 judgment and directed the aggrieved parties to approach the concerned high courts news agency PTI reportedA bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana observed that several issues required examination based on facts and circumstances of individual casesThe top court said it would transfer the records of the proceedings to the high courts concerned and asked them to call for relevant records and if required obtain evidence through district courts to decide all factual issuesClarifying that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the allegations the apex court directed that the interim protection granted by it would continue during the pendency of proceedings before the high courtsHowever the parties would be free to seek modification of the interim orders before the high courts which would decide such applications independently the bench said while requesting the high courts to decide the matters preferably within four monthsDuring the hearing senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi appearing in a matter related to the demolition of mosques in Somnath submitted that there was no encroachment on public land in the caseSenior lawyers allege demolition orders violated SC directionsHe alleged egregious violations of the apex courts directions claiming that authorities acted in disregard of the courts ordersResponding to the submission Chief Justice Surya Kant remarked Primary grievance appears to be that procedure is not being followed You authorities will say it is followed and the other side will say no Why not we order status quo and let the high court decide the sameSenior advocate CU Singh appearing in a contempt matter related to Maharashtra claimed that several demolitions take place after local politicians call for bulldozer actionHe submitted that there were instances where demolitions were allegedly carried out as punitive actionSingh argued that if the court found no contempt had taken place the plea could be dismissedIf Supreme Court does not stand up for its own judgment then I am sorry to say he saidSC reiterates demolition safeguards says due process must be followedJustice Bagchi remarked Judgment cannot be read as a statute Directions are hedged with a caveat These are in the form of reiteration of what statutory rights are thereThis judgment came as conscience of court was shocked There was foundation of presumption of innocence Yes bulldozers need to be used when rule of law is throttled by comfortable corruption between authorities and illegal encroachers added Justice BagchiBut in the guise of implementing law there should not be characterising of individuals It runs against basic tenets Question is whether a person had authorisation and procedure of law was followed Justice Bagchi saidAfter hearing the parties the top court asked them to approach the high courts concernedThe Supreme Court while ruling against bulldozer justice on November 13 2024 had laid down panIndia guidelines on the demolition of properties and said the executive cannot act as a judge declare an accused guilty and demolish his propertyPassing a series of directions the bench had said No demolition should be carried out without a prior show cause notice returnable either in accordance with the time provided by the local municipal laws or within 15 days time from the date of service of such notice whichever is laterSC says demolishing houses of accused persons or convicts without due process is lsquototally unconstitutionalrsquoThe apex court had observed that it would be totally unconstitutional to demolish houses merely because their occupants were accused persons or even convictsWhile pronouncing the judgment the court had said that even after a demolition order was passed affected parties must be given time to challenge the order before an appropriate forumIt had also said that even in cases where people do not wish to challenge a demolition order sufficient time should be given to vacate the premises and make necessary arrangementsWith PTI inputs