Rights advocates in India are looking to a Supreme Court hearing October 1 in hopes of a permanent ban on so-called bulldozer justice, in which state governments frequently demolish the homes of people — often Muslims — who have been accused of crimes.
After hearing a batch of petitions against punitive demolitions on Tuesday, the justices ordered that until the October 1 hearing, “there shall be no demolition anywhere across the country without seeking leave” of the court.
According to the Housing and Land Rights Network, more than 153,000 homes have been demolished in the past few years by state governments, displacing about 738,000 people.
State and local governments often justify the action by saying the buildings were unsafe or illegally constructed, but the demolitions often target individuals who have been accused but not convicted of crimes. Many of the demolitions have taken place in states ruled by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, or BJP.
Meenakshi Ganguly, deputy director of the Asia Division of Human Rights Watch, said Indian authorities are using “summary and abusive punishments against people, mostly Muslims,” by demolishing their properties.
“This violates the basic principle of justice. In courts, government lawyers claim that the properties were illegal. But it is unlawful to arbitrarily demolish properties without due process,” Ganguly told VOA.
“Yet, shockingly several BJP leaders have openly said that they believe in such bulldozer justice.”
Former Indian Supreme Court Justice Madan Lokur told VOA in an interview that in his view, the residential houses are being demolished as a form of collective punishment without the sanction of law.
“Houses are demolished on suspicion of being encroachments or being illegally constructed. Residential houses cannot be constructed overnight. Were the municipal authorities sleeping when the alleged illegal construction was going on? Surely, they are guilty of dereliction of duty,” Lokur said.
After firebrand monk and Hindu nationalist BJP leader Yogi Adityanath became the chief minister of the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, or UP, in 2017, he declared that he would make the state crime-free. Adityanath asked his officials to take the “strictest possible actions against all criminals” in the state.
Soon, the police and other civic officials in UP started taking “anti-criminal” actions, including the demolition of illegal constructions.
In 2022, after Nupur Sharma, a BJP spokesperson, made an allegedly offensive comment against the Prophet Muhammad, Muslims in UP staged a protest rally. Soon after, the state authorities demolished many houses and shops owned by those who had taken part in the rally.
The same year, after communal tension broke out between Hindus and Muslims in the BJP-ruled state of Madhya Pradesh, the authorities pulled down at least 50 houses and shops — all owned by Muslims.
Over the past few years, houses, shops and other “illegal” structures owned by accused criminals, communal violence rioters and others have been demolished in states including UP, MP, Haryana, Assam and Maharashtra — in most cases where the BJP was in power.
Over the past two years, Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, a leading organization of Islamic scholars in India, filed multiple petitions to the Supreme Court seeking orders to prevent governments from demolishing homes or shops as a form of extrajudicial punishment.
While hearing one petition filed by Rashid Khan, a Muslim autorickshaw driver, the court observed on September 2 that punitive demolitions cannot be justified, even if the property belongs to someone accused or convicted of a crime.
On August 17, authorities demolished Khan’s one-story house in Udaipur, in Rajasthan state, which he had rented out to two families.
Khan, who filed a petition with the Supreme Court last month seeking compensation from the state, said he believes his home was targeted in a punitive action because the 15-year-old son of one of his Muslim tenants had been accused of stabbing his Hindu classmate to death on August 16.
On September 13, while hearing another petition, the court observed: “Running a bulldozer on the property of an accused is akin to bulldozing the law of the land.”
The court noted that it does not oppose the demolition of unauthorized structures. But it said the demolitions are not being carried out in accordance with proper procedures.
“First issue notice, give time to answer and seek legal remedies, before going for demolition,” the court said, adding that it would soon issue national guidelines on the demolition of illegal structures.
