The Supreme Court on Friday took strong exception to Gujarat's Khedha municipality threatening to bulldoze a home co-owned by a man facing allegations of trespass. [Javed Ali Mahebubmiya Saiyed v. State of Gujarat and anr].A Bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Sudhanshu Dhulia and SVN Bhatti made it clear that bulldozers cannot run over the law."In a country where actions of the State are governed by the rule of law, the transgression by a family member cannot invite action against other members of the family or their legally constructed residence. Alleged involvement in crime is no ground for demolition of a property," it said.It took note of the fact that the alleged crime is yet to be proved through due legal process in a court of law, and added, "The Court cannot be oblivious to such demolition threats, inconceivable in a nation where law is supreme. Otherwise such actions may be seen as running a bulldozer over the laws of the land.".The Bench sought the response of the Gujarat government in the matter within four weeks, and ordered status quo of the property till then..The Court was hearing a plea by a man who is a co-owner of the property in question, where three generations of his family had been residing for over twenty years.His counsel pointed out that when the criminal complaint was registered on September 1, the municipal authorities threatened to bulldoze his family home..The Supreme Court had on September 2 criticised the trend of demolishing houses or properties of those who are accused of crimes and said that it would issue guidelines to tackle such issues of "bulldozer justice."A Bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan had said that such demolition cannot be allowed solely because a person is accused of a criminal offence..Senior Advocate Iqbal Syed with Advocates Mohammad Aslam, Saroj Kumar Sinha, V Bhandari, Amaan Syed and Vivek Kumar appeared for the petitioner, one Javed Ali Saiyed..[Read order]
The Supreme Court on Friday took strong exception to Gujarat's Khedha municipality threatening to bulldoze a home co-owned by a man facing allegations of trespass. [Javed Ali Mahebubmiya Saiyed v. State of Gujarat and anr].A Bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy, Sudhanshu Dhulia and SVN Bhatti made it clear that bulldozers cannot run over the law."In a country where actions of the State are governed by the rule of law, the transgression by a family member cannot invite action against other members of the family or their legally constructed residence. Alleged involvement in crime is no ground for demolition of a property," it said.It took note of the fact that the alleged crime is yet to be proved through due legal process in a court of law, and added, "The Court cannot be oblivious to such demolition threats, inconceivable in a nation where law is supreme. Otherwise such actions may be seen as running a bulldozer over the laws of the land.".The Bench sought the response of the Gujarat government in the matter within four weeks, and ordered status quo of the property till then..The Court was hearing a plea by a man who is a co-owner of the property in question, where three generations of his family had been residing for over twenty years.His counsel pointed out that when the criminal complaint was registered on September 1, the municipal authorities threatened to bulldoze his family home..The Supreme Court had on September 2 criticised the trend of demolishing houses or properties of those who are accused of crimes and said that it would issue guidelines to tackle such issues of "bulldozer justice."A Bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan had said that such demolition cannot be allowed solely because a person is accused of a criminal offence..Senior Advocate Iqbal Syed with Advocates Mohammad Aslam, Saroj Kumar Sinha, V Bhandari, Amaan Syed and Vivek Kumar appeared for the petitioner, one Javed Ali Saiyed..[Read order]