Demolitions including house of Afreen Fatima in compliance with law: Uttar Pradesh government to Supreme Court

The Uttar Pradesh (UP) government has defended before the Supreme Court, the recent demolition of houses and other buildings carried out by State authorities in Prayagraj..The government was responding to a plea filed by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind challenging the recent demolition of houses of those who had allegedly participated in protests against BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, after she had made remarks against Prophet MuhammadThe government in its affidavit stated that the Prayagraj demolitions were carried out by Local Development Authority which is an autonomous body from the State government and was a part of their endeavour to free the city of illegal and unauthorised constructions. Specifically regarding the demolition of house of Javed Mohammed, father of Afreen Fatima, the State submitted that the construction was in "violation of Prayagraj Development Authority rules" and that proceedings were initiated much "earlier than the riots" which took place after the remark on the Prophet by suspended BJP leader Nupur Sharma.Jamiat by cherry picking this demolition has attempted to give mala fide colour to a lawful action, it was contended. None of the actual affected parties have approached the Court, it was further pointed out..The affidavit maintained that all actions taken were in compliance with the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973..A bench of Justices AS Bopanna and Vikram Nath had, during the previous hearing, urged the authorities to ensure nothing untoward happens until it hears the matter next..The plea by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, which was filed through advocate Kabir Dixit in an already-pending case before the top court, stated that the demolitions in the State were carried out after protests were held against BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, who had made remarks against Prophet Muhammad and Islam during a television debate, which sparked an international furore.The applicant prayed for directions to the State to ensure that no further demolition exercise of any nature is carried out in the State "without following due process and that any demolition must be done only after adequate notice and opportunity of hearing is given to each of the affected persons."