In a defining final judgment, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and the Supreme Court delivered a stern rebuke to what is commonly known as “bulldozer justice”—the punitive demolition of homes as retribution for alleged crimes. This ruling underscores that such actions fly in the face of the rule of law and cannot be justified under the Constitution.
The Court’s decision, prompted by the 2019 unlawful demolition of a home in Uttar Pradesh, solidified that these methods violate the constitutional right to property as enshrined in Article 300A. “Justice through bulldozers is unknown to any civilized system of jurisprudence,” the Court’s judgment warned, stressing that selective demolitions used as retribution risk silencing citizens and destabilizing their homes, which are, after all, their ultimate sanctuaries.
This case stemmed from a 2020 complaint brought to light by Manoj Tibrewal Aakash after his home was demolished in District Maharajganj, reportedly following just a drum-beat announcement with no written notice or documented grounds for the action. Findings revealed that the encroachment, if any, covered only a small area of 3.7 square meters, certainly no justification for a complete demolition.
The bench, consisting of Chief Justice Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra, ruled that the State must compensate the petitioner Rs 25 lakhs and hold responsible officials accountable. Additionally, this judgment laid down clear protocols for State authorities to adhere to before undertaking any demolition for encroachment removal, especially for public projects like road widening.
This landmark case adds to the ongoing national scrutiny of such demolitions. Earlier in September, another Supreme Court bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan issued an interim halt on demolitions, except where approved by the Court. Furthermore, on September 12, a separate bench cautioned against demolition as a response to alleged criminal involvement, highlighting the importance of preserving the rule of law in such matters.
Through this pivotal ruling, the Court has made it unmistakably clear: bulldozer justice holds no place in a nation governed by law, and the voices of citizens cannot be subdued through the threat of losing their homes.
