The Supreme Court, on Monday, pulled up the Uttar Pradesh (UP) government for its “high-handed” demolition of houses in Prayagraj, saying it had shocked its conscience. 

“It shocks our conscience how the residential premises were demolished in a high-handed manner. The manner in which the whole process has been conducted is shocking. Courts cannot tolerate such a process. If we tolerate it in one case, it will continue,” said the Bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan.

According to sources, the demolitions targeting the homes of a lawyer, a professor, and three others in Prayagraj were carried out within 24 hours of issuing notices. The demolition notice was issued on March 1, 2021, served on March 6, 2021, and the demolition was carried out on March 7, 2021. The petitioners’ counsel alleged that the authorities demolished the houses within 24 hours, leaving them no opportunity to challenge the action under Section 27(2) of the UP Urban Planning and Development Act. They argued that the state had wrongly linked their land to gangster-politician Atiq Ahmed, who was killed in 2023.

The petitioners, including advocate Zulfiqar Haider, professor Ali Ahmed, two widows, and another individual, approached the SC after the Allahabad High Court dismissed their plea against the demolition.

Defending the state’s action, Attorney General R Venkataramani said the demolitions followed adequate due process. He added that large-scale illegal occupations had been observed and that it was difficult for the state government to control unauthorised possession.

Venkataramani argued that the first notice was issued on December 8, 2020, followed by notices in January and March 2021. “Therefore, we cannot say that there is no adequate due process. There is adequate due process,” the Attorney General said.

While the state defended its action, the court observed procedural lapses and said the owners were not given enough time to file an appeal.

 “Notice served on March 6, demolition carried out on March 7. Now we will allow them to reconstruct,” said Justice Oka.

The top court Bench noted that the state should have acted fairly by giving the occupants sufficient time to file appeals and hence, it would permit the reconstruction of the demolished homes. However, the court laid down certain conditions:

• They must pay for the reconstruction themselves

• They must give a written undertaking that:

• They will file legal appeals against the original demolition orders within the deadline

• They will not claim any special rights or ownership (equities) over the land simply because they are being allowed to rebuild

• They will not sell or transfer any part of the property to others (no third-party interests)

• If the Court later rejects their appeals, the petitioners must demolish the newly built houses again, at their own expense

To give the petitioners time to submit this undertaking, the matter was adjourned.

Denouncing the trend of state authorities resorting to “bulldozer actions” against persons accused of crimes, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan said, “In recent times, we are witnessing a very disturbing and depressing practice of State authorities using bulldozers to demolish houses and properties of persons accused of committing certain offences.”

While addressing students at Bharatiya Vidyapeeth New Law College, Pune, he expressed concern over such actions where houses are demolished as a form of punishment without any legal trial. He said such measures are akin to bulldozing the Constitution itself.

 “According to me, using a bulldozer to demolish a property is like running a bulldozer over the Constitution. It is a negation of the very concept of rule of law and, if not checked, would destroy the very edifice of our justice delivery system,” Justice Bhuyan said.

Justice Bhuyan also observed that demolishing the home of an accused person causes undue hardship to innocent family members.

It was not the first time the SC had condemned “bulldozer actions” by a state government. The top court has previously criticised states for acting like judges by punishing accused persons awaiting trial through such demolitions.

Recently, a video from an anti-encroachment drive in Ambedkar Nagar’s Jalalpur area in UP surfaced on social media, sparking widespread outrage. The footage shows an eight-year-old girl clutching her books and running away as her shanty is demolished by a bulldozer.