ForumIAS announcing GS Foundation Program for UPSC CSE 2025-26 from 27th May. Click Here for more information.
Contents
Source: The post is based on the article “Demolitions as state-sanctioned collective punishment” published in The Hindu on 11th August 2023.
Syllabus: GS 2 – Government Policies and Interventions for Development in various sectors and Issues arising out of their Design and Implementation.
Relevance: Issues with state led demolitions drive
News: In Nuh, Haryana, several homes were demolished in neighborhoods by the state government as a form of bulldozer justice following the riots.
The state governments justifies that these demolitions are done to remove “illegal structures” or “encroachments”. However, the courts have highlighted specific procedures for conducting demolitions.
What are the observations of the court regarding demolitions?
Courts have acknowledged that “unauthorized structures” frequently serve as homes for economically disadvantaged and vulnerable individuals, who have been failed by the state in its obligation to provide shelter to all its citizens.
Hence, other than enforcing basic procedural requirements such as adequate notice, courts have emphasized that the administration must conduct a survey before demolitions to assess residents’ eligibility for rehabilitation schemes.
If they are eligible, then rehabilitation should be done before any demolitions.
However, state governments frequently disregard these procedures and conduct demolitions at their own convenience.
For example, last year, it was discovered that the administration had changed the date on a demolition notice to make it seem like they were following the rules.
What do states clarify in carrying demolitions?
The states conduct these demolitions as a way to enact punishment against those linked to riots, attempting a form of frontier justice. They also argue that the courts are slow, frequently grant bail, and are lenient in granting acquittals.
Therefore, in order to calm public outrage, the state must take it upon itself to deliver “justice” outside the bounds of law.
However, despite widespread violation of zoning regulations, it is the vulnerable and marginalized communities that are subjected to demolitions. Additionally, the demolitions are predominantly concentrated in Muslim neighborhoods.
Hence, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana noted that the focused targeting of a specific community resembled ethnic cleansing.
What are the concerns with the state carrying out demolitions?
Bulldozer justice involves collective punishment, penalizing not only the accused before guilt is established but also impacting their innocent family members.
Imposing punishment without establishing guilt, at the discretion of the state, violates the rule of law. The rule of law safeguards individuals from an overreaching state.
Therefore, abandoning the rule of law for frontier justice is the first step towards an authoritarian society, where personal safety, property, and even fundamental rights become subject to the arbitrary decisions of state authorities.
Must Read: Picking Up Peace – on economic costs of riots and Haryana violence was preventable. Why did it happen?
What can be the way ahead?
The responsibility to uphold the rule of law and the Constitution rests with the courts. However, the courts, including the Supreme Court of India, have remained silent for over a year, even accepting the state’s justification for demolitions.
Hence, the recent High Court order of Punjab and Haryana recognizes the unlawful bulldozer justice pattern, potentially initiating the judiciary’s stance against state impunity and upholding fundamental constitutional principles.
