India’s top court lays down guidelines on ‘bulldozer justice’

India’s top court on Wednesday ruled that state authorities cannot act as judge and jury by demolishing the properties of accused individuals, emphasising that such actions violate the principle of due process and the separation of powers.

The Supreme Court’s judgment, addressing a series of petitions on property demolitions in Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-ruled states, laid down nationwide guidelines aimed at preventing what critics call “bulldozer justice.”

The court’s two-judge bench, comprising justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan, stated that the Executive cannot assume judicial functions by declaring individuals guilty and punishing them through property demolitions.

The bench highlighted that such actions, carried out without due process, not only overstep executive authority but undermine the rule of law. 

The Court stated: “The Executive cannot become a judge, decide that an accused is guilty, and punish him by demolishing his properties.”

Rights groups and opposition parties have condemned the practice, claiming that it disproportionately targets poor Muslims, bypassing established judicial procedures. BJP-led state governments have rejected accusations of bias, arguing that demolitions targeted illegal structures with due notices. 

However, the Supreme Court ruled that demolitions of properties solely on the basis of accusations contravene the fundamental principles of natural justice.

In its 95-page verdict, the bench described the sight of bulldozers demolishing properties without adhering to legal principles as a “chilling sight” and reminiscent of a “lawless state of affairs.” It warned that such arbitrary actions create a dangerous precedent where the “might is right” approach prevails, which is unconstitutional and unacceptable.

The court emphasised that the principles of a fair trial and the presumption of innocence are core to the legal system, stating, “An accused is not guilty unless proven so in a court of law.” It asserted that demolitions without following due process infringe on the right to a fair trial and compromise individual liberties.

To address these issues, the court mandated specific guidelines, including prior notice and video documentation of the demolition process. 

The Bench noted: “Even in cases involving death sentences, safeguards exist to ensure fair proceedings. The punishment of property demolition cannot be imposed on those merely accused or convicted without adhering to statutory requirements.”

The court called for accountability among public officials engaging in such actions, stressing that executive powers must be exercised within the bounds of the law and public trust. As the BJP had not issued an immediate response to the court’s decision, it remains to be seen how these guidelines will be implemented across states.