ABSTRACT
In recent years, the concept of “bulldozer justice” has gained attention in India as a controversial method of dealing with alleged or suspected rioters, vandals, stone pelters, minorities or the ones accused of any crime. This practice involves the demolition of properties linked to individuals accused of criminal activities, and it is often referred to as the instant justice mechanism that is propagated by the government of several states to punish the alleged rioters, protestors or criminals by demolishing their houses, stalls or any construction with the use of force. This action taken is often without due legal process. While intended to act as an instant response to unlawful acts, bulldozer justice raises various concerns regarding its compatibility with established legal and ethical standards. Some view it as an act of prevention to avoid others from participating in unlawful activities, they accept it as a system of giving instant justice as opposed to the slow process of the judiciary. Although legally, it sidesteps essential judicial principles, such as the right to a fair trial, and fundamental rights under the Constitution of India and undermines the rule of law. Ethically, the approach raises issues related to collective punishment, the disproportionate impact on vulnerable groups, and the potential abuse or misuse of power by authorities. However, many strongly believe that bulldozing properties not only renders the accused homeless but also their family members who reside in it and they believe that the family members should not be punished for the crime committed by one of them. In many cases, the bulldozing of properties had been challenged in the courts as being illegal. While some view bulldozer justice as a deterrent, however some argue such acts weaken the foundation of the justice system, and civil rights, and threaten the integrity of the judicial system. This paper will be analyzing various facts and cases leading to bulldozing of properties. And an attempt to find the effects of bulldozer justice on the legal and ethical landscape in India, highlighting its implications for justice and human rights.
KEYWORDS:
Bulldozer justice, instant justice, demolition, rule of law, human right, natural justice, collective punishment, separation of power.
INTRODUCTION
Every civilized society and its legal system recognize the sanctity of human life as the fundamental of human social value. Every person is entitled to live their life on their own terms without any interference from others. A successful democracy guarantees citizens its right to the protection of life and liberty. In India, the protection of life and personal liberty is granted under Part III of the Indian Constitution. These rights are cherished by the citizens as it grants protection against the state i.e.; no act of any state authority can violate any such rights of the citizens. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law”, also known as Right to life and personal liberty.
Recently in India demolitions of homes or properties often without due legal process, targeting marginalized communities or alleged criminals has gained popularity as ‘Bulldozer Justice’, use of this Justice system has been subjected to controversies, protest, clashes and political games. It is referred to as razing down of houses, huts, stalls, or any structure without a proper procedure of law. Even if the demolitions are claimed to be lawful, targeting specific individuals undermines the core principles of Articles 13, 14, 21, and 300A of the Indian Constitution. Demolishing the homes of accused persons without providing an opportunity for defines or proving their guilt violates fundamental principles of natural justice, including the presumption of innocence until proven guilty and the right to be heard (audi alteram partem). Hence, punishing family members of the accused by razing their houses is a ‘kin punishment’. In order to punish an alleged criminal, there is a due process of law that is to be followed under Rule of law, which means that the administrative actions of the authorities should follow a due procedure of law. In Chief Settlement Commissioner Punjab v. Om PrakashThe SC held that the rule of law is the most distinguished feature of our constitution, which means that the authority of the courts to verify the administrative actions by the standard legality. In Som Raj v. State of Haryana, it was observed that discretionary power exercised without due process and caution becomes antithesis to the concept of Rule of law. Further, in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, The SC observed that due process is a vital component of Right to Life and Liberty under Article 21 demanding states action to be fair, reasonable, and transparent. Bulldozer Justice bypasses all the legal process depriving individuals of their property and shelter, making it a clear example of misuse of state power.
In 1985, the case of Olga Tellis & Ors. v. Bombay Municipal Corporation & Ors. the court emphasised on the necessity of issuing a legal notice. The hon’ble court also observed the opportunity to be heard is a necessary before the process of evicting residents of an illegal slum or pavement. Bulldozer Justice is a problem that represents the misuse of administrative authority in a way that violates the legal principles and individuals’ rights. It involves demolition of houses, businesses, and properties by the authorities bypassing the due legal process which is an arbitrary action of the authorities, eventually leading to erosion of trust in legal institutions.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The researcher will adopt a doctrinal and socio-legal approach to analyse the practice of bulldozer justice in India. Primary sources, including constitutional provisions, legal doctrines, statutory frameworks, and landmark judgments, will be utilized to establish the legal foundation for examining the legal and ethical issues associated with such practices. Additionally, secondary sources such as reports, academic articles, essays, and newspaper analyses will be employed to contextualize the broader legal, social, and ethical dimensions of the issue.
By integrating primary and secondary data, the researcher aims to investigate the legal and ethical challenges surrounding bulldozer justice in India. Primary sources will facilitate a thorough analysis of the legal frameworks and foundational principles, while secondary sources will help identify and assess the socio-economic impacts and ethical concerns associated with these practices. This dual approach enables a comprehensive examination of the issue, highlighting areas for reform and alignment with justice and human rights.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Recently, India has witnessed many instances of a popular practice of bulldozer justice. In 2022 a report ‘Demolishing Rights’ was published by Human Rights Watch which provided a detailed analysis of forced evictions in Indian cities. The report emphasizes the importance of international human rights standards in evaluating the legality of these practices and adherence to global human rights norms, such as those in the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), to ensure fair and humane practices. Further the report highlighted the following issues:
Procedural Violations: The report emphasized on the widespread procedural lapses, including lack of prior notice, hearings, or transparency in demolition drives
Absence of Rehabilitation: Displaced individuals are seldom offered alternative housing or support thus resulting in homelessness, disrupted livelihoods, and increase in socio-economic vulnerabilities.
Targeting Vulnerable Communities: Marginalized groups, including low-income families, Dalits, Muslims, and tribal communities, are disproportionately affected, often driven by communal or political motivations.
In the year 2022 the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) submitted a report The Illegality of Bulldozer Justice: A Case Study of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh which critically examined the practice of bulldozer justice in India through detailed case studies from Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. The report (PUCL, 2022) has highlighted the similar concerns as the HRW report such as procedural violations, targeted marginalization, rights violations, need for accountability and rehabilitation. However, (PUCL 2022) report focuses only on the case studies from Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. It emphasized on the illegality and discriminatory nature of demolition drives from a legal and constitutional lens. Further the report emphasizes upon the need for a robust legal framework and intervention of judiciary in safeguarding the fundamental rights under Art 14 and Art 21.
In 2023, Amnesty International India in their report Breaking Homes, Breaking Lives highlighted the human rights perspective on demolition drives, focussing on their impact on the displaced communities. It criticises the practice as it impacts the socio-economic rights of the individuals which include the right to livelihood and housing. Further the report emphasized on the need for a right based approach to secure justice.
United Nations Habitat report “Forced Evictions and Human Rights: A Global Perspective” report outlines international human rights standards for addressing forced evictions. It offers a comparative framework to evaluate India’s demolition practices against global norms, emphasizing the need for accountability and inclusive urban governance. Similarly in the article, author Dr Usha Ramanathan examines the issue of forced evictions and its relationship with the rule of law. It examines the legal and human rights implications of evictions, emphasizing the need for legal protections against arbitrary displacement. The author advocates for adherence to due process, including prior notice, adequate compensation, and the right to appeal. It underscores the importance of safeguarding vulnerable populations from violations of their rights, ensuring that evictions are conducted lawfully and justly.
Sunil Kumar in his article critiques “bulldozer justice,” where authorities demolish accused individuals’ properties without due process, undermining the rule of law and targeting specific communities. Justified as swift action, it diverts attention from systemic failures like poor investigations and judicial delays, deepening social divisions. The piece calls for legal safeguards, accountability through tort law, and public debate to uphold justice and prevent such reckless actions.
Pujari Dharani in his article, “Bulldozer: An Instant Justice”, reflects upon various facets of bulldozer justice in India. He criticises these trends and opines through his article that these drives often bypass the constitutional safeguards, and thus violating Art 14 and Art 21 of the Constitution of India. He further states that such drives affect the due process of law. Further, he further emphasizes upon the misuse or abuse of discretionary powers of the executive and the need of judicial intervention to ensure the check on such an instant justice system. The author highlights the importance of upholding the values of due process of law, equality, justice and dignity. The author also examines the practice of bulldozer justice from a perspective of ‘retributive and reformative justice’ in India. Further, the author also reflects upon the idea of ‘justice hurried vs. justice denied’ and warns against conflating “instant justice” with revenge, advocating for a fair and timely justice system.
It has been seldom noticed that the bulldozer justice has also been used as a tool for communal targeting. Dr. Shadab Munawar Moosa, Demolition as Domination: The Dark Legacy of Bulldozer Culture in India examines the ethical dilemmas of bulldozer justice, particularly its use as a tool for communal targeting. He argues that these practices disproportionately affect the marginalised communities particularly Muslims and thus reinforcing communal stereotypes. Ahmed argues that such practices affect the public trust in governance. The article emphasizes the need for ethical governance that upholds the values of accountability and procedural fairness.
Thus, in India, bulldozer-led demolitions are being used as a form of punishment without following proper legal processes. These actions often target individuals based on unproven accusations or their identity, especially from minority communities. While officials claim these demolitions are routine enforcement of laws, they are widely seen as politically motivated acts to intimidate dissenters and “set an example”. This practice ignores basic principles of justice, like fairness and due process, and undermines public trust in institutions like the police, judiciary, and bureaucracy, which appear influenced by politics. The demolitions are portrayed as harsh punishments for crimes that haven’t been proven, making a mockery of the rule of law. Instead of ensuring justice, this approach uses public punishment to silence critics and maintain control, creating a dangerous shift where punishment seems more important than following the law.
Gautam Bhatia in his article examines the Supreme Court’s judgment on punitive home demolitions. The judgment established guidelines to uphold due process, including mandatory notice periods, hearings, and mechanisms for holding officials accountable for wrongful demolitions. Further, it specifically rejects the idea of the demolition of homes belonging to accused individuals without following legal procedures and incorporates the doctrine of proportionality to limit the power of the administrative authority. However, the judgement notably excludes protections for constructions on public land, leaving marginalized communities at risk. He emphasizes that the judgment is a crucial step towards curbing “bulldozer raj” and protecting citizens’ rights.
REASONS FOR THE GROWTH OF BULLDOZER JUSTICE IN INDIA
The growth of bulldozer justice in India can be attributed to several factors. Largely, it has emerged as a political tool, especially used by political parties to demonstrate control. It has been observed that the political leadership’s association of bulldozers with strong governance plays a crucial role in the continuing practice. This practice has become a means to lure common people during elections by showcasing strong action against the alleged anti-social elements. Many of the times it has been also used as a response to communal violence. This practice has been highly questioned as it was observed that the state resorts to demolitions in predominantly Muslim areas. The targeting of these communities has been criticized as a form of collective punishment. However, the state has justified such actions on the grounds of demolishing illegal constructions or properties connected to criminal activity, but many researchers argue that this becomes an instrument for social and political dominance.
On the other hand, many people favour this practice as they argue that this is a means for instant justice. The Indian legal system is often regarded as slow and inefficient, demolitions conducted by bulldozers bypass regular judicial processes. Even though this undermines the principle of due process and rule of law, it provides a quick and extrajudicial form of retribution. Therefore, improper judicial order and administration’s accountability is one of the core reasons for the controversial nature of this method.
It has been also observed that the media has played a significant role in glorifying bulldozer justice in India. They have often showcased these demolitions as necessary means for maintaining law and order. The media has contributed significantly in normalizing this practice in the eyes of the public.
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BULLDOZER JUSTICE IN INDIA
Bulldozer justice represents a significant challenge to the Constitutional framework of India, posing a serious threat to the fundamental rights of its citizens. In India, ownership of a home or property is regarded as a vital asset owned by very few. Such arbitrary demolitions without prior judicial orders violate the principle of natural justice. Such actions set a dangerous precedent, undermining the accountability of the state and eroding the vital safeguard of judicial scrutiny over governmental actions.
A review of the literature indicates that bulldozer justice disproportionately affects vulnerable communities and castes, particularly in states like Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, where it is often associated with communal violence. This selective approach exacerbates the social marginalization of minorities and deepens existing societal divisions. Comparable practices can be observed in other countries, such as Israel, where bulldozers are used to demolish Palestinian homes. In both instances, the bulldozer transcends its role as a mere construction tool, emerging instead as a symbol of state-sanctioned oppression.
Bulldozer justice has deep psychological ramifications, especially for the affected communities and individuals. The destruction of homes or properties leads to long-term displacement and trauma. It fosters fear and insecurity, where the affected people feel vulnerable to arbitrary action of the state authorities without any legal protection. This strengthens the system of the existing inequalities, making it difficult for affected communities to thrive economically and socially. Not only does it have an impact of the individuals and the communities but also it raises questions on the democratic set-up of India. Such excess use of power by the state, through extrajudicial actions like demolitions, challenges the very foundation of democratic values. The downfall of due process disrupts the rule of law, leading to a weakening of public trust in state authorities and the judiciary.
SUGGESTIONS
In order to control the and prevent the demolition drives in India there is a need to have a clear legal framework and judicial orders. Very recently the Supreme Court on November 14, 2024 in the case of In Re: Directions in the matter of Demolition of Structures v. and Ors. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has played a crucial role in dismantling the practice of ‘bulldozer justice’. The Court has emphasized that demolitions should only occur when absolutely necessary, such as in cases of illegal structures associated with criminal activity, and not as a method of collective punishment. The apex court has specifically condemned such actions as instances of administrative overreach, describing them as anarchy and lawlessness. The effective implementation of the guidelines set forth by the Supreme Court will be critical in preventing the recurrence of such practices in the future.
The State must also ensure that such practices are not community driven to strengthen the deep-rooted inequalities. They must also ensure that such practices do not disproportionately affect marginalized communities, particularly those from religious or caste minorities. There should be strict monitoring to prevent any biases in the execution of demolition orders.
The State should be transparent and accountable for the actions done by them so that there is no question of misuse or abuse of powers by administrative authorities.
Lastly, the state must provide rehabilitation measures in cases where demolitions were carried out which has affected individuals and families. Further the states must compensate for their losses and support for rebuilding their lives.
CONCLUSION
The Bulldozer Justice is a violation of constitutionalism and rule of law and a result of failure of natural justice. The act of bulldozing the house of citizens without observing due procedure laid down by the law is against the sanctity of a democratic nation. This act is not only against the basic principle of the constitution of India but is also against the morality and natural justice principle. The shocking part in this act is that it successfully gathered support of the mass population of the country. People in India are celebrating this illegal act of the authorities in the name of religion. Large groups of people look towards it as success and promotion of religion. Whereas in fact this act directly violates the fundamental right of the Indian Constitution. Where the authorities are trying to become the judge and jury who wants to decide the matter on the spot without respecting the due process laid down by the law. The solution to the bulldozer justice system in India is a judicial Intervention. Retired Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud has strongly denounced the concept of ‘Bulldozer Justice’, saying “Bulldozer justice is simply unacceptable under the rule of law. If it were to be permitted the constitutional recognition of the right to property under Article 300A would be reduced to a dead letter,”. As a safeguard of the Indian Constitution the judiciary must realize that demolition without due procedure of law is against constitutional morality.
Author name: Anurag Ogale
College name: Symbiosis Law School Pune.