Abstract
The act of bulldozing the houses of alleged criminals without a judicial process—known popularly as “bulldozer justice”—has generated much legal and constitutional debate within India. This research article discusses the growing phenomenon of punitive demolitions by the state, largely in Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, impacting communities marginalized by the state and bypassing due process of law. By citing recent Supreme Court judgments, led by the historic November 2024 judgment, the paper discusses how these demolitions amount to a violation of fundamental rights that are assured by the Indian Constitution (Articles 14, 21, 300A, and 51) forms the foundation of this study. The paper explores the importance of safeguarding the right to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence, and the rule of law. It highlights concerns such as executive overreach, lack of transparency, and the human suffering
caused by demolition activities. The paper emphasizes the need for strict adherence to judicial guidelines, the establishment of monitoring bodies, public awareness, and the provision of compensation to victims as key recommendations for reform.
Keywords
Bulldozer justice, right to shelter, due process of law, illegal demolition, executive overreach, rule of law.
Introduction
“Law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and when they fail in this purpose, they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress.”
— Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
“Bulldozer justice” is the term used to describe the practice of knocking down the property of t accused criminals or riot participants with bulldozers, often without adhering to due legal process. The term symbolizes instant punitive action by the state, bypassing judicial adjudication and procedural safeguards. This practice has been reported in various Indian states, including Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Assam, and Maharashtra. The Supreme Court of India (SC) criticized the practice of “bulldozer justice,” highlighting that demolishing properties based on criminal allegations against individuals or their family members violates the rule of law. The executive’s action to demolish the house of an accused amounts to a breach of the separation of powers, which is the basic structure of the Indian Constitution.
“Bulldozer justice” is a gross violation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution,[1] which guarantees the right to life—of which the right to shelter is a basic component. The courts have observed that demolishing the homes or properties of individuals who do not have any link or connection to a crime is nothing short of anarchy and amounts to a serious breach of constitutional rights.
Justice Gavai remarked, “It is not a happy sight to see women, children and the aged persons dragged to the streets overnight,”.[2] Destroying a home—built over a lifetime with hard-earned money—within seconds and without due legal process is entirely unjust and illegal. No authority has the right to demolish houses unlawfully. It is the judiciary’s duty to decide punishment, not the role of the state or central governments. Such actions are a violation of the rule of law and the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution.
This research paper explores the troubling rise of “bulldozer justice” in India, where the homes of individuals accused of crimes is demolished by the state without following proper legal procedures. It contends that such acts are a serious violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and shelter, and also pose a serious threat to the rule of law, justice, and human dignity. The paper focuses on the critical question of the role of the state and the constitutional limits of executive power in a democratic society.
Research methodology
This research paper 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 judgements, will utilized to establish the legal and ethical issues associated with such practices. It closely examines the principle of the rule of law, the doctrine of separation of powers, and critically examines Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This article ensures the right to life and personal liberty, which includes the right to shelter. The research uses different secondary sources, such as newspapers, academic journals, legal commentaries, and credible websites. It explores how these constitutional principles are being interpreted or violated during state-led demolition drives in India.
Review of literature
The Beginning of Bulldozer Justice in India
It all started with the speech of CM Yogi Adityanath in 2017, in which he said that “my government will bulldoze houses of anyone even thinking of perpetuating crime against women and weaker sections of society.”[3] Thereafter, several properties of criminals and various gangsters were demolished by the Uttar Pradesh government. In result of this, he also earned a nickname “Bulldozer Baba.” Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister also termed as “Bulldozer Mama” after the alleged demolition activities in the state following a communal clash. Even the BJP MP from Mathura, Hema Malini, said that “nothing can come in front of a bulldozer” [4] after the party crossed the majority threshold in 202 assembly constituencies in Uttar Pradesh.
According to Patenge Chathrapathi, in their article “Bulldozer Justice: Landmark Ruling on Property Demolitions,”[5] the practice of bulldozer justice was initiated by the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh in 2017 who warned that the houses of individuals involved in crimes would be demolished by bulldozer. Following this, numerous illegal demolitions took place across the state by the UP government, who claimed that they were part of removing illegal constructions from the state. Recently, in a suo-motu writ petition of 2020, the Supreme Court ordered to pay Rs. 25 lakhs as compensation for demolishing the house of Manoj Tibrewal Akash, a senior journalist in UP, citing that the journalist’s home was built through encroachment. The reason given by the authority is that the journalist’s home is built by encroachment. Supreme Court declaring Bulldozer justice is unconstitutional and also issued several guidelines relating to Bulldozer justice. Bulldozer justice is against Article 14, Article 21, Article 300A and Article 51.[6] The Court observed that it is unacceptable under the rule of law.
In 2022, the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh ordered the authorities to demolish houses and shops. Following the order of the CM, North Delhi Municipal Corporation sent seven bulldozers to demolish the mentioned houses and shops in the area, which included a mosque. This was the primary reason for the clashes that began in the state. According to a report released by the
Housing and Land Rights Network (HLRN),[7] more than half a million people were evicted in 2023, the highest number in the last 7 years. From 2017 to 2023, over 1.38 million (1.68lakh) people were forcibly evicted across India.
Bulldozing Homes Is Bulldozing the Constitution: Judicial Condemnation and the Right to Shelter
Justice Ujjal Bhuyan of the Supreme Court of India made a powerful remark, saying, ” Bulldozing homes is like bulldozing the Constitution,”[8]in response to the increasing trend of extra-legal demolitions carried out by state authorities. While addressing law students at Bharatiya Vidyapeeth’s New Law College in Pune, he stated that such actions constitute a direct assault on constitutional values, the rule of law, and the fundamental rights of citizens. Justice Bhuyan referenced a recent Supreme Court ruling that declared such demolition drives illegal and emphasized the importance of upholding the presumption of innocence and the rights of the accused until proven guilty.
A key constitutional principle violated by such actions is Article 21, which guarantees the Right to Life, and has been consistently interpreted by Indian courts to include the Right to Shelter. This right has evolved to encompass not just physical housing, but also the broader elements of dignified living—such as security, access to essential services, privacy, and stability.
In December 2022, after a woman’s house in Bihar was demolished by the police without following due procedure, allegedly at the instance of a land mafia, the Patna High Court reprimanded the police. “Whom do you represent, the state or some private person?” Justice Sandeep Kumar exclaimed. “Tamasha bana diya ki kisi ka bhi ghar bulldozer se tod denge.” [9] You are making theatrics out of demolishing someone’s home with a bulldozer, he said.
Key Judicial Precedents Supporting the Right to Shelter
Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985):[10] A landmark judgment where the Supreme Court recognized that the right to livelihood is an integral part of the right to life, and that forced evictions without rehabilitation violate this right. The Court ruled that the eviction of slum dwellers.
In P. G. Gupta v. State of Gujarat ,[11] a bench of three judges of this Court, considering the mandate of human right to shelter, read it into Article 19(1)(e) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India to guarantee the right to residence and settlement.
For every human being, it is necessary to have suitable accommodation so that he and his family can grow in every aspect. The right to shelter includes adequate living space as well as a safe and decent structure. Thus, the right to shelter is an essential requisite to the right to life.
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan (1996):[12] The Court reiterated that pavement dwellers and slum residents cannot be forcibly evicted without ensuring alternative accommodation, reinforcing the State’s duty to provide dignified housing, even on public land.
These cases firmly establish that the Right to Shelter is inseparable from human dignity, and any arbitrary or punitive demolition carried out without notice, a fair hearing, or resettlement is a direct violation of constitutional mandates and established judicial standards.
Landmark Supreme Court Judgement on Bulldozer Demolitions (2024)
On 13 November 2024, the Supreme Court of India, in a landmark ruling titled In Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of structures,[13] addressed the ongoing misuse of state power through punitive demolitions. The Court condemned the arbitrary destruction of homes of individuals accused of crimes without following due legal procedure, calling it a gross violation of fundamental rights under Articles 19, 21, and the principles of natural justice.
Justice B.R. Gavai, leading the division bench with Justice K.V. Viswanathan, noted that bulldozer demolitions infringe upon the right to shelter, emphasizing:
A house is not just a property but embodies the collective hopes of a family or individuals for stability, security, and a future.” He further added, “Depriving such innocent people of their right to life by removing shelter from their heads, in our considered view, would be wholly unconstitutional.” [13]
The bench issued comprehensive pan-India guidelines under Article 142 of the Constitution to ensure due process is followed before demolitions, warning that non-compliance will be treated as contempt of court. The ruling was in response to widespread and growing concerns over state-led demolitions without proper notice, hearing, or judicial oversight—most notably revived by the Rashid Khan case in Rajasthan.
Supreme Court Guidelines for Demolition
1. A minimum of 15 days prior notice should be given to the land owner or the occupier with detailed reasons i.e., why the house is going to be demolished.
2. An opportunity for a fair hearing should be provided compulsorily to the affected party due to the decision to contest or to clarify the situation of demolition.
3. The concerned authorities should notify the local Collector or the District Magistrate through E-mail after serving the notice, with an acknowledgment of auto-reply to the mail, this is to avoid tampering.
4. The order should contain the arguments of the affected part. If the decision is to demolish, it should be mentioned why they chose to demolish the property and if there are any other options.
5. After the issuance of the demolition order, 15 days’ time should be given to the affected party as they can remove the structure in the property or they can challenge the same before a higher authority.
6. There should be clear documentation of the whole demolition i.e., authorities should record the demolition process and also prepare the inspection report of the demolition.
7. Laid down a separate test to determine that the right of the accused is violated along with local laws i.e., if the accused house is only demolished by leaving similar houses around him, then it is surely a violation.
8. SC given exceptions for the guidelines, where they do not apply: They are 9. Unauthorized Construction in a public place.
10. An order issued by Court of Law directing for demolition.
The Supreme Court directed state governments to circulate these guidelines to all District Magistrates and local authorities to ensure compliance.
The Reasoning given by the Court:
1. There should be a Separation of Powers. The executive should not take the law into the hands and impose punishment. Imposing punishment is the work of the Judiciary.
2. There is a clear violation of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution which says the Right to Equality and Rule of Law.
3. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution is violated which says the Right to Shelter and dignified life are part of the Right to Life.
4. No person shall be deprived of property except the law specified under Article 300A of the Indian Constitution.
“Insights from Legal Scholars on the Unconstitutionality of Punitive Demolitions”
Several scholars have critically examined the phenomenon of bulldozer justice and its legal implications. Gautam Bhatia, in his article,[14] analyzes the Supreme Court’s recent judgment on punitive demolitions, emphasizing that the verdict establishes vital guidelines to prevent arbitrary State action and reinforces the necessity of due process. Pujari Dharani, in his article “Bulldozer: An Instant Justice,”[15] argues that such executive actions violate Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution and represent a misuse of discretionary powers, undermining the principle of procedural fairness.
Dr. Shadab Munawar Moosa, in “Demolition as Domination,”[16] critiques these practices as systematically targeting marginalized communities, particularly Muslims, and portrays them as instruments of State dominance that go beyond law enforcement to reflect majoritarian power structures. Collectively, these scholars highlight the erosion of legal safeguards and democratic accountability in the face of politically driven demolition drives.
Parul Raghuvanshi, Assistant Professor of Law, in her article “Injustice: Indian Supreme Court Curtails Arbitrary Demolitions,” observes that “justice through bulldozing is unknown to any civilized society.”[17] She notes that between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2023, over 740,000 people lost their homes due to State-driven, punitive, and arbitrary demolitions. Specifically, in 2023 alone, 107,449 homes were demolished and over 515,000 people evicted
across India.
Raghuvanshi argues that the executive has extended demolition not just to illegal or unauthorized constructions, but also to residential homes of individuals merely accused of crimes—often based on religious bias or communal suspicion. She contends that such actions violate two fundamental principles of justice:
1. The presumption of innocence—that no person should be punished until found guilty through due process.
2. The prohibition of collective punishment—that individuals should not be penalized for the alleged acts of others, such as family members.
She cites examples such as the demolition of Afreen Fatima’s home, based on allegations against her father, and another case involving a viral video of a man urinating on a tribal worker, where the accused’s house was demolished within days, despite legal action already being underway. In both cases, no notice was served nor was adequate time given to challenge the demolition, thus violating the principle of procedural fairness.
In support of this position, a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices A.S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, in a judgment dated March 31, 2025, condemned the Uttar Pradesh Government for razing homes without due process. The Court termed the action “inhuman” and ordered ₹1,000,000 as compensation to each affected family. The bench was particularly moved by a
viral video showing a young girl crying beside the rubble of her demolished home, calling the visuals deeply disturbing.[17]
Recent judgement
In a judgment of year 2019 Supreme Court underscored the need of due procedure in carrying out demolition activity. It was also observed by Supreme Court that the exercise of power of demolition which affects the property of the citizen of this country must be exercised in an absolutely fair and transparent manner.
In Radha Langri and Anr v. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Ujjain and Ors[18] , Madhya Pradesh high court observed that “it has become fashionable now for local administration and local bodies to demolish any house by drawing up proceedings without complying with the Principal of Natural Justice and publish it in the newspaper. It appears that in this case also the criminal case was registered against one of the family members of the petitioners and demolition activities were carried out.”
In recent case of Javed Ali Mahebub Miya Saiyed v. State of Gujarat & Ors [19] while passing an interim order against bulldozing properties Supreme Court observed that “in a country where action of state are governed by the rule of law, the transgression by a family member cannot invite action against other members of the family or their legally constructed residence. Alleged involvement in crime is no ground for demolition of a property. Moreover the alleged crime has to be proved through due legal process in a Court of law. The Court cannot be oblivious to such demolition threats inconceivable in a Nation where law is supreme. Otherwise such actions may be seen as running a bulldozer over the laws of the land.”
Further in the case of Jamiat Ulama I Hind v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation [20] while staying demolition activities in the country the apex court propose to lay down certain guidelines on a pan India basis for dealing with demolition activities.
SUGGESTION
In order to control and prevent arbitrary demolition drives in India, authorities must strictly adhere to the guidelines recently issued by the Supreme Court in November 2024, which aim to prevent the misuse of power. Public awareness campaigns should be conducted to inform citizens of their rights and the remedies available to them in case of illegal actions by authorities.
A monitoring body should be established to oversee all demolition activities and ensure compliance with due process. The State must function transparently and remain accountable for its actions, ensuring that there is no misuse or abuse of power by administrative authorities. If any administrative authority is found misusing or abusing their powers, strict legal action should be taken against them.
Finally, the State must compensate individuals whose homes have been illegally demolished and provide adequate support for rebuilding their lives.
Conclusion
Home demolition as a form of punishment—without any legal procedure—constitutes an outright attack on the constitutional values of justice, equality, and the rule of law. As highlighted in this paper, these evictions, commonly seen in states like Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, have had a devastating impact on vulnerable communities and signal a dangerous travesty of executive authority.
Through the review of Supreme Court judgments, especially the landmark ruling in November 2024, it is clear that the judiciary acknowledges the violation of Articles 14, 21, 300A, and 51 of the Constitution. The Court’s intervention and guidelines are not only timely but also necessary to limit arbitrary state actions that bypass fair trials, ignore the presumption of innocence, and cause irreparable harm to innocent families.
Even though the legal clarity is present, implementation on the ground remains weak. Administrative authorities continue to act beyond their constitutional limits. This paper shows that bulldozer justice is not just a policy failure; it is a human rights crisis that undermines democratic accountability and targets the vulnerable without lawful justification.
There is an urgent need for strong mechanisms to ensure accountability, transparency, and compliance with judicial directions. The state must fulfill its duty to act within the law, protect the dignity and rights of its citizens, and provide remedies, including compensation and rehabilitation, for those whose homes have been unlawfully demolished. Justice cannot be served through fear or force; it must be based on fairness, legality, and humanity.
Constitutional Provisions
[1] & [6]
India Const. art. 21.
India Const. art. 21.
India Const. art. 51.
India Const. art. 300A
Cases law
[10]Olga Tellis v. Bombay Mun. Corp., (1985) 3SCC 545
[11] P.G. Gupta v. State of Gujarat, (1995) Supp. (2) SCC 182; 1995 SCC (L&S) 782; 1995 (30) ATC 47; 1995 (2) JT 373 (India).
[12] Ahmedabad Mun. Corp. v. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan, (1996) SCC 123
[18] Radha Langri & Anr. v. Comm’r, Mun. Corp. Ujjain & Ors., W.P. No. 744 of 2023 (M.P. High Ct. 2024).
[19] Javed Ali Mahebub Miya Saiyed v. State of Gujarat & Ors., W.P. (Civ.) Diary No. 41707/2024 (India Sup. Ct. 2024).
[20]Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind v. North Delhi Mun. Corp., W.P. No. 295 of 2022 (India Sup. Ct.).
Official Court
[13] In Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of structures, https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2022/12239/12239_2022_2_1501_57147_Judgement_13- Nov-2024.pdf.
Reports / Institutional Publications
[7] Housing & Land Rights Network, Forced Evictions in India: An Overview (2022–2023) (2023), https://www.hlrn.org.in/documents/Press_Release_Forced_Evictions_2022_2023.pdf.
News Articles
[3]Srawan Shukla, Will Bulldoze Your Houses Even If You Think of Crime: Yogi Adityanath’s Warning to Mafia, DNA India (Sept. 6, 2017), https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-will bulldoze-your-houses-evenif-you-think-of-crime-yogi-adityanath-s-warning-to-mafia-2543520.
[4]Nothing Can Come in Front of a Bulldozer, Says Hema Malini After BJP’s Win in UP Polls, Times of India (Mar. 10, 2022), https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/nothing-can-come-in frontof-a-bulldozer-says-hema-malini-after-bjps-win-in-up-polls/articleshow/90124270.cms.
Academic Articles / Legal Blogs
[2] Bulldozer Demolitions Remind of a Lawless, Ruthless State of Affairs: Declares Supreme Court as It Issues Pan-India Guidelines, Supreme Court Observer (n.d.), https://www.scobserver.in/journal/bulldozer-demolitions-remind-of-a-lawless-ruthless-state-of affairs-declares-supreme-court-as-it-issues-pan-india-guidelines/.
[5] Bulldozer Justice: Landmark Ruling on Property Demolitions, IP & Legal Filings (n.d.), https://www.ipandlegalfilings.com/bulldozer-justice-landmark-ruling-on-property-demolitions/.
[8] Bulldozer Actions Like Running a Bulldozer Over Constitution: Negates Rule of Law – Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, LiveLaw (n.d.), https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/bulldozer-actions-like running-a-bulldozer-over-constitution-negates-rule-of-law-justice-ujjal-bhuyan-287294.
[9] SC Hearings on Bulldozer Justice: What Has Happened So Far?, Supreme Court Observer (n.d.), https://www.scobserver.in/journal/sc-hearings-on-bulldozer-justice-what-has-happened so-far/.
[14] Gautam Bhatia, Better Late Than Never: The Supreme Court’s Bulldozer Guidelines Judgment, Indian Const. Law & Phil. Blog (Nov. 13, 2024), https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2024/11/13/better-late-than-never-the-supreme-courts bulldozer-guidelines-judgment/.
[15] The Rise of Bulldozer Justice in India: Legal and Ethical Dimensions, The Amikus Qriae (n.d.),https://theamikusqriae.com/the-rise-of-bulldozer-justice-in-india-legal-and-ethical dimensions/.
[16] Demolition as Domination: The Dark Legacy of Bulldozer Culture in India, Radiance Weekly (n.d.), https://radianceweekly.net/demolition-as-domination-the-dark-legacy-of bulldozer-culture-in-india/.
[17] When Bulldozer Justice Breeds Injustice: Indian Supreme Court Curtails Arbitrary Demolitions, Oxford Hum. Rts. Hub (n.d.), https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/when-bulldozer-justice breeds-injustice-indian-supreme-court-curtails-arbitrary-demolitions/.
AUTHOR:
MOHD WAHID RAZA
ASIAN LAW COLLEGE ( NOIDA )