The Allahabad High Court has delivered a split verdict on whether constitutional courts can impose additional safeguards to prevent the demolition of residential properties linked to persons accused in criminal cases. The matter has now been referred to the Chief Justice for being placed before a third judge.
The Division Bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Siddharth Nandan differed on the scope of the High Court’s powers under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue general directions regulating demolition proceedings under municipal and development laws.
In a separate judgment delivered on July 20, Justice Atul Sreedharan held that, subject to limited exceptions, no action should be taken to demolish the residential property of an accused person for two years from the date of registration of a First Information Report (FIR).
The judge observed that demolition proceedings initiated immediately after the registration of a criminal case, under the guise of enforcing municipal or planning laws, could amount to a punitive or retributive exercise of executive power rather than a bona fide statutory action.
Justice Sreedharan observed that the High Court had repeatedly dealt with cases in which demolition notices were issued soon after an FIR was registered, followed by demolition after only a formal compliance with statutory procedures.
According to the judge, such actions had continued despite the law laid down by the Supreme Court against punitive demolitions, commonly referred to as “bulldozer justice”. He held that such actions constituted a colourable exercise of executive discretion undertaken for retributive purposes instead of genuine enforcement of planning laws.
Justice Siddharth Nandan, however, disagreed with the proposed two-year restriction. He held that the Court could not prescribe a fixed period during which authorities would be restrained from exercising statutory powers under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, as such a direction would effectively keep the operation of a valid statute in abeyance.
The judge observed that there is a legal presumption that public authorities act in accordance with law and the principles of natural justice, and any person aggrieved by arbitrary or illegal demolition proceedings is entitled to invoke the High Court’s writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Justice Nandan also highlighted the increasing problem of unauthorised constructions, observing that while rapid urbanisation and population growth have contributed to the issue, they cannot justify violations of planning and building regulations.
Stressing the need for administrative accountability, he directed that whenever notices are issued for violations of construction norms, simultaneous departmental proceedings should also be initiated against officials responsible for permitting or overlooking such illegal constructions.
He further directed that such proceedings should be concluded in accordance with law within a reasonable period and, in any event, within six months.
The judge also observed that enforcement action should not selectively target one individual while ignoring similar violations in the surrounding area. If demolition proceedings are initiated selectively, the affected person will be at liberty to approach the High Court alleging a retributive exercise of executive discretion and violation of fundamental rights.
The case arose from a writ petition filed by three members of a family alleging that their residential property was targeted for demolition in collusion with the police immediately after one of their relatives was booked under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act.
In February this year, while hearing the writ petition, the High Court had expressed concern over the continuation of alleged punitive demolitions in Uttar Pradesh despite the Supreme Court’s directions that demolitions cannot be used as a punitive measure and must strictly adhere to the requirements of due process of law.
The post Allahabad High Court delivers split verdict on safeguards against demolition of properties linked to accused persons appeared first on India Legal.