On March 5, the Supreme Court sharply criticized the Uttar Pradesh government for illegally demolishing the homes of a lawyer, a professor, and three others in Prayagraj. The apex court warned that such actions send a “shocking and wrong signal” and hinted at ordering the state to rebuild the demolished buildings at its own expense.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and N Kotiswar Singh expressed serious concerns about the arbitrary use of demolition drives, emphasizing that such acts must adhere to constitutional protections, particularly Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and shelter.
Petitioners (Advocate Zulfiqar Haider, Professor Ali Ahmed, two widows, and another individual) approached the top court after the Allahabad High Court dismissed their plea against the demolition. The petitioners said that a demolition notice was issued on March 1, 2021, which was served on March 6, 2021, and demolition was carried out the very next day, without giving them time to challenge the same.
They also claimed that they were lawful lessees who had applied to convert their leasehold rights into freehold property.
The state’s defense, represented by Attorney General R. Venkataramani, asserted that the petitioners had been given reasonable time to respond to the demolition notice. However, Justice Oka questioned the manner in which the notices were served, observing that such arrogance was unjustified.
Senior Advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari, representing the petitioners, stated that the state authorities incorrectly linked the petitioners’ land to that of gangster-politician Atiq Ahmed, who was killed in 2023. He argued that the misidentification resulted in the unlawful demolition and urged the court to hold the state accountable.
The Supreme Court also pointed out procedural flaws, questioning why notices were affixed rather than formally delivered by post or courier. The bench criticized the government’s reliance on hyper-technical arguments and denied the state’s request to remand the case to the High Court, stating that such a move would only result in unnecessary delays.
In a strong statement, Justice Oka reminded the state that the Supreme Court had already established guidelines on ‘bulldozer justice,’ emphasizing the importance of following due process before conducting demolitions. He stated that the court would ensure accountability, saying, “Now we will order reconstruction at your cost; that is the only way to do this.”
The case, Zulfiquar Haider & Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., will next be heard on March 21. This decision could set a precedent for preventing arbitrary demolitions and protecting citizens’ fundamental rights from the state’s abuse.
