Why bulldozers threaten due process, Pg12

Key Highlights:

• The Allahabad High Court questioned the legality of punitive demolitions in Uttar Pradesh, highlighting concerns over due process.
• The court addressed a case where a family's property was threatened with demolition following charges against a relative, despite the family not being implicated.
• The court framed five questions to examine if such demolitions violate Supreme Court directions and infringe on constitutional rights.
• The Supreme Court in 2024 directed that property cannot be demolished merely because the owner is accused of an offense.

Detailed Insights:

• Punitive demolitions involve demolishing properties linked to accused individuals shortly after alleged wrongdoing, raising concerns about executive overreach.
• The UP Municipal Corporation Act, 1959, and the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, empower authorities to remove unauthorized constructions, but only through a structured process.
• Demolition should be a regulatory measure of last resort, not an instrument of instant action, and the registration of an FIR does not automatically render a structure illegal.
• The Allahabad High Court's questions address whether the apprehension of demolition infringes fundamental rights and what standards should guide preventive judicial intervention.
• Selective demolitions convert regulatory power into punitive action, breaching administrative neutrality and eroding public confidence in impartial governance.
• The Constitution guarantees that no person shall be deprived of property except by procedure established by law, including notice, hearing, reasoned decision, and judicial oversight.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Due Process: Fair treatment through the normal judicial system, ensuring legal rights are respected.
• Punitive Demolition: Demolition of property as a form of punishment without proper judicial process.
• Separation of Powers: Division of governmental powers among different branches to prevent abuse of authority.