Demolition

On the 13th of November, 2024, the India’s Supreme Court ruled against the practice of ‘Bulldozer justice’ calling it unconstitutional. The court held that authorities cannot demolish residential properties solely on the basis of criminal accusations without due process. This ruling comes in response to a number of petitions seeking action against authorities using demolition as a punitive measure against those accused or convicted of crimes. Bulldozer justice is the extrajudicial practice of demolishing properties owned by individuals accused of serious crimes, often without a proper legal process. Utilizing a comparative legal methodology, this paper examines the legality of the bulldozer justice system across multiple jurisdictions. The paper evaluates the legal responses to the practice and finds that different courts in different jurisdictions have held that the practice is not only unconstitutional but it also violates basic human rights tenets including the right to fair trial, right to own and acquire property, right to housing and shelter etc. From the comparative evaluation attempted, the paper finds that bulldozer justice represents a failure of governance, justice, and humanity. Among a host of other recommendations, the paper recommends that inclusive urban planning, which integrates informal settlements into the broader framework of formal urban development, offers a more sustainable and equitable solution.