MyVoice: Views of our readers 15th November 2024
BJP’s riot act bulldozed
Finally, the Supreme Court, to our great relief, read the States – implicitly the BJP-ruled States as they are the ones that resorted to ‘bulldozer justice’ – the Riot Act. It took a firm stand against ‘bulldozer justice’, denounced it as ‘unconstitutional’ and ‘extrajudicial’ and barred it. ‘Bulldozer justice’, a misnomer (more appropriately and accurately, it should be described as ‘bulldozer punishment’, ‘bulldozer violence’ or, better still, ‘bulldozer crime’) is based on the principle that ‘might is right’; it does not conform to the rule of law; it inflicts ‘collective punishment’ and violates a family’s constitutionally guaranteed right to shelter and it is ordered by state governments and not by courts jeopardizing the separation of powers. We don’t want the level of our civilization assessed by the primitive-style use of bulldozers to dispense justice. The top court has rightly held that any attempt in the future to bulldoze properties under the guise of dispensing instant justice will be construed as contempt of court. Further, it has proposed “restitution of demolished property at the personal cost of public officials” who knock down buildings including houses and shops using bulldozers in breach of its guidelines, appended to the judgment. Hopefully, the fear of having to face contempt proceedings and incurring monetary loss will act as a deterrent. Still the otherwise laudable judgment is not without lacunae. There is no mention of giving compensation to the victims of what is peddled as ‘bulldozer justice’ and punishing those who committed the offence of demolishing houses and shops using JCBs without following the due process of law. We urge the apex court to give a thought to this and do the needful.
G.David Milton, Maruthancode, Tamil Nadu
***
The decision of the Supreme Court against “bulldozer justice” raises substantial issues regarding accountability and due process. How can we make sure local authorities follow these guidelines? What safeguards will be taken to prevent the abuse of demolition authority in politically heated situations? likewise how can victims of past razing get justice and compensation? To foster real reverence for citizens’ rights, the court’s guidance must have an effect outside of legal systems. Will elected officials prioritise justice over political expediency?
Anshu Bharti, Begusarai, Bihar
***
The Supreme Court has given right orders to the states at right time regarding bulldozer justice. The verdict against such extreme measures like destructing the houses of accused by the BJP-ruled States on one or other pretext will be helpful in arresting the dangerous trend. To bulldoze a house at will without serving any prior notice, if one is found accused in any crime has become common practice for some States and local authorities. It’s nothing but judging the accused as guilty without any trial, and punishing his family for their no fault. The state’s act of injustice has been perceived as befitting lesson to the accused and getting currency as heroic act in the public glare. So the states were competing one after other to follow the short cut route to get the instant gratification, which is unlawful indeed. Now the states cannot take this extreme measure, unless it’s anillegal construction or encroachment.
Dr DVG Sankara Rao, Vizianagaram, AP
***
It refers to “SC halts bulldozer action by states”. The apex court of the country has done well to speak against bulldozer justice which has been growing quite rapidly across the states in India. The Supreme Court has categorically spoken against this instant justice system. But the million dollar question is whether governments in question would pay heed to it and be wary of demolishing houses as a practice in future or whether government officials would listen to the court or their political bosses. Ultimately this tactic should not be used against a specific community to target them. Now the ball is firmly in the court of the executive.
Bal Govind, Noida