Bulldozer Raj

The apex court's intervention is welcome but the fact remains that the bulldozers of several state governments and the municipal corporations in Delhi, all ruled by the BJP, razed far too many houses and buildings before it was thought fit for them to be advised to follow the basics of the law. At the same time, it is refreshing and reassuring that the court rejected every argument, including the one about third parties approaching the court based only on media reports that the state government advanced to justify its acts. The court made it clear that it hardly mattered who approached the court as long as their case merited legal consideration. India has been independent for the last 75 years but it is unfortunate that the highest court of the land had to tell its governments that there cannot be retaliatory justice. It's a crude reminder that the fundamentals of constitutional democracy are yet to take firm roots in this country and people who think on the lines of khap panchayats with their received wisdom on instant justice get to move the levers of power. It is now up to the proponents of the bulldozer raj to decide if they want to follow the rulebook or go ahead with their versions of it. The petitioners had pointed out in the court that most demolitions happened after senior government functionaries boasted about retaliatory justice, an idea which is alien to modern jurisprudence. The bureaucracy which is paid to act lawfully went along gleefully and has never regretted it; they will also have to do a rethink on what they have been doing to the basic doctrine of governance. Both groups of trigger-happy people must be told that should they invent new means to go ahead with their designs, they will fall foul not only of their own laws but also be guilty of contempt of court. Now that the Supreme Court has made its stand clear, it must also keep a watchful eye on developments and ensure that justice is done per its directives. Attempts to violate them would not be taken lightly.

India calling the judiciary

India has entered into a new era of politics—the bulldozer era. Recently, there were riots during Ram Navami processions in various Indian cities. Miscreants and rioters indulged in criminal activities on the streets. Public property was damaged, and many people were killed or injured. The police have to control the riots, arrest the culprits and bring them to the court of law for a trial and subsequent punishment. The miscreants’ faith, race, caste or ethnicity are not a deciding factor before the law. If someone has damaged public property and the same is proven in the court, there is due process to recover the damage from the culprit. No one can have any dispute on any of the above facts. However, in brazen showmanship, some state governments are acting as judge, jury and executioner, and selectively targeting a section of the people based on their faith. If there is an accusation of someone indulging in criminal activity like stone pelting, the authorities send a bulldozer to raze down the home or the business establishment of the accused. There is no trial, no serving of notice, no due process of law, but a theatrical show of brute power to please a cheering crowd. Indian politicians of certain states are competing with each other to earn the sobriquets like Bulldozer Baba, Bulldozer Mama, Bulldozer Chacha and so on. Many people are cheering on this new trend, not understanding that the Indian Constitution and the rule of law are getting bulldozed in the process. Rioting is a serious crime. There are other serious crimes like murder, rape, assault etc. Will the same instant justice be applied to all the crimes in the future? If someone is accused of a crime, will the state be sending bulldozers to raze down the accused person’s home? What if you live in a joint family, an adult member of your extended family is charged with a murder, and the authorities raze down your common home without any notice or trial for a crime in which you have no control or responsibility? If a member of a family has thrown stones, he is the one who needs to be punished. How are his family members, including minor children, responsible for his crime? Why should they be rendered homeless? Which law gives the power to raze down buildings? If it is proved that the accused is innocent in a court of law later, will they be compensated? Will the civil servants who led the bulldozers pay the compensation from their salary? One of the city commissioners who indulged in this brazen lawlessness claimed that bulldozer justice is to instil fear in the minds of miscreants. In other words, it is a state-sponsored act of intimidation. Another excuse given is the state needs to recover the losses for the damage to public property. It defies logic how razing down homes of the accused help the government in recovering damages. If the government wants to recover damages, it must follow the due process of law. It must first prove the crime of the accused in a court of law, assess the quantum of damage caused by the culprit’s criminal act, and then recover the property, as directed by the court. Even if the properties are standing on encroached land, it needs to be proven to be standing in encroached lands. Protest against the regime is not taboo in the democracy but it is crime in the country.