 |
|
In a landmark judgement, India's Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud has delivered a powerful denouncement of the controversial practice of 'bulldozer justice', marking a significant turning point in the legal landscape of the country. The judgement, delivered on his final day in office, addressed the case of journalist Manoj Tibrewal Aakash whose ancestral home was demolished without proper legal process. The Supreme Court bench, presided over by CJI Chandrachud alongside Justices Manoj Misra and JB Pardiwala, found the state's actions to be unlawful, highlighting the vulnerability of property rights when subjected to such arbitrary actions.
The court highlighted the absence of due process in the demolition, pointing to the fact that the owner was only notified through public announcements using drum beats, with no written order preceding the demolition. This lack of transparency and adherence to legal protocols was deemed unacceptable by the court. The bench further noted the absence of any legal justification for the demolition, underscoring the arbitrary nature of the state's actions. As a consequence, the Supreme Court ordered the state to pay Rs 25 lakh as interim compensation to the petitioner. The court also ordered a disciplinary inquiry into the actions of the officials involved in the unauthorized demolition, signaling a commitment to holding those responsible accountable for their actions.
CJI Chandrachud's judgement went beyond the specific case, delivering a strong message against the use of 'bulldozer justice' as a tool of selective punishment. He emphasized that such practices are unacceptable in a civilized legal system and warned state officials against undermining the fundamental right to property enshrined in Article 300A of the Indian Constitution. The judgement underscored the importance of upholding the rule of law and ensuring that property rights are protected from arbitrary and unjustified actions by the state.
The ruling has been widely interpreted as a significant victory for individuals seeking legal recourse against arbitrary state actions. It reinforces the principle that the law should be the ultimate arbiter of disputes, not brute force. The judgement also underscores the need for public accountability and transparency in the administration of justice, particularly in cases involving the demolition of properties. The Supreme Court's directive to conduct a disciplinary inquiry against the responsible officials demonstrates the court's commitment to ensuring that those who violate the law are held accountable for their actions.