'Retributive Exercise of Executive Discretion': Justice Atul Sreedharan of Allahabad HC Slams Bulldozer Demolitions
New Delhi: Justice Atul Sreedharan of the Allahabad high court on Monday (July 20) came down heavily on bulldozer demolitions by the Uttar Pradesh government and said that the state is demolishing the houses of persons accused of an offence "to satiate the perceived blood lust of a society fed on a staple diet of bulldozer justice", reported LiveLaw.
"The state is certain that the society suffers from collective schadenfreude and shall applaud the state for dispensing vigilante style summary justice, without adhering to the procedure established by law and secures pleasure from the misfortune of the other person suffering loss", said Justice Sreedharan in a 51-page opinion authored by him which was part of a split verdict by a division bench also comprising Justice Siddharth Nandan.
Justice Sreedharan made the observations while hearing a writ petition wherein
The observations were made in a 51-page opinion by Justice Sreedharan in a split verdict in connection with a writ petition where the properties of a Hamirpur family were targeted by authorities shortly after their relative was booked under the BNS, IT Act, POCSO Act, and the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act.
Opens order with Bashir Badr couplet
Justice Sreedharan termed the practice of immediate demolition of an accused's dwelling place as a "retributive exercise of executive discretion" and identified it as the 'vilest' species of the genus “colourable exercise of executive discretion”.
Opening his order with a couplet by Urdu poet Bashir Badr – "लोग टूट जाते एक घर बनाने में तुम तरस नहीं खाते बस्तियां जलाने में (People face ruination in just making a home, and you feel no remorse setting ablaze entire settlements)" – Justice Sreedharan highlighted the human need of shelter.
Justice Sreedharan highlighted that despite the judgments of the Supreme Court, the demolitions continue with impunity "as though these judgments do not exist", or the state is certain that the defiance towards the law laid down by the highest Court of the land “shall not visit them with any adverse consequences”.
He added that a house is not merely a property but the embodiment of a family's hopes, dignity, and security, and taking it away abruptly consigns them to the "deepest abyss of despair", reported LiveLaw.
Justice Sreedharan added that courts have to prevent this from happening and compensation in favour of the affected can be ordered.
'Theft of donations at the Ram Temple is last straw on the camel's back'
He also cited the ongoing furore over the alleged embezzlement of funds from the Ram temple in Ayodhya to say that corruption has become normalised.
“the recent controversy relating to the theft of donations at the Ram Temple is the proverbial last straw on the camel's back. Nothing can shame a people who remain unfazed by the theft at the Ram Temple which epitomises the nadir of the Indian's integrity,” said Justice Sreedharan.
In the present case, both Justices Sreedharan and Nandan unanimously held that demolishing homes to punish an accused is an illegal and retributive abuse of power.
The two judges delivered a split verdict on whether the state can be barred from taking any action to demolish the house of an accused for a period of two years from the date of registration of an FIR.
This article went live on July twenty-first, two thousand twenty six, at fourteen minutes past six in the evening.The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
