Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav on Tuesday attacked the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) over the Supreme Court's observation that bulldozer action cannot be justice.
"Bulldozer can't be justice. It was unconstitutional, it was to scare people. Bulldozer was to deliberately suppress the voice of Opposition. I thank the Supreme Court for this direction that has stopped bulldozer. Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister (Yogi Adityanath) and BJP leaders glorified 'bulldozer' as if this is justice," Yadav said.
Now, when the Supreme Court has given a direction, I think the bulldozer will stop and justice will come through court, he added.
SC halts 'bulldozer justice'
Earlier in the day, the Supreme Court said even if there is one instance of illegal demolition, it is against the ethos of our Constitution, directing that authorities across the country will not demolish properties, including of those accused of crime, till October 1 without seeking its permission.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan clarified that its order will not be applicable to unauthorised structures on public roads, footpaths etc.
"Even if there is one instance of an illegal demolition… it is against the ethos of our Constitution," the bench observed.
It said till October 1, the next date of hearing, no demolition be carried out "without seeking leave of this court".
The top court was hearing petitions alleging properties of those accused of crime were being demolished in several states illegally.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench that a "narrative" was being built over the demolition of properties.
He said there was a petition before the apex court which alleged that because the person belonged to a particular religion, his property was demolished.
"Let them bring to your lordships' notice one instance of demolition where the law is not complied (with)," the law officer said.
He said the affected parties have not approached the court because they know that they have received notices and their constructions were illegal.
"Rest assured that outside noise is not influencing us," the bench told the senior law officer.
The bench also expressed its displeasure over the statements made after the September 2 hearing in the matter during which the apex court had said it proposes to lay down certain guidelines on the issue that would be enforceable across the country.
"After that order, there have been statements that the bulldozer will continue … and it all depends in whose hands the steering is," the bench said.
It said such statements were made and the court was refraining from saying anything further on that.
"Mr Mehta, after these directives are laid down, we will seek your assistance on this glorification and grandstanding… You will assist us on how to stop this. If necessary, we will ask the Election Commission also," the bench said.
"How can anybody's house be demolished only because he is an accused? Even if he is a convict, still it can't be done without following the procedure as prescribed by law," the court had then observed.
It, however, had said the court will not protect any unauthorised construction or encroachment on public roads.
The solicitor general, appearing for Uttar Pradesh, had referred to an earlier affidavit filed by the state in the matter.
He had said the affidavit states that merely because a person was alleged to have been a part of some offence can never be a ground for demolition of his immovable property.
(With agencies inputs)
