Skip to main content
PulseWire News

India's Supreme Court Declares 'Bulldozer Justice' Unconstitutional

India's apex court bans controversial practice often used against Muslims in the name of law enforcement.

By Pragati K.B.Source: nytimes.com1 min read
India's Supreme Court Declares 'Bulldozer Justice' Unconstitutional
Image via nytimes.com

In brief

On November 13, 2024, India's Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling outlawing 'bulldozer justice,' the controversial act where authorities demolish properties of primarily Muslim communities as punitive measures following conflicts or dissent.

In a significant decision, the Supreme Court of India has deemed 'bulldozer justice' unconstitutional, a term used to describe the demolitions carried out by state authorities against individuals, predominantly from Muslim communities, deemed as acts of rapid retaliation after communal unrest or political opposition. The practice, which has become increasingly prevalent in recent years, was particularly noted in regions governed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu-nationalist party.In its ruling, the court condemned the demolitions as emblematic of a "lawless state," emphasizing that the state cannot unilaterally punish individuals without due process. This judicial intervention follows ongoing claims that such actions are often justified on the basis of illegal construction, undermining the rights of specific communities.The Supreme Court's decision comes in the wake of extensive demolitions in Haryana and other states, particularly targeting properties linked to the Muslim community after violent clashes with Hindus. Human rights organizations have applauded the ruling, hoping it marks a turning point in the fight against systemic discrimination and violence toward minorities in India.Experts and advocates stress that while the ruling is a positive development, implementing effective changes on the ground remains critical. Former U.N. special rapporteur Miloon Kothari highlighted the broader implications of these demolitions, asserting that they obstruct access to essential services and infringe upon fundamental human rights.As the landmark judgment sets a precedent, the persistent issue of 'bulldozer justice' looms large, raising questions about future enforcement and protection for targeted communities amidst increasingly polarized sentiments within the country.

Topics

More on this story