– Abdul Bari Masoud
New Delhi, Sep 3: Reacting to the Supreme Court of India’s assertion on Monday that no house, including that of a convict, can be demolished without following due process of law, Maulana Mahmood Asa’d Madani, President of Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind(M), expressed hope that the judiciary would take a firm stance against what he described as unjust and illegal bulldozer actions. “Bulldozers do not deliver justice; they destroy it,” he stated, highlighting the severe impact such actions have on entire communities.
“When a house is demolished, the entire family suffers – not just the accused. How can we claim to protect women while simultaneously demolishing 150,000 houses in recent years, leaving women, children, and the elderly to suffer the most?” Maulana Madani questioned.
He emphasized that the trend of using bulldozers as a tool of instant justice deeply disturbs not just Muslims, but all those who value justice in the country. He vowed that Jamiat would continue its fight for justice and not back down.
Senior advocates Dushyant Dave and M.R. Shamshad represented JUH in court, with Farukh Rasheed serving as the Advocate on Record. The petition originally sought to challenge bulldozer actions that Jamiat successfully halted in Jahangirpuri, Delhi, in 2022. However, noticing a nationwide pattern, Jamiat has since filed special petitions against three states.
Dave presented recent instances from Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Madhya Pradesh, citing a case where Justice Viswanathan remarked, “A father may have a disobedient son, but demolishing the father’s house because of this is not the right approach.”
Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta defended the demolitions, arguing they were conducted under municipal laws relating to illegal constructions. However, Dave raised serious concerns about the growing trend of state governments using demolitions as punitive measures, arguing that the right to a home is integral to the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Dave called for the court to order the reconstruction of demolished houses, citing egregious examples such as the demolition of a house in Jaipur because a Muslim father’s son was involved in a fight at school. “Where is the justice in this? Under what municipal law can this be considered lawful?” Dave questioned.
The bench directed all parties involved in petitions against bulldozer actions across various states to submit draft proposals by 13 September. These proposals will be compiled and presented to the court by senior advocate Nachiketa Joshi. The next hearing is scheduled for September 17.
