On Wednesday, 13th November 2024, the Supreme Court passed a judgement on the "Bulldozer Action", which represents a watershed moment. The essence of the judgement is that no property, legal or illegal, can be demolished as a punitive action simply because its owner has been alleged or proven to have committed a crime. This decision highlights that demolitions must closely adhere to due process and cannot be utilized as a form of punishment for criminal behaviour outside of the established judicial system.

Many people are disappointed by this decision. The states effectively used "Bulldozer Justice" as a deterrent against criminal elements, sending a clear message that illegal activities would not be tolerated, particularly in high-crime areas. By demolishing the illegal homes of known criminals, state authorities created an immediate, impactful deterrent that discouraged similar behaviour in the community.

The homes themselves were often illegal constructions, with prior notices already served that had gone unheeded. It was not until the individuals were identified as criminals that action was finally taken, with demolition serving as both a punishment and a way to remove unlawfully built structures. This approach provided what many perceived as "instant justice"—swift, decisive, and visible. It wasn't slowed down by the delays that often leave communities feeling that justice is inaccessible or that wrongdoers can manipulate the system to avoid real consequences.

With this decision, however, there is a possibility that criminal elements will feel emboldened because the immediate fear of bulldozer action has been removed. The high level of legal intricacy, along with the slow pace of our justice system, can lead to years of prosecution and punishment for crimes. This delay fosters the image of impunity, particularly when criminals can avoid punishment through appeals, legal loopholes, or administrative delays. Despite its controversy, Bulldozer Justice gave communities a sense of rapid accountability and deterrent.

However, from a legal perspective, the Supreme Court's intent is to ensure consistency and fairness in how the law is applied. The Court emphasized several core principles. Firstly, the principle of rule of law mandates that no individual should face penalties or loss of property without lawful procedure, preserving equality and preventing selective enforcement. Secondly, the principle of separation of powers prevents executive overreach by reasserting that the judiciary alone has the authority to determine guilt and assign penalties, safeguarding against politically motivated or arbitrary actions.

The Court also highlighted the importance of public accountability and transparency: demolitions, even of illegal structures, should be transparent, legally justified, and non-discriminatory to prevent abuse. Additionally, by advocating pan-India guidelines, the Court aims to standardize procedures for demolitions, ensuring they are equitable and lawful across states.

However, this decision does not change the fact that crime, particularly organized crime, remains a serious problem, with delayed justice creating a hole that might lead to further disorder. By addressing the arbitrariness of Bulldozer Justice, the Court emphasizes one aspect of the issue while leaving the larger question unresolved: why should justice be delayed to the extent where citizens lose faith in the system?

The judiciary must confront the "elephant in the room" of systemic delays. Public frustration over slow, inaccessible justice is understandable, as the lack of swift consequences undermines the rule of law just as bulldozer action would. The Supreme Court should consider encouraging reforms that expedite case resolutions, reduce procedural bottlenecks, and improve transparency to foster trust in the justice system.

While this judgement upholds the spirit of the law, the challenge of implementing timely justice remains. A true solution lies in making our legal processes more efficient and accountable, so that justice is neither hurried nor delayed, but simply and reliably delivered.

Award Winning Article Is Written By: Ms.Khushi Bangia

Authentication No: NV640447706079-28-1124