Even if there is one instance of illegal demolition, it is against the ethos of our Constitution, the Supreme Court said on Tuesday while 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.
While hearing these petitions on September 2, the apex court had questioned how can anybody's house be demolished just because he was an accused.
"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.
Mehta had said the state has made it clear that demolition of an immovable property can take place 'only for violation of and in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the respective applicable municipal law or law governing development authorities of the area'.
The top law officer had said no immovable property can be demolished solely on the ground that the owner or occupant of such property was involved in a criminal offence.
The counsel appearing for one of the petitioners had said almost every state was now indulging in this practice and demolishing properties.
The top court was hearing the petitions filed by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind and others seeking directions to various state governments to ensure no further demolition of properties of those accused in cases of rioting and violence takes place.
The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind had earlier filed a plea in the apex court over demolition of some buildings in Jahangirpuri area of the national capital.
The Muslim body had also filed a petition in the apex court seeking directions to the Uttar Pradesh government to ensure no further demolition of properties of those accused of violence was carried out in the state.
It had also said no demolition should be carried out without following the due process of law and sans prior notice.
