New rules to stop coronavirus variant stoke chaos at Indian airports

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Prominent NRI community leader SM Syed Khalilur Rehman, fondly known as CA Khalil, passed away in Dubai on Thursday at the age of 86 after a brief illness.

Khalil had been admitted to Aster Hospital in Mankhool on Tuesday after experiencing severe leg weakness. Despite the best efforts of the medical team, he succumbed to a double heart attack that worsened his condition, his son Rais Ahmed confirmed.

The news of his passing has sent waves of grief across communities, particularly in his hometown of Bhatkal, Karnataka, where he was a celebrated figure. Tributes have been pouring in on social media, highlighting his significant contributions to international trade, social service, and education.

A Legacy of Leadership and Service

A chartered accountant by profession, Khalil was a founding member of the Dubai chapter of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), where he served as chairman from 1987 to 1994. His illustrious career included key leadership roles, such as general manager of Khaleej Times, group executive director of the Ilyas and Mustafa Galadari Group, and vice-chairman of the Jashanmal Group of Companies.

He also chaired Maadhyama Communications and Sahil Online, a web-based news platform, and was a director and trustee of several media companies and charitable organisations in Dubai and India.

A Champion for Education and Philanthropy

Khalil’s impact extended far beyond his professional achievements. As president and general secretary of Anjuman Hami-e-Muslimeen, he played a pivotal role in the development of educational institutions, including schools and colleges in Bhatkal and surrounding areas. His dedication to social upliftment earned him recognition from the Government of Karnataka, which honoured him with a prestigious award for his philanthropic contributions.

A Life Celebrated

The Bhatkal Muslim Khaleej Council (BMKC) recently released a documentary celebrating Khalil’s remarkable life and service to the community—a testament to his enduring legacy.

CA Khalil is survived by his family and countless admirers across the globe. His passing marks the end of an era for Indian expatriates in the UAE and beyond, leaving behind a legacy of leadership, generosity, and commitment to community service.

Bengaluru: The Prime Minister Narendra Modi led union government has requested the Karnataka High Court to direct the Mandya district administration and the state government to clear a madrasa operating within the premises of the historic Jama Masjid in Srirangapatna.

The Waqf Board, opposing this move, has claimed the mosque as its property and defended the right to conduct madrasa activities there.

The matter was brought before a division bench headed by Chief Justice N V Anjaria following a public interest litigation filed by a person named Abhishek Gowda from Kabbalu village in Kanakapura taluk. The petition alleged “unauthorised madrasa activities” within the mosque.

Representing the Central government, Additional Solicitor General of India for High Court of Karnataka, K Arvind Kamath argued that the Jama Masjid was designated as a protected monument in 1951, yet unauthorised madrasa operations continue there.

He noted that concerns over potential law and order issues have so far prevented any intervention. Kamath urged the court to direct the Mandya district administration to take action and vacate the madrasa from the mosque.

In defence, lawyers for the state government and the Waqf Board contested this request, stating that the Waqf Board had been recognised as the owner of the property since 1963 and, thus, conducting madrasa activities there is lawful.

After hearing both sides, the bench adjourned the case for further arguments, scheduling the next hearing for November 20.