New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday (February 7) refused to entertain a plea seeking contempt proceedings against authorities in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh for allegedly violating apex court’s pan-India direction on demolition of properties and asked the petitioner to move the Allahabad High Court.
A bench comprising Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran disposed of the plea with liberty to the petitioner to move the High Court, saying it had given liberty in its November 13, 2024 verdict that in case of any breach, the jurisdictional high court would be entitled to entertain the grievance.
What did the apex court say?
“We find that the issue can be best addressed by the jurisdictional high court. We, therefore, dispose of the present petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional high court,” it said.
After the order was dictated, the counsel representing the petitioner submitted before the bench, “In the meantime, third party interest may not be created in my property.”
“Go and file a prosecution. We had issued all necessary directions,” the bench told the counsel.
Apex court laid down pan-India guidelines on use of bulldozer
The apex court, in its November 13, 2024 order issued a slew of directions and laid down pan-India guidelines on the bulldozer use by state governments for demolition of properties of accused of crimes as a punitive measures without following due procedure of law and directed that no demolition should be carried out without prior show cause notice.
What did the petitioner say?
The petitioner stated that the Sambhal authorities came to his premises and started demolishing it in violation of the apex court order despite he and his family members had all the necessary documents, approved maps and other related documents of the property.
The petitioner claimed that the action of the Sambhal authorities was in complete violation of the apex court verdict and sought initiation of contempt proceedings against them, to restrain them from creating any third party interest in the premises and a direction to them to maintain status quo as on January 11.
“The petitioner and his family members had all the necessary documents, approved maps and other related documents of the property but the contemnors (authorities) came to the premises of the petitioner property and started demolishing the said property,” the petition said.
