while issuing a set of instructions to reduce “bulldozing actions”, the Supreme Court observed that demolishing people’s homes on the grounds of their alleged involvement in crimes would amount to imposing a “collective punishment” on the family, which is impermissible in the constitutional scheme.

A bank that encompasses BR Gavai judges and KV Viswanathan observed in the sentence:

“The right to life is a fundamental right. As already discussed above, with the expansion of the scope of the law, the right to shelter was also considered as one of the facets of Article 21 of the Constitution. Several people or perhaps even several families could live in a single structure. The question to be considered is whether, if only one of the occupants of such a structure is charged or convicted of a crime, the authorities may be permitted to demolish the entire structure, thus removing the shelter from the heads of persons who are not directly or indirectly related with the commission of the crime.”

It is an established principle of criminal jurisprudence, as recognized in our country, that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. In our opinion, if the demolition of a house in which a number of persons of a family or several families reside is permitted solely on the ground that a person residing in such a house is either charged with or convicted of an offence, it will amount to with the imposition of a collective punishment on the entire family or families living in such a structure. In our view, our constitutional scheme and criminal jurisprudence would never permit the same.”

The judgment cited the observations made by Justice VR Krishna Iyer in Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. and others v. Gujarat Steel Tubes Mazdoor Sabha and others: “we have rejected as a nation the theory of community guilt and collective punishment and instead no man shall be punished except for his own guilt.”

Other reports on the ruling can be read Here.