Tight slap on face of hate-filled CMs: Congress after SC pauses ‘bulldozer justice’

The Congress on Tuesday, 17 September welcomed the Supreme Court directive against "bulldozer justice", saying it is a "tight slap" on the face of hate-filled chief ministers and leaders who were encouraging it.

The opposition party also asserted that bulldozer has become a symbol of hate, violence and political vendetta.

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 those accused of crime, till 1 October 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 and the likes.

In a post in Hindi on X, Congress general secretary Priyanka Gandhi Vadra said, "The decision of the Supreme Court holding a mirror to the unjust and inhuman 'bulldozer policy' of the BJP governments is welcome."

"Through such barbaric actions, the policy and intentions of trampling humanity and justice by 'running a bulldozer over the law of the country' have been exposed before the entire country," she said.

They believe that under the guise of "instant justice", the rule of mob and fear can be established by crushing the Constitution with the bulldozer of oppression and injustice, Priyanka Gandhi said.

"But this country is run by the Constitution and will run only by the Constitution. The court has made it clear that 'bulldozer injustice' is not acceptable," she said.

Reacting to the development, Congress spokesperson Supriya Shrinate said the Supreme Court has made it clear that the country will be run by the Constitution and not by bulldozer and anarchy.

"The Supreme Court's assertion that bulldozer will not be allowed till guidelines are framed is a tight slap on the face of hate-filled CMs and leaders who were encouraging bulldozer justice by putting a lock on courts," she said in a video statement posted on X.

"Bulldozer has become a symbol of hate, violence and political vendetta. Bulldozer means fanning a storm of hatred against one community, one section. We welcome this verdict and hope that after this, UP Chief Minister (Yogi Adityanath) will not challenge the Supreme Court to keep his bulldozer running and there will be a ban on bulldozer justice of copycats in Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra," she said.

Shrinate asserted that bulldozer has no place in a civilised society and is used by anarchic elements and goons, not elected chief ministers.

Reacting to the order, Akhilesh Yadav, in a post on X, attacked Yogi Adityanath without taking his name and said, "The supreme order of justice has sidelined not only the bulldozer but also the destructive politics of those who misused the bulldozer."

"Today the wheels of the bulldozer came off and the handle of the steering wheel has came out. This is an identity crisis for those who had made the bulldozer their symbol. Now neither the bulldozer will be able to run, nor those who used to run it. The time has come for parking both," he said.

"Today the thinking of 'bulldozing' itself has been demolished. Now will they misuse the bulldozer by changing its name? Actually this is not a question of the public, it is a big apprehension," he added.

The top court's directive came over petitions alleging properties of those accused of crime were being illegally demolished in several states.

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.

The bench also expressed its displeasure over the statements made after the 2 September 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.