As state actions challenge the Supreme Court’s clear directives, the battle between rule of law and executive overreach has never been more critical.
PUNJAB CHIEF MINISTER Bhagwant Mann convened a high-level meeting on Friday with Deputy Commissioners and Senior Superintendents of Police to strategize and intensify the fight against drug addiction.
A multi-pronged approach was decided, with district administrations and police coordinating efforts to disrupt drug supply chains and take stringent action against traffickers.
Law enforcement agencies have been directed to identify drug hotspots and seize properties linked to the trade.
Though delayed, this initiative is crucial. The drug menace has devastated countless families and corroded Punjab’s social fabric. However, while the government’s intent is commendable, its methods raise grave legal and ethical concerns.
Bulldozer Justice: A Dangerous Precedent?
In an alarming move, the Punjab government has adopted the ‘bulldozer model’—previously seen in Uttar Pradesh and Haryana—demolishing houses of alleged drug peddlers. Officials maintain that properties linked to traffickers will be confiscated and destroyed.
But who determines guilt? The courts or the executive?
A fundamental tenet of justice is innocent until proven guilty. If the state demolishes homes based on mere allegations, where does that leave the rule of law?
This approach risks turning Punjab into a police state, where the investigator, judge, and executioner are one—the state police.
Rule of Law or Executive Overreach?
Under Indian constitutional jurisprudence, property rights are protected by Article 300A, which states that no person shall be deprived of their property except by authority of law. The Punjab government’s decision to seize and demolish properties without due legal process violates this fundamental right.
The rule of law demands that justice be applied uniformly—without fear or favour, and certainly not at the whims of executive power
Judicial scrutiny is indispensable when property confiscation is at stake. Courts determine guilt—not the police, not the government. Bypassing judicial oversight sets a dangerous precedent, reminiscent of extrajudicial practices in authoritarian regimes.
The Supreme Court’s Stand on Demolitions
In its November 13, 2024, judgment in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 295 of 2022, the Supreme Court delivered a strong rebuke against arbitrary demolitions:
“It is a dream of every person, every family, to have a shelter above their heads. A house is an embodiment of the collective hopes of a family or an individual’s stability and security.”
Raising a critical constitutional question, the court observed:
“An important question arises: Should the executive be permitted to take away the shelter of a family as a punitive measure against an accused? Does such action align with our constitutional framework?”
The court firmly upheld the doctrine of Rule of Law, citing A.V. Dicey:
- No person shall be punished except for a distinct breach of law established by ordinary courts.
- No man is above the law.
- The Constitution guarantees legal protection of individual rights through judicial decisions.
The ruling made it unequivocal:
“Under the constitutional framework, there is no scope for arbitrariness by officials. No one can be punished or made to suffer in body or goods except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the courts.”
Separation of Powers: Who Decides?
The Supreme Court reinforced the doctrine of separation of powers, asserting that the executive cannot usurp judicial functions:
“When adjudicatory functions are entrusted to the judiciary, can state government officers assume this role and punish individuals by demolishing their properties without trial? Such a situation would be wholly impermissible in our constitutional setup.”
Further, it warned:
“If the executive arbitrarily demolishes the houses of citizens solely because they are accused of a crime, it violates the principles of ‘rule of law’ and ‘separation of powers.’”
Rights of the Accused and Institutional Accountability
Even the accused, the court emphasized, have constitutional rights:
“Even the incarcerated—whether accused, undertrial, or convict—have rights, like any other citizen. They have a right to dignity and cannot be subjected to cruel or inhuman treatment.”
Stressing accountability, the court declared:
“The State and its officials cannot take arbitrary and excessive measures against the accused, or even against convicts, without adhering to due process.”
And in a stark warning to overzealous authorities:
“If a citizen’s house is demolished merely because they are accused—or even convicted—without following due legal process, it is wholly unconstitutional.”
The Right to Shelter and Collateral Damage
The Supreme Court highlighted the collateral consequences of these demolitions:
“The accused is not the only occupant of a property. If their spouse, children, or parents live in the same house or co-own the property, should they be penalized simply for being related to an accused person? What is their fault? Punishing them by demolishing their home is anarchy and a direct violation of the right to life guaranteed under the Constitution.”
Condemning high-handed actions, the court cautioned:
“The chilling sight of a bulldozer razing a building—when authorities have failed to uphold natural justice and ignored due process—evokes a lawless state where ‘might is right.’ Such arbitrary actions have no place in our constitutional framework.”
To prevent further violations, the court issued strict directions:
“Any violation of these directions will result in contempt proceedings, in addition to prosecution. Officials responsible for illegal demolitions will bear the cost of restitution at their personal expense, along with damages.”
The Need for Judicial Oversight
Punjab’s fight against drugs is necessary, but it cannot come at the cost of constitutional rights. The war on drugs must not become a war on civil liberties.
Can the Punjab government assure its citizens that its crackdown on drugs is in strict adherence to the Supreme Court’s directives and constitutional principles? If not, who will be held accountable for these violations?
If state officials continue to defy judicial oversight, should they not be prosecuted for contempt? And if the very custodians of the law resort to lawlessness, what recourse do citizens have?
Accountability must not be reduced to scapegoating low-ranking police officers while those at the helm evade responsibility. The rule of law demands that justice be applied uniformly—without fear or favour, and certainly not at the whims of executive power. 
_________
Also Read:
Justice Over Bulldozers: Supreme Court Reinforces Constitutional Rights for Vulnerable
Our VIP Culture: A Growing Class of Parasites
kanwar manjit singh
punjabtoday@gmail.com
Disclaimer : PunjabTodayNews.com and other platforms of the Punjab Today group strive to include views and opinions from across the entire spectrum, but by no means do we agree with everything we publish. Our efforts and editorial choices consistently underscore our authors’ right to the freedom of speech. However, it should be clear to all readers that individual authors are responsible for the information, ideas or opinions in their articles, and very often, these do not reflect the views of PunjabTodayNews.com or other platforms of the group. Punjab Today does not assume any responsibility or liability for the views of authors whose work appears here.
Punjab Today believes in serious, engaging, narrative journalism at a time when mainstream media houses seem to have given up on long-form writing and news television has blurred or altogether erased the lines between news and slapstick entertainment. We at Punjab Today believe that readers such as yourself appreciate cerebral journalism, and would like you to hold us against the best international industry standards. Brickbats are welcome even more than bouquets, though an occasional pat on the back is always encouraging. Good journalism can be a lifeline in these uncertain times worldwide. You can support us in myriad ways. To begin with, by spreading word about us and forwarding this reportage. Stay engaged.
— Team PT