[Demolitions in Somnath] “If Authorities in Contempt, Will Ask Them to Restore Structures”: SC Declines To Halt Demolitions, Seeks Gujarat’s Response

The Supreme Court Today (Oct 4) said if it finds that authorities in Gujarat acted in contempt of its order on demolition of properties, it will ask them to restore the structures. A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan was hearing a plea seeking initiation of contempt proceedings for alleged violation of the apex court’s September 17 order which had said that there shall be no demolition of properties, including those accused of crimes, across the country without its permission.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court issued a stern warning to Gujarat authorities regarding the alleged violation of its earlier order on the demolition of properties. The Court indicated that if it finds the state guilty of contempt, it may order the restoration of the demolished structures.

A bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan was addressing a petition that sought to initiate contempt proceedings against the Gujarat government. The petition alleged that authorities had violated the Supreme Court’s September 17 order, which stipulated that no property demolitions, including those of accused criminals, should be carried out without the Court’s explicit permission.

Senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, representing the petitioner, Summast Patni Muslim Jamat, argued that despite this clear directive from the Supreme Court, authorities in Gujarat went ahead with demolitions.

“Despite the top court’s order, the authorities in Gujarat have demolished structures,”

-Hegde told the bench.

The Court, while not issuing any immediate notice or interim order, made its stance clear.

“We are not issuing notice or any interim order… but we clarify that if we find they (state) are in contempt of our previous order, we will not only send them to jail but will also ask them to restore everything… we will order status quo ante,”

-the bench warned. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on October 16.

Background: Court’s September 17 Order

The petition filed by the Summast Patni Muslim Jamat seeks action against the Gujarat authorities for allegedly ignoring the Supreme Court’s September 17 directive. This order imposed a temporary suspension on all property demolitions across the country unless prior permission was sought from the Court.

However, the Court had clarified that this order did not extend to unauthorized structures located on public land, streets, footpaths, or water bodies, or to properties already ordered for demolition by a court.

The petitioner accused the state of unlawfully demolishing several historically and spiritually significant Muslim religious sites in Prabhas Patan on September 28, 2024. They argued that these demolitions were carried out without proper notice or providing an opportunity for a hearing.

Hegde, representing the petitioner, emphasized the historical and religious significance of the demolished structures. He noted that some of these buildings dated back to the year 1309, stating,

“The notices served on us did not mention demolition at all.”

Gujarat Government’s Defense

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Gujarat government, countered the petitioner’s claims. He asserted that the land in question was government-owned and that the demolition process had followed legal procedures. According to Mehta,

“Proper notices were issued, and personal hearings were also given.”

He further added that the municipal proceedings began in 2023, and the land in question is located 360 meters away from the Somnath temple, adjacent to a water body, thus falling under the exceptions outlined by the Court’s September order.

Mehta also mentioned that residents had approached the Gujarat High Court a day earlier, but no order was passed to stay the demolition.

The Court, in response, reiterated that its September 17 protective order does not apply to public land, streets, or water bodies.

“We have already clarified that our protective order will not apply to public land, street, or water bodies… So, we will not issue notice. You (state) file your reply,”

-said the bench.

Arguments for Status Quo

Despite the state’s defense, Hegde urged the bench to issue an order for maintaining the status quo. He emphasized the historical significance of the demolished area, stating,

“This is an area of 50-odd acres existing since the time of the State of Junagadh, during the Junagarh kingdom. There are five dargahs, ten mosques there.”

However, the Court remained resolute, reiterating that the state would be held accountable if found in violation of the Supreme Court’s order.

“If the state has violated its order, they will have to recompense fully,”

-the bench remarked.

The Jamat’s Petition: Religious and Historical Significance

The petition by the Summast Patni Muslim Jamat highlighted the historical and religious importance of the demolished sites, including mosques, dargahs, eidgahs, and residential properties of custodians (Mutawallis) of these religious places.

The petition stated that many of these sites had existed for centuries, dating back to the era of the State of Junagadh. Among the demolished sites, the petition specifically mentioned the tomb of Haji Mangroli Shah Baba, a revered structure for the local Muslim community, which had been used for over a century.

According to the petition, the ownership of this site had been settled by a legal decree as early as 1903.

The petitioners argued that these demolitions were carried out in blatant defiance of the Supreme Court’s order, undermining the authority and sanctity of the judiciary.

The defiance, they contended, had

“lowered the majesty of the judiciary in the eyes of the public,”

necessitating strict action against those responsible.

Supreme Court’s Move Towards Regulating Demolitions Nationwide

Earlier this week, the bench led by Justice Gavai took significant steps toward setting out nationwide regulations for demolition activities. The Court emphasized that these directives, in a “secular country” like India, would apply equally across all religions and communities.

To ensure fair legal proceedings, the Court indicated that proper procedures must be followed before any demolition, including prior notice via registered post and providing a reasonable timeframe for contesting the demolition orders.

The Court also hinted at the possibility of requiring mandatory videography of demolitions and holding officials accountable by mandating compensation recovery for unjustified demolitions.

In the upcoming hearings, the Supreme Court will further delve into whether Gujarat authorities violated its previous orders, and if so, the state may face both legal and financial repercussions.

Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Demolitions

FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES