Bulldozers are used by the powerful against particular groups, frequently ignoring other groups that are just as guilty of identical acts. This is a pattern that we observe. The ideals of justice are being flagrantly violated by this selective application.
Any equitable society must recognise the crucial difference between punishment and retaliation.
The state is legally permitted to penalise those who break the law, but it is not permitted to take retaliatory action. This distinction is sharply highlighted by recent events in Udaipur, Rajasthan, and comparable situations in Madhya Pradesh. These events also expose a disturbing tendency of governments employing harsh measures under the pretence of justice. After a schoolboy in Udaipur stabbed a classmate, there were tensions among the community and eventually a riot. The law offers a precise procedure for dealing with these offences.
But rather of carrying out this legal process, the Rajasthan police destroyed the boy’s family home with a bulldozer. This action can only be characterised as retaliation rather than a sanctioned penalty. The boy’s parents and siblings, who were not involved in the crime, were made homeless as a result of being penalised for something they did not do.
This is not a unique instance. Similar punitive demolitions have taken place in Madhya Pradesh, where bulldozers have been used as political power weapons rather than as agents of law enforcement. Such acts give rise to grave worries regarding the abuse of governmental authority, especially in light of the seeming selective application of these demolitions. We observe a pattern in state after state where people in positions of authority employ bulldozers against particular groups while frequently ignoring others who are just as guilty of comparable offences. The concepts of justice and equality before the law are flagrantly violated by this selective application of the law.
It is a positive step that the supreme court intervened and entrusted the creation of demolition guidelines. These rules will guarantee that no one is punished without following the proper procedures, offering essential safeguards like advance notification, a chance to comment, and a reasonable amount of time before any destruction is done. This is an essential component of justice, not just a formality under the law.
Bulldozer use in these circumstances is a relatively new and risky phenomena that is reminiscent of extrajudicial practices like encounter killings that have afflicted states like Maharashtra and Punjab. The Supreme Court correctly denounced these actions and emphasised the need for the rule of law to take precedence. The standards that are being draughted are a positive step towards preventing punishment from becoming synonymous with retaliation. The state must always preserve the ideals of justice by making sure that everything it does is reasonable, proportionate, and compliant with the law.
Author: This news is edited by: Abhishek Verma, (Editor, CANON TIMES)
Authentic news.
