Attempt to give mala fide colour to lawful demolitions: Uttar Pradesh to Supreme Court

The Uttar Pradesh government has told the Supreme Court that a plea filed by Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind against the recent demolitions of houses of certain individuals, has "attempted to give a mala fide colour to lawful action taken by the local development authorities as per the procedure established by law".

It alleged that the applicant resorted to "cherry picking one sided media reporting of a few incidents and extrapolating sweeping allegations from the same against the State."

The state justified demolitions carried out in Prayagraj and Kanpur after the violent protests against BJP leaders' remarks on Prophet Mohammed. It claimed the allegations are "completely false and misleading". "Pertinently, none of the actual affected parties, if any, have approached this court in relation to the lawful demolition actions," the Uttar Pradesh government said in its affidavit.

Also Read — Demolitions to happen only as per law, not as a measure of retaliation: SC to UP government

With regard to demolitions in Kanpur, the written response said, the factum of the constructions being illegal, has also been admitted by the two builders over there.

About demolition of a house occupied by one Javed Mohammed, the state government said the complaints were received from local residents about illegal constructions and use of it for commercial purposes of running the office of 'Welfare Party of India'. This was "in contravention of norms; the people kept coming and going all times of the day and night and park their vehicles on road, creating a constant problem in the commuting," the state said, also giving dates of prior notices issued in the matter before the demolition on June 12.

It contended that the demolitions have been carried out by the local development authorities, which are statutory autonomous bodies, independent of the State administration, as per law as part of their routine effort against unauthorised/illegal constructions and encroachments, in accordance with the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1972.

"The petitioner, Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind, has failed to place on record the facts duly supported by affidavits and has merely hand picked certain media, reporting to make unfounded allegations against the State machinery and its officers, and seeks sweeping omnibus reliefs unfounded in either law or fact," the UP Government said.

In so far as taking action against the persons accused in rioting is concerned, the state government is taking stringent steps against them in accordance with completely different set of statutes, namely Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the Indian Penal Code (IPC), UP Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Prevention of Public Property Damages Act; and (iv) Uttar Pradesh Recovery of Damages to Public and Private Property Act, 2020 and Rules 2021, the affidavit said.

On June 16, the top court had told the Uttar Pradesh government that demolitions of houses must be done in accordance with the law and not as a retaliatory measure. It had also sought a response from the state government in a plea that questioned a series of actions taken in Kanpur and Prayagraj after the violent protests.