JOIN USProphet remark violence: Uttar Pradesh authorities issue demolition notices to accused and kin, says report
The Prayagraj and Saharanpur city authorities in Uttar Pradesh have issued show-cause notices of demolition to those accused, and their kin, of involvement in the violence that ensued on June 10 over the remarks made on Prophet Mohammed. The houses are allegedly built in violation of norms.
According to a report by The Indian Express, the Prayagraj Development Authority has issued over 30 notices to residents, one of whom is the elder brother of AIMIM’s district president Shah Alam, who was allegedly involved in the violence.
A non-bailable warrant was issued by a local court against Alam recently, on an application moved by the police.
“The house of Shah Alam and his brother are built on separate plots. But there is no boundary wall between the two plots. Since Syed Maqsood (Alam's brother) along with his family lives abroad since long, Shah Alam and his family were using the entire property. PDA issued notice to Syed Maqsood but it is indirectly to Shah Alam. We have come to know that Syed Maqsood’s son recently returned to India,'' a local resident reportedly told IE.
The publication further said that the houses of Shah Alam and Syed Maqsood were found locked at Gausnagar, with the show-cause notice, issued on June 14 by the PDA zonal officer, pasted outside, asking Maqsood to appear in court on June 29 defending the construction against demolition.
Mohammad Farhan, AIMIM state spokesperson, claimed that Shah Alam was falsely implicated and the PDA notice was to harass his family.
In addition, the Saharanpur Development Authority has reportedly issued 10 notices, including to Mehraj and Mohammad Ali who are both in jail after being booked for violence.
“Notices were issued to Mehraj and Mohammad Ali stating their house located at Thateri Wali Gali and Peer Wali Gali, were built in violation of the norms under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Ordinance, 1973. They were asked to file a reply on June 24 as to why demolition order should not be issued against their residence,” Babar Waseem, lawyer of the accused, told the publication. “I filed a reply to the SDA against the notices issued to Mehraj and Mohammad Ali. I stated that the two are not owners of those properties,” he added.