Afrène Fatima
Politician Javed Mohammad's house demolished in 2022
“You can get homesick at home, you know?”
That's what Afreen Fatima, an activist from Prayagraj, a city in northern India, feels from time to time.
In the summer of 2022, Ms. Fatima's childhood home — a two-story, yellow-brick house in the heart of the bustling city — was demolished overnight by authorities.
The house was demolished after her father, a local politician named Javed Mohammad, was arrested and named as the “key conspirator” of a Muslim protest, which had turned violent.
He denies these allegations and has never been convicted of any crime related to the June 2022 protests.
The family is just one of many people who have found themselves at the mercy of so-called “bulldozer justice” – when authorities quickly demolish the homes of people accused of crimes – but hopefully , among the last.
On Wednesday, India's highest court banned this practice which has grown in recent years, particularly in states governed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Although the victims include Hindu families, critics say the action primarily targets India's roughly 200 million Muslims, particularly after religious violence or protests – a charge the BJP denies.
Chief ministers of several states have linked the demolitions to their government's tough stance on crime. Officially, the reason given is that these structures were built illegally.
Experts have repeatedly questioned this, saying there is no legal justification for it and that punishing someone for an alleged crime using laws aimed at others makes no sense.
Getty Images
Critics say bulldozers are used to target Muslim citizens
Ms Fatima says that in the 20 months Mr Mohammad spent in prison – he was released on bail earlier this year – she and her family moved within the city twice.
It took some effort, but they finally feel settled. Yet there are times when their new home feels strangely unfamiliar, she says, like an “adopted space” that hasn’t been lived in enough.
“It's not the same. I spent most of my life in our old house. There are no memories here, it's empty,” she says.
So when the court read its judgment this week, Ms. Fatima hoped to finally be able to turn the page.
But the result turned out to be bittersweet.
Because even though the court prohibited authorities from arbitrarily razing the homes and businesses of those accused or convicted of crimes, it did not mention any form of reparation for families like Ms. Fatima's, who were victims of such demolitions in the past.
“We welcome this ruling, but what about those of us who have already lost our homes?” she said.
Somiya Fatima
Authorities cited illegal construction as the reason Mr Mohammad's house was razed – a charge he denies
This practice had become commonplace: in 2022, authorities in five states bulldozed 128 structures in just three months “as punishment,” according to an Amnesty International report.
In its order, which is more than 95 pages long, the court comes down hard on state governments, saying it cannot “become a judge and decide that an accused person is guilty and, therefore, punish him.” .
Inflicting such a punishment “recalls an anarchic state of affairs, where the strongest was right,” adds the judgment.
The court then issued a set of guidelines requiring authorities to give at least 15 days' notice to an occupant before the demolition of an illegal structure and to publicly explain the reason for the demolition. All public officials will also be held personally liable under Indian laws if any demolition is carried out unlawfully, the judgment added.
Rights groups, lawyers and opposition leaders hailed the order as a “turning point” in the fight against the unfair practice that has gone unchecked for years. “Late is the hour at which these guidelines have chosen to appear – but better late than never!” said Delhi-based lawyer Gautam Bhatia.
Govind Mathur, a judge and former chief justice of a high court, agrees that the order does not mention anything about the victims, but adds that “does not restrict any claim for compensation from such persons”.
“If an act is illegal, the victim can always seek compensation. The wrong committed will remain a wrong and the price must be paid by those at fault,” he said.
This order, adds Judge Mathur, is a “strong message for the state apparatus not to align itself with political leaders but to act in accordance with the law”.
Somiya Fatima
Afreen Fatima is a leading activist
Ms. Fatima emphasizes, however, that the reality is not so simple.
It has been more than two years since his family first challenged the demolition in a high court. But there was not a single hearing, she said.
She still remembers the day it all happened. Onlookers huddled in the corner to watch for the excavator that was falling on their house. Many of them were holding cameras and phones. Ms Fatima, who watched the demolition on her own phone from a relative's house, remembers being paralyzed.
She thought about her room and the large number of souvenirs and furniture stored there. There were stories everywhere, precious everyday memories, like the time she spent with her sister and the lively family discussions around the dinner table. “All that was gone,” she said.
While Ms. Fatima's family has been able to rebuild their lives to some extent, others say they are still stuck in limbo.
“We are practically on the streets, with nothing and no one,” explains Reshma, a daily wage laborer from the state of Rajasthan. In September, Reshma's house in Udaipur city was demolished for illegal encroachment, a day after her eight-year-old brother allegedly stabbed his classmate.
The child was taken into custody and sent to a juvenile home, while his father was arrested for complicity in murder. Since then, Reshma, her mother and her sister have lived in a small slum on the outskirts of the city.
For them, the court's decision makes no sense, she said. “We want real help, money or compensation to rebuild our lives, it doesn’t change anything.”
Vivek Singh
The court said such demolitions are reminiscent of an “anarchic situation”.
Like Ms. Fatima, Reshma's family also challenged the demolition in court. Legal experts say the Supreme Court's guidelines could potentially impact how all of these pending cases will be heard in the future.
“This decision will change a lot of things – the courts will have to check whether legal procedures were followed during these demolitions,” CU Singh, senior advocate at the Supreme Court, told BBC Hindi.
Ms. Fatima is not entirely sure whether the court order would actually stop the demolitions.
But her father, Mr. Mohammad, is brimming with hope, she said.
Sometimes she catches her father thinking about their old house – the sofas and rugs, the rows of books on the shelves, which he had painstakingly collected, probably still lying in the rubble.
“He made most of the improvements, from the curtains to the cushion covers. Losing the house broke his heart more than anyone else's,” she says.
But Mr. Mohammad does not want to dwell on the suffering and is already busy making further improvements to the house and his life. “He keeps telling me that this is a historical order and that we need to talk about it as much as possible,” his daughter says.
“Just like this house, we rebuild lives and renovate our memories.”
