[ad_1]
Bhopal:
In robust remarks on bulldozer motion in opposition to these accused in felony circumstances, the Madhya Pradesh Excessive Courtroom has mentioned it has grow to be “trendy” for civic authorities to demolish properties with out following correct process.
The Indore bench of the excessive court docket made the observations earlier this month in a case referring to the demolition of the house of Rahul Langri, who faces a case of voluntarily inflicting damage to extort property. He’s accused of threatening and assaulting a person, who later died by suicide. Langri was arrested and despatched to jail. Police then received in contact with the civic physique and his two-storey home in Ujjain was razed.
Langri’s spouse Radha approached the court docket and mentioned in her petition {that a} discover within the title of Raisa Bi, the earlier proprietor, was served and the home was razed the following day with out listening to them out. The home, she mentioned in her petition, was not unlawful. She mentioned the home was registered with the housing board they usually had taken a financial institution mortgage.
Justice Vivek Rusia dominated that the demolition was unlawful and awarded a compensation of Rs 1 lakh every to Radha Langri and her mother-in-law Vimla Gurjar.
The court docket additionally ordered motion in opposition to civic officers for finishing up the demolition. The petitioners have now determined to maneuver the civil court docket for greater compensation.
“As noticed repeatedly by this court docket, it has grow to be trendy now for native administration and native our bodies to demolish any home by drawing up proceedings with out complying with the principal of pure justice and publish it within the newspaper. It seems that on this case additionally the felony case was registered in opposition to one of many relations of the petitioners and demolition actions had been carried out,” the court docket mentioned.
The court docket added that as an alternative of razing the homes, the petitioners ought to have been requested to get the development regularised. It added that “demolition must be the final recourse to be adopted, that too after giving a correct alternative to the proprietor of the home to get it regularized”.
The petitioner Radha Langri alleged that her husband was jailed on false prices and their home demolished. “They gave a day’s discover after which razed our house. We tried to point out them the property papers, however they didn’t hear. Now we’ve got received justice,” she mentioned. She added {that a} crime is dedicated by a person and never by the household. “This (bulldozer motion) shouldn’t be completed.”
The petitioner counsel Tehzeeb Khan mentioned, “If a felony stays in a home, it doesn’t imply each particular person in that home is a felony. Razing his home will punish the innocents too.”
[ad_2]
Supply hyperlink