The Uttar Pradesh government has told the Supreme Court that demolition drives by local authorities were not extra-legal punitive measures targeting people from a particular community.
In a 63-page affidavit filed in response to petitions filed by Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind, the UP government said that the demolition drive against the owners of illegal structures was a routine measure.
Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind had filed a petition in the Supreme Court on June 13 after civil administrations in Prayagraj, Kanpur and Saharanpur ordered houses of accused involved in violent protests against remarks on Prophet Muhammad by former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma. had broken.
The petition has sought a direction to the Uttar Pradesh government not to take any action against residential or commercial property of any accused in any criminal proceeding in Kanpur district as an additional legal punitive measure.
On the petition of Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind, the Supreme Court on June 16 gave the state government three days to respond.
What did the UP government say in its affidavit?
In its affidavit, the UP government denied doing anything extraordinary and stood firm on telling the Autonomous Development Authorities and their bulldozers about their duties without fear or favour.
“We take strong objection to the petitioner (Jamit) naming the highest constitutional functionaries of the state and wrongly coloring the legal functions of the local development authorities, which are strictly adhering to the UP Urban Planning and Development Act of 1973. The government has said in its affidavit that action will be taken against the accused persons targeting a particular religious community.
Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind attempts to give a malicious tint to the legal action taken by the local development authorities in accordance with the procedure established by law by unilaterally selecting the media, reporting certain incidents and extrapolating from the same broader allegations. against the state,” the affidavit added.
On the demolition in Kanpur, the state government said the structures were illegal and non-compliant constructions and proceedings against them were initiated long before the riots in June 2022.
The affidavit said that in one of the two cases, proceedings began in August 2020 and in the other in February 2022. It said that in these cases, the builder and owner had considered them to be illegal constructions.
Feather Javed Mohammed’s house demolishedOn June 12, an accused in the Prayagraj clash, the UP government said the building was without approval. It was unofficially used as an office, and proceedings broke out before the riots.
As far as taking action against those accused of riots is concerned, the State Government stated that it is taking strict action against them in accordance with completely different laws, namely: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), Indian Penal Code (IPC). CrPC (IPC), UP Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act; and (iv) the Uttar Pradesh Recovery of Damage to Public and Private Property Act, 2020 and the Rules 2021.