The Supreme Court transferred the contempt petitions related to demolition of structures to the High Court. According to the court, there are factual disputes in the cases which will be investigated by the HC. The High Court has been instructed to take a decision within 4 months.
New Delhi [भारत]July 24 (ANI): The Supreme Court has transferred a batch of contempt petitions and related writ petitions alleging violation of its November 13, 2024 judgment to the concerned high court. The court said that these cases involve factual disputes, which require detailed investigation and evidence.
High Court will investigate the matter
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Jaimalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana directed the concerned High Court to investigate whether the demolition action was carried out in violation of the Supreme Court directions. The court requested the High Court to decide these cases as soon as possible, if possible within four months.
The bench said that the petitioners have claimed that their properties were demolished without following the principles of natural justice and in violation of law. However, officials argued that due process was followed and that the action was taken against illegal constructions or encroachment on public land.
The Supreme Court said that since these issues involve factual disputes, they should be decided by the jurisdictional High Court after examining the records and, if necessary, by recording evidence through the district courts.
The Court also ordered that the interim protection granted earlier to the petitioners will continue as long as the cases are pending before the High Court. Also, it allowed the parties to approach the High Court for any modifications in the interim orders. The bench clarified that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the allegations made by any party.
The Supreme Court said the high courts will also examine whether its directions dated November 13, 2024, were violated and whether the actions of the authorities amount to contempt of court. It allowed the parties to file additional documents and affidavits before the High Court and also allowed them to take other legal remedies as advised.
Case related to Madhya Pradesh High Court
In a related case, the Supreme Court partially accepted an appeal filed by Imroz Khan. The Court observed that the Madhya Pradesh High Court had dismissed the contempt proceedings on the mistaken assumption that the authorities were unaware of the earlier decision of the Supreme Court. The bench set aside the High Court order and sent the case back for fresh consideration.
The Supreme Court directed the Madhya Pradesh High Court to decide whether the disputed land is public or private property, whether the construction is authorized or unauthorized, and if it is unauthorized, whether the demolition was carried out by following legal process. The related contempt petition has also been transferred to the High Court, with a request to decide on both the cases together within three months.
Some other petitions were withdrawn
The court also disposed of some related cases. This allowed advocate SS Qazi to withdraw contempt petition number 610/2025. The Writ Petition (Civil) No. 340/2022 and the Contempt Petition (Diary No. 13431/2022) were dismissed as ‘Not Pressed’ after senior advocate MR Shamshad submitted that the petitioners did not wish to pursue them. On the request of senior advocate CU Singh, the applications in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 162/2022 were also withdrawn with liberty to approach the concerned High Court.
The appeal was mentioned before the bench by senior advocate S Muralidhar, following which the court agreed to take it up, allowed and partly allowed the appeal.
Those appearing in the case included senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Huzefa Ahmadi, Sanjay R Hegde, Salman Khurshid, MR Shamshad, CU Singh and IH Syed. The respondents and the governments were represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, Additional Solicitors General KM Nataraj, Aishwarya Bhati and Anil Kaushik, advocate-on-record Shrirang Bharat Verma, advocate Harshvardhan Mall Visen and several other lawyers. (ANI)
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianetnews Editorial staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)