No action will be taken on demolition notices related to Bahraich violence until tomorrow: Uttar Pradesh govt assures SC

New Delhi [India], October 22 (ANI): Uttar Pradesh government has assured the Supreme Court that authorities won’t take any action till tomorrow on demolition notices issued against some buildings belonging to persons allegedly involved in the October 13 Bahraich violence in the state.

Notably, violence erupted between two communities during the Durga idol immersion procession on October 13 in Bhraich, leading to the killing of one person identified as Ram Gopal Mishra.

Of the five arrested in connection with the Bahraich violence, two were injured during the encounter, while the remaining three were taken into custody, according to Uttar Pradesh Director General of Police (DGP) Prashant Kumar, who also stated that the situation is now under control.

On October 18, the Public Works Department (PWD) issued a demolition notice for the residence of Abdul Hameed, one of the accused in the Bahraich violence, over illegal construction in the area.

Following this, a petition was moved in the Supreme Court against the demolition notices issued by the Uttar Pradesh authorities to several people, including Abdul Hameed, an accused in the Bahraich violence over alleged illegal construction.

Three petitioners jointly filed the petition through advocate Mrigank Prabhakar, urging the SC to quash the demolition notices.

The petitioners argue that the proposed demolition is punitive, saying, “The defence of “unauthorized construction” is being used as a ruse to carry out punitive demolition and also to illegally overcome the interim protective orders passed by this Court on 17-09-2024.”

They had further submitted that the proposed demolition action is “punitive” and is ex-facie actuated by “malice” because of the undue haste with which the respondent authority has initiated the proposed action.

“The trigger for the proposed demolition notices is the close proximity of the communal flare-up and violent incident and the impugned notice, based on the perception of OR the alleged involvement of the owners/ residents/occupants in that alleged criminal activity,” the petitioner said.