What happened
The Allahabad High Court delivered a split opinion in a dispute involving alleged bulldozer action against residential homes and commercial properties in Uttar Pradesh. The matter has now been referred to the Chief Justice for placement before a third judge because the two judges disagreed on whether the High Court could add safeguards beyond the framework already laid down by the Supreme Court of India.
The petition came from three residents of Hamirpur district in Uttar Pradesh. They said their house and commercial establishments were sealed and faced demolition after an FIR was registered against a relative under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, 2021.
Why the dispute matters
The case is important because it touches the constitutional limits on demolition action, especially when the affected property owners are not the named accused in the criminal case. It also raises a wider question on whether administrative demolition can be justified on land-use grounds even when criminal allegations have triggered public controversy.
Background and earlier position
Related current affairs
- Saharanpur court orders ‘150-yr-old mosque’ eviction; orders demolition later
- Supreme Court statement says allegations against sitting judge must follow institutional mechanism
- Teachers on Census work deemed on school duty; cannot refuse assignment, says Calcutta HC
- Preacher sentenced to death in POCSO case (INBRIEF)
- InBrief: Allahabad HC continues to question UP government actions on temple land
- CJI expresses confidence in young lawyers