PIL seeks implementation of SC guidelines amid property demolitions by Punjab Police

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court urging the enforcement of Supreme Court guidelines in response to reported actions by the Punjab Police involving the demolition of properties linked to alleged drug peddlers. The plea highlights concerns over the legality of such demolitions and seeks adherence to due process.

In November of last year, the Supreme Court issued a strong statement against the trend of “bulldozer justice,” emphasising that the executive branch cannot demolish properties solely on the grounds that the owners are accused or convicted of crimes. The Court ruled that such actions, if taken without due process, violate the principles of judicial review and the rule of law. The executive cannot assume the role of a judge, declare guilt, and impose punishment through property demolition, the Court had stated.

The PIL, seeks immediate directions to ensure the strict implementation of legal procedures for the forfeiture of illegally acquired properties under Chapter V-A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act and Section 107 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. The plea also calls for the enforcement of Section 19 (a) to (c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, to address the drug menace in Punjab and to prevent potential contempt proceedings against officials.

The petition references reports claiming that the Punjab Police have demolished properties allegedly acquired through drug trade proceeds. It further states that authorities have identified nearly 78 more properties linked to drug peddlers in Ludhiana for demolition and have already attached properties worth Rs 94 crores associated with 112 smugglers.

The plea argues that the NDPS Act provides a comprehensive framework for dealing with illegally acquired properties and that proper legal procedures must be followed to address the drug crisis in Punjab. It emphasizes that adherence to due process is essential not only to curb the drug menace but also to protect officials from potential legal repercussions in light of the Supreme Court’s earlier judgment.