SC orders status quo in Ahmedabad slum demolition case, Assures to pay rent differential
New Delhi, Apr 25 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Friday directed that status quo be maintained at a slum site in Chharanagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, where demolition was allegedly being carried out despite the Court's earlier protective order.
A Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh passed the interim order while hearing a plea by 49 slum dwellers who claimed that they were being forcibly evicted without proper notice or rehabilitation, in violation of the Gujarat Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1973.
The matter was first mentioned before the Court on Thursday, when temporary protection from demolition was granted till Monday (April 28). However, after reports emerged that demolition activities had resumed at the site, the petitioner's counsel, AoR Sumitra Kumari Choudhary, urgently mentioned the matter again, seeking enforcement of the interim relief.
The Bench questioned the petitioner's counsel regarding relocation of slum dwellers as part of the area's redevelopment plan. When it was submitted that the rent compensation offered of Rs 6,000 per month was insufficient even for a slum accommodation, the Court advised the petitioners to accept the available alternative housing, and assured that the Court would address the rent differential if necessary.
Posting the matter for detailed hearing on April 28, the Court emphasized that no further demolition should take place in the interim.
The petitioners had earlier approached the Gujarat High Court challenging a public notice dated January 29, 2025, which required them to vacate their homes within 30 days.
They contended that individual notices were not served, and only a public notice was issued, violating their rights under the Slum Act. They also alleged that demolition began on March 20, 2025, without proper procedure.
The State of Gujarat, in response, argued that the area had been declared a 'Slum Clearance Area' in 2019, and that all structures were unauthorized. A work order had been issued to a private developer, and multiple public notices were pasted at the site. The State maintained that the petitioners were attempting to stall a long-pending redevelopment project, which had already benefited hundreds of residents.
The High Court had rejected the slum dwellers' plea, holding that due procedure was followed and over 508 beneficiaries were already relocated and awaiting new housing. It further observed that seven residential towers had already been constructed, undermining the claim that the petitioners were unaware of the redevelopment process.
The High Court had granted 30 days' time for voluntary vacation, provided the petitioners filed an undertaking.
Now, with the Supreme Court stepping in and indicating sympathy toward the plight of the slum residents, particularly on the issue of inadequate rent compensation, the case is set to be further heard on April 28, with the Court's assurance of balanced relief keeping the demolition in abeyance till then.
UNI SNG SJC
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
17 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC refuses to quash FIR against ex-judge accused of raping minor daughter
New Delhi, Calling it 'shocking', the Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to quash the criminal proceedings against a former judicial officer accused of sexually abusing his minor daughter. 'The daughter is making an allegation. It is a shocking case. He is a judicial officer and these are serious allegations of incest. This is shocking. And the daughter has made the allegations. She must have been scarred for life. How can this be a case for quashing?" a bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan asked. The bench, as a result, dismissed his appeal against a Bombay High Court passed on April 15, 2025, upholding the framing of charges by the trial court. The bench did not agree to the submissions that the judge was framed due to the long-standing matrimonial dispute with his estranged wife and the case was a 'counter blast' and lodged after his father died by suicide allegedly after being harassed by the complainant's side. 'We don't want to get into all this. Suicide may be because of the son's actions,' Justice Manmohan remarked. The counsel for the former judge said, 'This man's entire life has been ruined starting with his matrimonial problems." 'His father committed suicide. The complaint was made much later and was never mentioned during earlier legal proceedings,' the lawyer added. The bench, however, noted the serious allegations and charges under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act against him. The case stems from an FIR registered on January 21, 2019, in Bhandara, Maharashtra after the alleged incidents of abuse taking place between May 2014 and 2018. It came on record that a chargesheet had been filed but formal charges were yet to be framed in the case. The former judge was charged under Section 354 of IPC for assaulting a woman with intent to outrage her modesty apart from Sections 7, 8, 9, 9, and 10 of the POCSO Act, relating to various forms of sexual assault, including aggravated and incestuous abuse. The plea alleged the complaint was made with malicious intent and the FIR was registered four years coinciding with an ongoing custody dispute and matrimonial litigation after the alleged events. The plea said the statutory presumption under the POCSO Act was improperly invoked, as no foundational facts had yet been established. With top court's refusal to quash the charges, the former judge is expected to stand trial in a special POCSO court.
United News of India
33 minutes ago
- United News of India
Mumbai housing fraud: Woman posing as MHADA officer arrested
Mumbai, June 11 (UNI) The police arrested a woman for allegedly defrauding people of over Rs 1.22 crore by offering them low-cost flats in prime areas of Mumbai under the guise of Maharashtra government official housing schemes, police said on Wednesday. The Dindoshi police station arrested the accused, Bela D'Souza, who was reportedly posing as a senior official with the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) and promised affordable flats in Jogeshwari, Goregaon, Mahim and Bandra area of the city. Police have identified three more accused in the case, Kedar Satam, Jitendra Rathod, and Girish Rao, who are absconding. All four have been booked for cheating and criminal breach of trust. A complaint was made following which an FIR was registered at Dindoshi police station against the four accused. During the investigation, police tracked down and arrested Bela D'Souza. The remaining three accused are on the run and efforts are underway to locate them, police said. Police suspect the group may have defrauded other individuals using similar tactics. Authorities are also verifying if the accused had used the names of actual housing schemes or officials to gain the trust of victims. UNI AAA PRS
Hindustan Times
38 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
HC quashes cat kidnapping case against Bengaluru man, rebukes police for travesty
The Karnataka high court has quashed criminal proceedings against a Bengaluru resident accused of 'kidnapping' his neighbour's cat, Daisy, and rebuked the police for getting entangled in what it called a 'whimsical pursuit of justice.' 'The cat named Daisy appears to have driven everyone the criminal justice system...,' said the court on Tuesday. Justice M Nagaprasanna, who heard the case, expressed disbelief that a dispute over a missing feline spiralled into a full-blown criminal case, with a First Information Report (FIR), investigation, CCTV scrutiny, and a charge sheet invoking serious provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). In 2022, Nikitha Anjana Iyer filed a complaint against her neighbour, Taha Hussain, alleging he wrongfully confined her pet cat. Police took the complaint at face value, registered the FIR, and began investigating. The court said what followed was a travesty. The police initially slapped IPC Sections 428 and 429 related to acts of cruelty against animals. The sections were dropped and replaced with Sections 504 (intentional insult), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 509 (insulting a woman's modesty) by the time the charge sheet was filed. None of those charges withstood legal scrutiny. Justice Nagaprasanna said the entire police machinery got involved in the case of a missing cat, recorded statements of neighbours, checked CCTV footage, found nothing, and still filed a charge sheet. '...If the contents of the complaint are seen, it shocks the conscience of the court as to how the jurisdictional police could have registered the complaint, as there is no offence indicated except a missing cat and alleged wrongful custody.' Iyer described Daisy as a companion she cared for 'like a child.' But the court found no evidence to support the allegation that Hussain confined the cat. It accepted the petitioner's argument that Daisy was an agile and independent feline with a habit of jumping in and out of apartment windows, hardly grounds for criminal liability. Justice Nagaprasanna took exception to what he called 'retrospective embellishments' in the charge sheet, citing new allegations, including abuse and sexual gestures, that had not featured in the original complaint. 'Not even a titter of an ingredient' necessary to sustain the IPC charges was present, the court said. The court called the case a 'symptomatic misuse of the criminal process'. It said such frivolous litigation clogs courts and wastes judicial and police resources. Justice Nagaprasanna said the police deserved 'stern admonishment' for allowing themselves to be swept into a dispute so clearly unfit for criminal prosecution. 'Cases of this nature should serve as a gentle, but firm reminder to all stakeholders in the criminal justice system that the law is a solemn instrument — not a toy to be played with at the altar of personal pique.' The court stayed proceedings in the case in July 2024, noting then that allowing such matters to progress would choke the criminal justice system. In its final order on Tuesday, the court quashed proceedings against Hussain and granted him liberty to initiate action for malicious prosecution. The court refrained from acting against the complainant, citing her absence.
