Uttam Nagar clash: Delhi HC halts MCD demolition of accused homes for a week

The bench observed the women had wrongfully combined multiple prayers into a single petition, and its jurisdiction was limited to issues concerning demolition and encroachment, not police protection.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday restrained the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) for one week from demolishing houses belonging to the mothers of two individuals accused or questioned in connection with the murder of a 26-year-old man during clashes between families in Uttam Nagar over Holi celebrations, even as it refused to consider their petition seeking protection from police action and from proposed demolition.

Security personnel deployed at the demolition site in Uttam Nagar after a massive uproar over the killing of a 26-year-old man during Holi celebrations on March 8. (Hindustan Times)

The order was passed by a bench of justice Amit Bansal, who directed the two women – Shahnaz and Jarina – to file a better petition confined to demolition issues within one week and asked MCD to take no action until then.

While Shahnaz’s two sons, aged 14, were questioned by police, Jarina’s son Imran was named an accused in the FIR registered in connection with the March 4 incident that led to the death of Tarun Kumar.

In her petition, argued by advocate Divyesh Pratap Singh, Jarina alleged she feared facing similar action to the demolition carried out by MCD on March 8, when a portion of a four-story building belonging to another accused Umardeep was bulldozed. She argued such action could be taken as a punitive measure merely because members of her family were questioned in a criminal case.

Shahnaz, in her plea, stated her house was next to Umardeep’s residence and the demolition had created an atmosphere of fear in the locality.

The bench observed the women had wrongfully combined multiple prayers into a single petition, and its jurisdiction was limited to issues concerning demolition and encroachment, not police protection.

“Police investigation and all, you have wrongfully clubbed all this. It is pointed out that the averments made in the writ are vague, and an entirely separate cause of action has been made. The jurisdiction of this court is with regard to encroachment and demolition. Police protection is not within my mandate,” justice Bansal said.

He added: “Accordingly, the petitioner seeks to withdraw the petition to file a better petition in one week, to file a petition with better particulars. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Till the time you move your fresh petition, they will not do anything.”

Additional solicitor general Chetan Sharma, appearing for Delhi Police, argued that under the guise of seeking protection against demolition, the women were attempting to obtain protection from police action. He contended such relief could not be granted by a civil court and would require a separate criminal petition, warning that granting protection could hamper the ongoing investigation. “It’s a case of misjoinder of cause of action… If there is a murder, it has to be investigated, and you cannot use a petition against demolition for protection,” the ASG submitted.

MCD’s lawyer Sanjay Poddar termed the petitions “mischievous and bereft of facts.” He submitted that the March 8 demolition drive cleared a lane comprising eight houses that had encroached upon a public street, describing it as a routine anti-encroachment exercise not requiring prior notice. While Poddar maintained the women’s houses also encroached on the public street, he assured the court no action would be taken against them for the time being.

The clash between the two families began on March 4 when an 11-year-old girl threw a water balloon from her terrace, which hit a Muslim woman. The altercation escalated into a fight, resulting in injuries to eight people. Tarun Kumar, 26, succumbed to his injuries the following day. An FIR was registered under relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.