The Bombay High Court on Monday stayed the demolition of the properties of two persons accused of being involved in the violence that broke out in Nagpur on March 17, Bar and Bench reported.

The direction came hours after the municipal authorities bulldozed the home of Fahim Khan, one of the persons accused in the matter, on Monday morning. The court’s intervention halted the demolition of allegedly illegal portions of the residence of another accused, Yusuf Sheikh.

Khan, the leader of the Minorities Democratic Party, and others have been charged with sedition and spreading misinformation on social media in connection with the clashes.

The violence broke out hours after Hindutva groups held a protest in Nagpur demanding that Mughal emperor Aurangzeb’s tomb located in Maharashtra’s Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar be removed.

On Monday, the bench of Justices Nitin Sambre and Vrushali Joshi criticised the municipal authorities for their “high-handedness” and said the demolitions appeared to be prima facie in breach of a 2022 judgement by the Supreme Court relating to bulldozing of structures, Bar and Bench reported.

The plea was heard at the Nagpur bench of the High Court.

Sunil Gajbhiye, Nagpur Municipal Corporation’s deputy engineer, told ANI on Monday that the demolition at Khan’s home had been conducted following “proper investigation”.

“We had the order to investigate a complaint about illegal construction. We did a proper investigation. A notice was issued for 24 hours as per section 53(1) of the MRTP Act [1966 Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act],” Gajbhiye was quoted as saying. “As soon as the duration was completed, this action was taken.”

There are no provisions in Indian law that allow for the demolition of property as a punitive measure. However, the practice has become commonplace in Bharatiya Janata Party-ruled states.

In November, the Supreme Court held as illegal the practice of demolishing properties of persons accused of crimes as a punitive measure. It said that processes must be followed before removing allegedly illegal encroachments.

On Monday, the High Court court said that it would look into the legality of the demolition notices that the municipal authorities had issued to the petitioners and their subsequent actions after the municipal commissioner and the executive engineer submit their responses.

The matter will be heard next on April 15.

The court expressed concern about the property owners not having been given the chance to present their case before the demolitions, Bar and Bench reported.

Advocate Ashwin Ingole, representing Khan, told Bar and Bench that such demolitions cannot be carried out without providing the affected persons with a 15-day notice and an opportunity to be heard as per the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Ayaz Sheikh, the brother of Yusuf Sheikh, alleged that the municipal authorities had started razing a portion of their home despite the family having all property documents, PTI reported.

The news agency quoted Ayaz Sheikh as claiming that the structure was built legally and that the municipal corporation's action was an act of revenge.

“We had no involvement in the riots and this property belongs to my father and I am the owner of this property since the 1970s,” he was quoted as saying. “We are law-abiding citizens and Hindus and Muslims stay together here."

The violence in Nagpur

During the clashes in Nagpur on March 17, stones were thrown at the police amid rumours that a cloth with the Islamic declaration of faith, known as the Kalma, had been burnt during an agitation by a Hindutva group in the late afternoon.

The police, however, denied that such a cloth was burned during the protest.

Several persons, including police personnel, were injured and vehicles were damaged in the violence. A 38-year-old man who was injured in the clashes died at a hospital on Saturday.

The police have so far arrested 104 persons. At least 12 first information reports have been filed in connection with the violence.

Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said on Saturday that the cost of damage to property during the violence will be recovered from the rioters.