(Judicial Quest News Network)
In a Significant development in Allahabad, four legal fraternity members have written to Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court to take cognizance of the “illegal “demolition of the house in Pragyaraj.
Yesterday the local authorities had demolished the home of Javeed Mohammed, a leader of Welfare Party of India and father of activist Afreen Fatima.
The main accused Javeed Mohammedin Friday’s violence in the city over the Prophet Mohammed controversy.
In a letter to the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court, the lawyers contended that the demolition was against the law because the house was in the name of Javed’s wife.
The Four Advocatesnamely K.K.Roy, M Saeed Siddiqui, Rajvendra Singh and Prabal Pratap have prayed that the house in question be reconstructed and compensation be provided to the wife of the Javed, in whose name, the letter claims, the house was registered.
It is pertinent to mentioned here that Javed Mohammed has been named as a key conspirator by the Uttar Pradesh police alleging that he had given a call for the Friday protest (in Pragyaraj) against the controversial statements of BJP leader on the Prophet Mohammed.
Javed was arrested on June 10 and thereafter, his wife and daughter were also detained, however, they were released subsequently.
His elder daughter Afreen, a student in Delhi’s p[remier Jawaharlal Nehru University, was part of protest against controversial Citizenship Amendment Act and the police said they are examining her role in Friday’s protest as well.
Earlier on June, 11 a notice was given by the Municipal Authorities stating that the in house in question shall be demolished and they should vacate the house. Consequently, yesterday, the house was demolished completely.
Further the letter petition avers that Javed Mohammed had no ownership of the house in question.
Since Javed Mohammad has no ownership over the land and the building which is selected and targeted for demolition, any attempt by the District and Police Administration and the Development Authority to demolish that house will be against the basic principle of law and a grave injustice to the wife and children of Javed Mohammad.
The letter submits that to justify the act of demolition, the Pryagaraj Development Authority had pasted the demolition notice on the wall of the house of Parveen Fatima only on June,11, even though no show cause notice was issued to them earlier.
The letter further contends that demolition is the resort for the officers and before that, section 26 of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development act, 1973 deals with the penalties which runs from 26 to 26A, C, B, D. That section 21-A of the act of 1973 deals with power to seal unauthorized development and section 20a-A(4) gives power to the aggrieved person to make an appeal before the Chairman if any order of sealing has been passed by the vice Chairman of the authority.
It is also contended that the entire act of bulldozing the building is against the provision of the act and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the constitution of India.
That according to the Criminal Jurisprudence , criminal liability is individual liability to the person who commits the crime and his or her family members cannot be punished for any act of violence or illegal/criminal activity by any person. That it is pertinent to mentioned here that the aforesaid house was constructed approximately 20 years before and in the area where is was situated mostly are constructed without any sanctioned map but the demolition of the house of Mrs Parveen Fatima is totally illegal and a pick and choose exercise which is unjust and arbitrary