NATIONAL: Uttarakhand HC Slams Demolition Notice to Rape Accused
Rape Allegations Spark Outrage in Nainital
A 12-year-old girl’s alleged rape by a 65-year-old man, Usman (Usman), in Nainital (Nainital) on April 12 triggered widespread unrest. The girl’s mother filed a complaint at a police station on Wednesday evening, leading to Usman’s arrest under the POCSO Act.
Demolition Notice Defies Supreme Court
The Nainital Municipal Council issued a demolition notice to Usman’s residence, alleging encroachment on municipal/forest land. This action violated the Supreme Court (Supreme Court) guidelines issued on November 13, 2024, prohibiting demolitions based solely on criminal accusations.
High Court’s Stern Intervention
Usman’s 60-year-old wife approached the Uttarakhand High Court (Uttarakhand High Court), challenging the notice through her counsel, Kartikey Hari Gupta (Kartikey Hari Gupta). The bench, led by Chief Justice G Narender (Chief Justice G Narender) and Justice Ravindra Maithani (Justice Ravindra Maithani), reprimanded the municipal council, stating, “You cannot violate a Supreme Court order; it’s recent and clear on demolition procedures.”
Municipal Council Backs Down
Advocate J S Virk (J S Virk), representing the municipal council, assured the court that the demolition notice would be withdrawn. The case is scheduled for further hearing on May 6, with the court demanding detailed responses from the authorities.
Protests and Vandalism Erupt
The rape allegations fueled protests in Nainital, with shops and restaurants in the market where Usman’s office is located being vandalized. The High Court criticized the police for failing to prevent the violence, with the Chief Justice remarking, “Your incompetence caused these issues, and you’re trying to cover it up.”
Police Inaction Questioned
When Usman was presented in court, a scuffle broke out with lawyers who refused to represent him, which the police failed to control. Justice Maithani questioned, “Why didn’t you anticipate this? How can anyone be denied legal representation?”
Threats and Local Tensions
Usman’s wife stated in her petition that she faced threats following media reports, forcing her to flee her home. With her husband in jail, responding to the demolition notice within three days was impossible, she argued.
Supreme Court Guidelines Ignored
The Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling against “bulldozer justice” mandates a minimum 15-day notice period before any demolition, which was disregarded in this case. The High Court emphasized strict adherence to these legal protocols.
Court Warns Against Communal Tensions
Without directly addressing communal allegations, the court directed authorities to act lawfully and avoid emotionally driven decisions. It demanded details on actions taken against those responsible for the vandalism.
Socioeconomic Fallout
The unrest disrupted Nainital’s tourism, with shops and street vendors shutting down. The High Court took suo motu cognizance, ordering enhanced vehicle checks and internet monitoring to maintain peace and order.