[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he recent demolitions in Uttarakhand, where several mazars (Muslim shrines) were bulldozed, have raised serious concerns about the rule of law in India. Officially justified as measures to clear “illegal encroachments,” these actions disproportionately targeted Muslim religious sites, suggesting a disturbing bias. While the administration claims legality, the focus on structures predominantly associated with the Muslim community reflects selective enforcement, raising questions about justice and equality.
India’s Constitution guarantees equality before the law (Article 14), along with the right to life, liberty (Article 21), and freedom of religion (Article 25). Yet, these demolitions, often carried out without due legal process or proper notice, violate these fundamental rights. Numerous reports, including those by The Indian Express, The Wire, and Scroll, have documented how Muslim homes, shops, and religious structures are disproportionately targeted. In Delhi’s Jahangirpuri, for instance, bulldozers were sent to demolish properties even after a Supreme Court stay order, highlighting a disregard for judicial directives. Similar actions in Uttar Pradesh saw properties of those accused of protesting against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) destroyed without proper legal recourse.
The selective nature of these demolitions becomes even clearer when compared to the treatment of other religious communities. Hindu temples, for instance, are rarely subject to such aggressive measures, even when they occupy disputed land. The state actively supports the upkeep of Hindu religious sites, often funding festivals and maintaining temples. Christian churches and Sikh gurdwaras also manage their affairs with relative autonomy. In stark contrast, Muslim properties face increasing restrictions, not just through demolitions but also through legislative changes like the Waqf Amendment Bill 2024, which seeks to curtail the autonomy of Waqf properties—essential assets that fund social and educational projects within the Muslim community. This legislation reflects a broader strategy to weaken Muslim institutions, directly violating the Constitution’s guarantees under Article 26.
The targeting of Muslim properties, whether through selective demolitions or restrictive legislation, appears to be part of a deliberate attempt to marginalise the community. The rise of Hindutva extremism, distinct from the inclusive values of Hinduism, promotes a vision of a Hindu Rashtra that seeks to diminish the presence and influence of minorities, particularly Muslims. This directly conflicts with the vision of India’s founders, who crafted a nation built on secularism, diversity, and unity.
Prominent leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, B.R. Ambedkar, Jawaharlal Nehru, Maulana Azad, Sarojini Naidu, Hansa Mehta, and Begum Aizaz Rasul envisioned a country where every citizen, regardless of faith, could live with dignity and freedom. The Constitution they helped shape embodies these ideals, guaranteeing the right to practice and propagate one’s religion (Article 25) and ensuring equality before the law (Article 14). However, the ongoing selective targeting of Muslim sites undermines these constitutional promises, eroding India’s secular fabric.
The recent introduction of the Waqf Amendment Bill further exemplifies the efforts to limit Muslim institutional autonomy. Waqf properties have long served as vital community assets, supporting mosques, educational institutions, and charitable initiatives. By restricting their management, the state is undermining a key aspect of Muslim socio-cultural identity. This strategy of using legislative tools to curtail minority rights is a subtle but powerful means of disenfranchisement, reflecting a broader agenda that is more about exclusion than legality.
The concerning trend of selective demolitions has drawn widespread condemnation from human rights activists, who view these actions as part of a broader attempt to marginalise and intimidate the Muslim community. Activist Harsh Mander has called the demolitions “a direct assault on the constitutional principles of equality and secularism,” highlighting that such actions undermine India’s pluralistic foundation. Shabnam Hashmi, another prominent human rights advocate, described the demolitions as “a form of collective punishment aimed at creating a climate of fear among minorities.” These voices emphasise the need for an urgent and collective response to preserve India’s democratic values.
The Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) has played a crucial role in challenging these demolitions and advocating for justice. The organisation has been at the forefront of providing legal representation to those affected, ensuring that victims have access to due process and a fair hearing. By offering pro-bono legal aid, filing petitions, and raising awareness, APCR has worked tirelessly to defend the rights of marginalised communities. Their efforts remind us that civil society must remain vigilant and proactive in holding authorities accountable, ensuring that the rule of law prevails over political expediency.
What is equally alarming is the silence of much of the mainstream media, often referred to as “Godi Media,” on these issues. While independent outlets have been vocal in highlighting the disproportionate impact of these actions on Muslim communities, mainstream channels largely ignore these violations. Instead, many choose to frame these demolitions as standard law enforcement, echoing official narratives without critical scrutiny. This lack of balanced media coverage deprives the public of fully understanding the issues, allowing biased actions to continue unchecked.
The rule of law demands impartiality, yet the recent spate of demolitions indicates a pattern of targeted discrimination. When state power is used selectively to suppress one community while sparing others, the very principles of democracy and secularism are compromised. India’s strength lies in its diversity, and the selective enforcement of laws against Muslims undermines this core value.
The time has come for civil society, the judiciary, and citizens to stand against these divisive actions. Article 32 of the Constitution empowers citizens to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of their fundamental rights, and this provision must be robustly invoked to challenge the misuse of power. Legal institutions must act as impartial protectors of the Constitution, ensuring that the rule of law is upheld without bias.
Citizens, too, must raise their voices against the increasing marginalisation of Muslims, recognizing that this is not just a community issue but a national issue affecting the democratic fabric of the country. Upholding the rights of Muslims is about preserving the core values of India—values of unity, diversity, and secularism. By defending these rights, we safeguard the constitutional protections that allow every citizen to live with dignity, freedom, and respect.
The selective demolition of Muslim properties, along with restrictive legislation, represents a dangerous trend that threatens to undermine India’s pluralistic identity. These actions risk creating a society where fear and division replace tolerance and harmony. To defend India’s democratic and secular ethos, it is imperative to challenge forces that seek to dismantle this inclusive vision. Upholding the spirit of the Constitution means ensuring that justice is not just a promise on paper but a reality for every Indian, as envisioned by leaders who believed in a diverse and united India.
