A harrowing case of mass displacement has unfolded at the Chandola Lake area in Gujarat, where over 8,000 families were evicted overnight without prior notice or any alternative resettlement. Images that circulate on social media show women, children and the elderly lying in the open as their homes lay flattened by the state bulldozers. These residents had lived in the area for over three to four decades. Many possessed voter ID cards, Aadhaar cards, ration cards and other state-issued documents that validated their long-term residence in the area.
Yet, despite this, the Gujarat government reportedly labelled them as ‘foreign nationals’ or ‘Rohingya’ – a term increasingly weaponised in India’s political discourse to stigmatise and erase Muslim slum dwellers.
A voter ID card signifies not only proof of residence but also long-term inclusion on the electoral roll, thereby establishing a statutory right to vote. Similarly, ration cards have been accepted as valid proof of residence in rehabilitation policies, such as those implemented in Delhi for slum dwellers. Ironically, actual Rohingya refugees who are stateless would not possess such identity cards. This glaring contradiction exposes the hollowness of the state’s claims, which appear bent on rendering these families homeless.
The anatomy of bulldozer politics in India
Slum demolitions are not new in India. However, the frequency, scale and impunity with which they are now being carried out reflect a deeper structural rot. India’s constitutional courts – once perceived as protectors of the marginalised – have increasingly turned a blind eye to these acts, or worse, have lent them judicial legitimacy. The shift from earlier jurisprudence, such as Olga Tellis, Shantistar Builders, and Chameli Singh which recognised the right to shelter under Article 21 to today’s punitive characterisation of the urban poor as mere ‘encroachers’ is deeply troubling. These landmark decisions once envisioned a welfare state obliged to resettle displaced persons with dignity. That constitutional vision now lies in disrepair.
Previously, the state was obligated to verify the documentation of slum dwellers and facilitate their rehabilitation, taking into account their prolonged residence at the site. This obligation rooted in both statutory mandates and constitutional principles is now increasingly disregarded. Today, the process of dispossession is fast-tracked under the blanket justification of removing ‘illegal encroachments’. Courts have progressively adopted a narrow reading that frames residents as mere unlawful occupiers of public land. This framing not only excludes them from rights-based protections but also obscures the structural failures of urban planning that give rise to such settlements. In doing so, it absolves the state of its duty to ensure dignified resettlement for the displaced.
Moreover, the targeted deployment of demolition machinery acquired new dimensions in recent years. This form of punitive state action can be traced to 2017, after Adityanath assumed office as chief minister of Uttar Pradesh. Under the rubric of a ‘zero tolerance to crime’ policy, the state began utilising demolitions as an extrajudicial measure to punish individuals accused – often without trial – of criminal conduct. Since then, this practice has proliferated across several Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-ruled states and acquired the popular euphemism of ‘bulldozer justice’, serving as a tool of collective punishment primarily targeting individuals from Muslim community in India – demolishing their homes, businesses and means of livelihood.
This story was originally published in thewire.in. Read the full story here.