Nagpur violence: civic chief apologises to HC over illegal demolitions, claims ignorance of SC guidelines

The two-storey residence of Fahim Khan, a key accused in the March 17 violence, being demolished in Nagpur.
| Photo Credit: PTI

Nagpur Municipal Commissioner Abhijeet Chaudhari has submitted an unconditional apology to the Bombay High Court for the demolition of properties belonging to accused in a recent riots case, admitting civic officials were unaware of Supreme Court mandates on such actions.  

In an affidavit filed before the High Court’s Nagpur Bench on Tuesday (April 15, 2025), Mr. Chaudhari stated the Nagpur Municipal Corporation (NMC) had not received any circular from the Maharashtra government regarding the apex court’s guidelines, which require procedural safeguards before demolishing properties linked to accused persons.  

A Division Bench of Justices Nitin Sambre and Vrushali Joshi granted the State government two weeks to respond, while noting the administration’s overreach. The court had earlier stayed demolitions on March 24 after petitioners — including Fahim Khan, a key accused charged with sedition — challenged the civic body’s actions.  

While Mr. Khan’s two-storey house was razed before the court’s order, authorities halted the demolition of co-accused Yusuf Sheikh’s property following judicial intervention.  

Mr. Chaudhari claimed the Town Planning department was unaware of the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling, which directed States to issue circulars ensuring due process before such demolitions. “No such circular reached the NMC, so zonal officers followed existing statutes like the Slum Act, 1971,” he stated, stressing the lapses were unintentional.  

The demolitions followed March 17 violence in Nagpur sparked by rumours of a desecrated religious chadar during protests against Aurangzeb’s tomb in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar.  

The affidavit underscores systemic failures in disseminating judicial directives. Critics allege the demolitions targeted minorities, while the NMC insists it acted without malice. The High Court’s scrutiny now tests the balance between urban governance and constitutional safeguards.  

(With inputs from PTI)