Chief Justice of India Declares Legal System Governed by Rule of Law, Not Bulldozer Justice

Justice Gavai highlighted the significance of the judgment against 'bulldozer justice' during his address

New Delhi:

Chief Justice of India B R Gavai declared on Friday that India's legal framework operates under the rule of law rather than what he termed the "rule of the bulldozer."

While presenting the inaugural Sir Maurice Rault Memorial Lecture 2025 in Mauritius, focused on 'Rule of Law in the Largest Democracy,' Justice Gavai referenced his own judgment condemning 'bulldozer justice.' Sir Maurice Rault was a distinguished jurist who served as Mauritius's Chief Justice from 1978 to 1982.

During his three-day official visit to Mauritius, Justice Gavai emphasized the principle of rule of law and its comprehensive interpretation by India's Supreme Court, stating, "The judgment conveyed a clear message that the Indian legal system is governed by the rule of law, not by the rule of the bulldozer."

The Supreme Court's ruling on 'bulldozer justice' determined that demolishing homes of accused individuals in response to alleged offenses circumvents legal processes, violates the rule of law, and infringes upon the fundamental right to shelter protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.

"The court further held that the executive cannot simultaneously function as judge, jury, and executioner," the CJI explained. He delivered his lecture before distinguished guests including Mauritius President Dharambeer Gokhool, Prime Minister Navinchandra Ramgoolam, and Chief Justice Rehana Mungly Gulbul.

In his address, the CJI referenced several landmark Supreme Court judgments, including the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati verdict that established the basic structure doctrine and limited Parliament's power to amend every aspect of the Constitution.

"Throughout the 75 years since the Indian Constitution's adoption, the concept of Rule of Law has evolved far beyond legal texts, permeating social, political, and constitutional discourse alike," he observed.

Justice Gavai noted that in the social sphere, laws have been enacted to address historical injustices, with marginalized communities frequently invoking them and the language of rule of law to assert their rights against established systems of oppression.

"In the political domain, the rule of law functions as a standard for good governance and societal progress, standing in stark contrast to misgovernance and lawlessness, where institutions and public officials might otherwise avoid accountability," he remarked.

Referencing the contributions of Mahatma Gandhi and B R Ambedkar, Justice Gavai stated that their vision demonstrated that in India, "the Rule of Law is not merely a set of rules."

"It represents an ethical and moral framework designed to uphold equality, protect human dignity, and guide governance in a diverse and complex society," he explained.

The CJI referenced recent significant verdicts, including the one that abolished the practice of instant triple talaq among Muslims. He also highlighted judgments challenging the adultery law and the electoral bond scheme.

"Collectively, these four judgments demonstrate how the Supreme Court has developed the rule of law as a substantive principle, employing it to invalidate laws that are manifestly arbitrary or unjust," he said.

Justice Gavai emphasized the importance of the judgment establishing the right to privacy as a fundamental right.

"This articulation underscores that, when understood as a core principle of constitutionalism, the rule of law operates on both procedural and substantive levels: it restrains arbitrary action by the State, guarantees equality before the law, and embeds democratic accountability across all branches and levels of governance," he explained.

Justice Gavai stated that this principle has animated legal discourse as the Supreme Court repeatedly invoked the language of rule of law to both legitimize and explain its constitutional role, as well as the constitutional roles of other branches of the state.

"The rule of law is thus not a rigid doctrine but a conversation across generations, between judges and citizens, parliaments and peoples, nations and their histories. It concerns how we govern ourselves with dignity, and how we resolve the inevitable conflicts between liberty and authority in a democratic society," he concluded.