The Gujarat government recently defended the demolition of Islamic structures in the state to the Supreme Court, reiterating that the demolitions did not contradict the Supreme Court's earlier judgments or amounts to a deliberate attack on the particular community, under the guise of evacuating encroachments, but still happened to be unlawfuUnluckily for the authorities involved, this demolition was against an earlier order issued by the Supreme Court whereby their orders had stopped the demolitions of the properties of people considered to be engaged in criminal activities without following due process. The court passed this order while preventing arbitrary actions of local authorities against people who were part of protesting and or civil unrest, especially when demolitions were being used as a punitive measure without proper legal recourse. The Gujarat Collector, however clarified in the court that the structures were illegal encrochnments on public land and did not stand in any valid legal light. The Collector underlined that the activity was part of a much larger process whereby encroachments were to be removed across the state, sect aside. The government had argued that proper notices were issued before demolitions and due process was maintained. In the supporting affidavit presented, it has been contended that the structures pulled down do not have any authorization, and therefore the pulling them down does not violate any of the Supreme Court's orders. The state had pleaded that the structures needed to be cleared for reasons of public safety and to restore order since they obstruct public spaces such as roads and pathways. Furthermore, the Collector dismissed allegations that the demolitions were targeted or carried out with communal bias, stating they were part of a legal and routine exercise to clear encroachments in all parts of the state. The government further advanced the argument that religious discrimination could never be the ground of the claim of the petitioners since similar steps had been taken against illegal encroachment belonging to other communities too. Again, it appeals to the Supreme Court to dismiss the petitions with a contention that the actions were in the bounds of legality and carried out without discrimination. The Supreme Court will consider the submissions and then pass judgment on whether demolitions violated its earlier directives. It is an important case because there is indeed cause for concern that legal processes are now being misused to target certain communities while, at the same time, raising real questions of balance between maintaining public order and citizens' rights. Probably, the judgment of the court will have greater implications on how state authorities deal with the encroachment problem and the powers they will exercise in executing these acts.