A Bulldozer Drive, a Journalist’s Loss, and Growing Political Storm
By: Javid Amin | 29 November 2025
In late November 2025, a demolition drive by the Jammu Development Authority (JDA) reduced to rubble the modest home of journalist Arfaz Ahmad Daing in the Transport Nagar (Narwal) area of Jammu. The house, reportedly built by his father decades ago, was razed without prior public notice — triggering widespread shock. What followed was not just sympathy for a displaced family, but a cascade of political reactions, demands for accountability, and a struggle to protect civil liberties.
Now, the region’s Deputy Chief Minister, Surinder Choudhary, has stepped in — calling for a formal investigation into the demolition, labeling it “selective,” and emphasizing the need for transparent governance. This demand adds fresh urgency to questions already dogging the episode: Who authorised the demolition? Was due process followed? And does this set a dangerous precedent for journalists, marginalized families, and property-rights in Jammu & Kashmir?
This article unpacks the full story — tracing the demolition, political backlash, human reactions, and the broader implications for governance, press freedom, and social trust in J&K.
The Demolition: What Happened in Transport Nagar
A home demolished — and a family displaced
On 28 November 2025, during a city-wide anti-encroachment drive, the JDA demolished a single-storey house belonging to the family of journalist Arfaz Ahmad Daing. The house reportedly belonged to Daing’s father. According to media reports, the family claimed they had lived there for nearly 40 years.
The family — including elderly parents, Daing himself, his wife and children — say they were not given any prior notice before the demolition. Residents in the area also claimed that despite living there for decades, none were served a formal eviction or warning.
Daing, whose journalistic reporting has drawn attention in recent months, alleged that the demolition amounted to a targeted act. Given the lack of prior communication and the suddenness of the act, he and many others described it as a punitive exercise — not just a standard enforcement drive.
Official justification — or selective enforcement?
The JDA justified the exercise by calling the demolished structure an “illegal construction/encroachment.” The demolition, they claimed, was part of a larger anti-encroachment operation across Jammu.
Yet, critics and local residents pointed out a glaring inconsistency: while small houses — like that of Daing’s — were demolished immediately, reportedly vast tracts of JDA-land encroached by “influential” persons remain untouched.
That contrast — demolishing a small, decades-old family home while ignoring large, allegedly encroached properties — sparked widespread accusations of selective targeting.
Political Fallout — From Bulldozers to Blame: Authorities Under Fire
Dy CM demands a probe — political accountability at stake
On 29 November 2025, the region’s Deputy Chief Minister Surinder Choudhary visited Daing’s family, expressed solidarity, and publicly demanded a formal inquiry into the demolition. He called the drive “high-handed” and “selective,” and urged the Manoj Sinha-led Raj Bhawan to order a probe into who authorised the demolition and under whose instructions the JDA and police acted.
Choudhary stressed that the action appeared not to have been approved by the elected government — pointing out that the JDA leadership is appointed by the L-G administration, not by the government headed by Omar Abdullah. He demanded suspension of the officers involved pending the inquiry.
He argued that such “arbitrary or vindictive” governance damages public trust, particularly among vulnerable families, and undermines basic constitutional principles — including freedom of speech and protection of journalists.
Broader political blame game — overreach, defamation, and democratic deficit
The demolition has widened the existing friction between the elected government and the Raj Bhawan-controlled administrative authorities — a recurring tension in J&K’s dual governance structure.
Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has already accused LG-appointed officials of using bulldozers to “defame and humiliate” the elected government. He questioned the logic of targeting only small homes when massive encroachments by allegedly influential individuals remain untouched.
Opposition parties and civil society members have accused the authorities of using demolition drives as tools of selective punishment — especially against dissidents, journalists, and weaker societal groups.
Press Freedom, Civil Rights, and Community Alarm
A journalist’s home razed — is press freedom under threat?
That the demolished house belonged to a journalist — not just any civilian — has added a chilling dimension. Daing runs a digital news portal, and in recent times had reportedly reported on sensitive issues, including alleged cross-border drug trafficking.
The fact that a journalist’s home can be demolished — with little or no prior notice, under heavy police presence — sends alarming signals about the vulnerability of media practitioners. As Choudhary noted: “You cannot silence the voice of a journalist. He has a right to speak and publish his views. Any attempt to silence journalists weakens democratic institutions.”
Many in the media and civil-society warn that such incidents could foster self-censorship, particularly among regional reporters and social media journalists — those who often lack institutional protection and rely on courage and community trust.
Fear among common people — if one house can be razed, who’s next?
This demolition also triggers deep anxiety among ordinary homeowners and communities living on fragile land tenure — especially in informal settlements, old city areas, or on land whose ownership documents are weak or contested.
If demolition can proceed without notice, and without public consultation, people with limited means or legal literacy may find themselves suddenly homeless. The sense of insecurity — not just for properties, but for dignity and stability — becomes pronounced.
Moreover, the notion that selective demolition could serve as a tool of intimidation or retaliation — especially against critics or dissidents — undermines public trust in governance and fairness.
A Ray of Hope — Inter-Faith Solidarity and Human Compassion
Amidst the anger, fear, and political controversy, there emerged a humane, deeply symbolic act: a Hindu neighbour, Kuldeep Kumar (also referred to as Kuldeep Sharma), offered a five-marla plot of his own ancestral land to Daing’s family — to help them rebuild.
Kumar, accompanied by his daughter, signed a gift deed and publicly committed to aiding the family: “I am giving this land so that my brother does not remain helpless.” He also vowed that if this plot is targeted too, he would give more.
This gesture has been widely praised across communities and political lines. It resonates as a reaffirmation of inter-faith harmony and social solidarity — even when institutional structures seem to fail people.
For many, this act-of-kindness underscores a simple, yet powerful truth: beyond politics, constitutional debates, and power struggles — human dignity and compassion can still prevail.
What the Probe Should Focus On — Beyond Public Statements, Towards Accountability
If the proposed investigation is to be meaningful and restore public trust, it must be robust, transparent, and impartial. Here’s what a credible probe should examine:
-
Authorization Chain: Who ordered the demolition? Was it the JDA, police, or some other administrative authority? Was there a documented order or directive from the L-G’s office or any other official?
-
Due Process: Were notices served to residents before demolition? Did the family receive any prior warning, hearing, or opportunity to respond or relocate? Given that the family claims decades-long settlement, was their occupancy recognized in any official record?
-
Comparative Enforcement: Why was only this house demolished while other larger/older encroachments reportedly remain untouched? A transparent list of all properties razed (and those spared) should be published by the JDA.
-
Accountability of Officials: If the demolition occurred without proper approval, the officers involved — from JDA and police — should be suspended pending outcome.
-
Protection for Press & Minorities: The probe must explicitly address whether the demolition was driven by the journalist’s reporting, religious identity, or community status — to assess risks to press freedom and minority rights.
-
Resettlement or Compensation: For the demolished house, the family must be offered either compensation or alternative accommodation — especially if due process was found lacking.
Only such a comprehensive inquiry can ensure that the demolition isn’t swept under the rug — and that citizens regain faith in law, fairness, and equal treatment.
Broader Implications — Governance Structure, Dual Power and the State of Democracy in J&K
Dual governance and the risks of executive overreach
This demolition exposes one of the core structural problems in the current governance of Jammu & Kashmir: dual power — where bureaucracy (appointed by the L-G) and elected government coexist, often with overlapping or opaque authority.
As Choudhary has pointed out, if officers (like the JDA vice-chairman) are appointed by the L-G and not by the elected government, enforcement actions can bypass democratic oversight, resulting in “selective” or arbitrary outcomes.
Such concentration of administrative authority — outside electoral accountability — poses risks not only to fair enforcement, but to civil liberties, minority protections, and the trust of ordinary citizens.
Press freedom and the fear of “bulldozer justice”
When demolition becomes a tool not just for urban planning, but also for intimidation — especially against journalists or dissenting voices — it undermines one of democracy’s essential pillars: free media and dissent.
This incident may set a chilling precedent. If not checked, others — journalists, activists, critics — may become reluctant to raise uncomfortable questions, fearing that their homes, security, or livelihoods could be targeted.
Community resilience, social solidarity, and the human face of resistance
Yet, the neighbour’s act of gifting land reminds us that even in fraught political and administrative environments, communities — ordinary citizens — retain agency. Their solidarity, compassion, and inter-faith empathy can become powerful counters to fear, suppression, and institutional failure.
If nurtured, such gestures can help rebuild trust — not just between individuals, but between communities and the idea of a just, humane democracy.
What Should Happen Next — Steps to Restore Confidence and Protect Rights
In light of the demolition and ensuing controversy, the following actions are essential:
-
Immediate, Transparent Inquiry: The L-G administration should order a neutral, time-bound probe into the demolition; findings should be made public.
-
Suspend Involved Officers: Pending investigation, officers involved in the demolition must be suspended — to ensure no further unilateral actions and preserve the integrity of the inquiry.
-
Publish Full Encroachment & Demolition List: The JDA must release a comprehensive list of all structures demolished or marked for demolition, to show whether the drive is uniform or selective.
-
Legal & Housing Relief for Affected Family: The journalist’s family must be offered immediate relief — either through compensation, legal protection, or alternate housing/land (including the gifted land).
-
Protect Press Freedom: The government must reaffirm commitment to free expression and ensure journalists are not targeted for their reporting.
-
Institutional Reform: The governance model in J&K needs structural overhaul — clarify authority, ensure checks and balances, and prevent administrative overreach that undermines elected governments.
-
Community Engagement & Dialogue: Instead of heavy-handed action, authorities must engage with communities to find humane, fair solutions: regularization of long-standing settlements, transparent land records, fair rehabilitation — especially for low-income, marginalized families.
Conclusion — Bulldozers May Demolish Homes, But Who Will Rebuild Trust?
The razing of journalist Arfaz Ahmad Daing’s house has stripped more than bricks and mortar — it has exposed deep fault-lines in governance, civil rights, and social trust in Jammu & Kashmir. The demolition is not just a local incident; it is a test of democratic values, administrative fairness, and institutional accountability.
The call by Deputy CM Surinder Choudhary for a probe is more than political theater. It is a demand for justice — for a journalist, for his family, for vulnerable communities — and for a system that respects fairness over force, process over power, and rights over repression.
If authorities heed this call — and if citizens remain vigilant — there is still a chance not just to rebuild a home, but to restore faith in justice, dignity and democratic governance. Let that be the stronger foundation for the people of J&K.
