Maharashtra
,
,
Mumbai Suburban
Published :
Oct 2026
|
Updated :
Railway development, housing rights, and rehabilitation concerns: The Garib Nagar demolition in Mumbai
Reported by
Shubham Kothari
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Rakshit Dhingra, Amrita Chekkutty
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
500
Households affected
2400
People affected
2017
Year started
0.52
ha.
Land area affected
500
Households affected
2400
People Affected
2017
Year started
0.52
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Land Use
Reason/Cause of conflict
Encroachment by Non-Right Holders (Other than Caste-based)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban
Unclassifed
Sector
Land Use
Reason/Cause of conflict
Encroachment by Non-Right Holders (Other than Caste-based)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban
Ended
1
Summary

In May 2026, the Western Railway launched a demolition drive to remove nearly 500 structures spread across approximately 5,200 square metres of land at Garib Nagar, near Bandra East railway station in Mumbai, Maharashtra. The eviction drive was undertaken to clear railway land for the proposed Integrated Bandra Railway Complex, which includes the expansion of the sixth railway line between Bandra Terminus and Mumbai Central to accommodate additional long-distance train services. The conflict centres on the competing claims over urban land between railway infrastructure development and the housing rights of residents who have occupied the settlement for decades.

On 16 May 2026, residents were informed of the impending demolition following an order by the Bombay High Court permitting the railway authorities to remove structures across Garib Nagar, except for 100 homes protected by the court. The railway authorities began demolishing the structures on 19 May, mobilising nearly 1,000 personnel alongside the local police to maintain law and order. The densely packed settlement contained structures exceeding four storeys, requiring extensive demolition teams and bulldozers.

Residents argue that hundreds of low-income families, many of whom have lived in the settlement for decades, are being uprooted with inadequate rehabilitation and little time to relocate. They alleged that demolition work on neighbouring structures damaged their homes, rendering some unsafe for habitation. The damage, coupled with disruptions to electricity and water supplies, forced several families to leave their homes temporarily despite the court-ordered protection.

On 20 May, the authorities started demolition of a mosque and a madrassa in the locality. The residents claim that they were not informed of the demolition of the religious structure. The demolition triggered religious sentiments in the region dominated by the muslim community. During the demolition the community started pelting stones on the authority and attempted to physically stop the eviction. In response, the police retaliated with lathi-charge leading to a four-hour long conflict between locals and police. The incident led to injury to at least 10 police person and an unknown number of residents.

The demolition drive continued for five days, until May 23, under heavy police deployment.

On 25 May, railway authorities started the demolition of all storeys of the protected structure. The residents informed the officials to manually break the top storeys. However, the authorities used bulldozers which led to the collapse of five entire protected structures.

According to Western Railway, eviction proceedings under the Public Premises Act began before 2017, and eviction orders were issued in November that year. Railway authorities maintain that the structures are unauthorised encroachments on public land, while residents have raised concerns about the short notice preceding the demolition, the loss of their homes and uncertainty over rehabilitation.

Later, the police filed a case against 100 people on charges including attempt to murder, rioting, unlawful assembly, assault on government officials and damage to public property. The police arrested 19 people in the incident. The arrested were presented in the Bandra sessions court and were sent for seven-day remand.

Following the demolition drive, the cleared site was cordoned off with a boundary wall, preventing residents from returning to the land and effectively making their eviction permanent. 

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for rehabilitation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

What was the action taken by the police?

Arrest

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

19

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Currently under arrest

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

Yes

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Yes, they were produced within 24 hours

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 61(2)[Criminal conspiracy];Section 109 [Attempt to murder]; Section 121(1)&(2)[Voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt to deter public servant from his duty]; Section 132[Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty] Section 189[Unlawful assembly];Section 190[Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object]; Section 191(2)&(3)[Rioting.]

Prevention of destruction of public property Act

Section 3[Mischief causing damage to public property]

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

Yes they were informed, Yes they had access

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

No

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

The arrested people have been send for 7 days of remand for further investigation and identification of other accused.

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Ashfaq- accused, Tahir- father of one of the accused

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Dwelling/habitation use

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

₹

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

Yes

When did it end?

May 2026

Why did the conflict end?

After the evictions, the residents were removed from the said location and the location was compounded with wall leading to their permanent eviction.

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Western Railways

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

5
Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

Arrest

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

19

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Currently under arrest

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

Yes

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Yes, they were produced within 24 hours

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

Section 61(2)[Criminal conspiracy];Section 109 [Attempt to murder]; Section 121(1)&(2)[Voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt to deter public servant from his duty]; Section 132[Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty] Section 189[Unlawful assembly];Section 190[Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object]; Section 191(2)&(3)[Rioting.]

Prevention of destruction of public property Act

Section 3[Mischief causing damage to public property]

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

Yes they were informed, Yes they had access

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

No

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

The arrested people have been send for 7 days of remand for further investigation and identification of other accused.

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us