A land dispute between two individuals snowballed into a conflict between the Scheduled Caste and uppercaste community in Nalasar village in Palanpur tehsil, Banaskantha. Jitendra Kalaniya, a Dalit, has been fighting a legal battle against Sardarbhai Suchol belonging to the upper caste (Chaudhary) over a patch of land behind Kalaniyas house. Both of them have claimed rights over the land, and the matter is sub judice. Kalaniya has reportedly filed many applications as part of the legal process, which irked the uppercaste community in the village. They have been pressuring the Dalit community to persuade Kalaniya to stop pursuing the matter but he did not agree. This led the villagers to boycott the 80 Dalit families residing in Nalasar. According to Jayesh Bhatiya, a member of the Dalit community, the social and economic ostracisation has caused immense hardships to the community. He told the media that the village residents have been asked by the uppercaste not to provide ration to the Dalits, employ them in farms as labourers, ride in their vehicles or allow them to cut hair, among others. The boycott has been particularly challenging to the Dalit women. The shopkeepers do not let us enter the shops; we are unable to graze cattle or get fodder; our children are not allowed to use public transportation to go to schools… When we insist, they say that the villagers have asked us to refuse services to you, Kantaben Bhatiya told journalists. A few Dalit representatives approached the Additional Superintendent of police and the district collector. They lodged a complaint and an FIR was filed, following which 14 persons were booked under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955, and the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Demand for better access to common land/resources
Protection against caste discrimination and social ostracisation
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Private
Type of Common Land
Has the Conflict Ended?
No
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Other
Legislations/Policies Involved
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
Section 3(1)(g): [Prohibits wrongful interference in the enjoyment of right over land by person belonging to Scheduled Caste community]; Section 3(1)(r): [Prohibits intentionally insulting or intimidating with intent to humiliate a member of the Scheduled Caste in any place within public view]; Section 3(za)(D): [Prohibits obstructing or preventing members of the Scheduled Caste from entering any educational institution, hospital, dispensary, primary health centre, shop or place of public entertainment or any other public place]; Section 3(za)(E): [Prohibits obstructing or preventing member of the Scheduled Caste from practising any profession or the carrying on of any occupation, trade or business or employment in any job]; Section 3(zc): [Prohibits the imposition or threat of social or economic boycott of any person or a family or a group belonging to the Scheduled Caste]
The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955
Section 4: [Punishment for enforcing social disabilities]; Section 6: [Punishment for refusing to sell goods or render services]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 153A: [Prohibits and punishes acts promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony]; Sections 503-506: [Definition of and punishment for criminal intimidation]
Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute
What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community? What was the decision of the concerned government department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Pending
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
Case Number
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Financial harassment, Other harassment
Whether criminal law was used against protestors
Official name of the criminal law. Did the case reach trial?
Reported Details of the Violation:
80 Dalit families face social and economic boycott. Residents have been asked by the upper-caste not to provide ration to the Dalits, employ them in farms as labourers, ride in their vehicles or allow them to cut hair.
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Nalasar Village in Palanpur Tehsil, Banaskantha
Nature of Protest
Complaints, petitions, memorandums to officials
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Additional Superintendent of Police and District Collector, Banaskantha
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
No
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
Name, Designation and Comment of Corporate Authorities Approached
Other Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Documented By
Rejitha NairReviewed By
Rejitha NairUpdated By
Rejitha NairEdited By
Rejitha NairLand Conflict Watch
