Chhattisgarh
Sarona
,
Saraipani
,
Kanker
Published : 12 July, 2014   |   Last updated - 24 Jun, 2024
Chhattisgarh Forest Department Ransacks Homes of 17 Tribal Families in Kanker's Saraipani
Reported by
Deepika Joshi
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Updated by
Anupa Kujur
21
Households affected
105
People Affected
2006
Year started
28
Land area affected
21
Households affected
105
People Affected
2006
Year started
28
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Conservation and Forestry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Forest Administration (Other than Protected Areas)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

On February 8, 2021, the forest department allegedly destroyed the homes of 17 tribal families living in Saraipani area in Kanker district’s Sarona region. According to the residents, a group of 50-60 people arrived in the village and started destroying the houses. The group reportedly included 10-12 beat guards and forest rangers, residents of the neighbouring Bangabari and Khallari villages and members of the Joint Forest Management Committee of the adjoining villages.

The officials allegedly ransacked the houses and stole farming equipment, ration, cash and poultry. A resident told LCW that they also threw away cooked food, and when a woman protested, a female forest officer manhandled her. Another resident added that the forest department destroyed items, including radio and clothes.

The village residents informed LCW that a 25-year-old youth, Dinesh Mandavi, was reported missing since the day of the attack. Some eyewitnesses claimed that he had run off to the forest after being chased by the group.

Following the incident, the affected families visited the Kanker police station on February 11 and submitted written complaints about the destruction of their properties and also filed a report on the missing youth. Mandavi was found two months later.** **The community has also been demanding compensation for the losses they have incurred in the attacks and due to the confiscation of their properties by the forest department over the years.

Speaking to a fact-finding team of the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), of which this researcher was a member, the upsarpanch (deputy sarpanch) of Bangabari panchayat, Shivlal Singh Netam, said, “We were taken by the forest department” for the attack on Saraipani. They had arranged for a vehicle to take the group there.” He added that in a Gram Sabha hearing of Bangabari village in January 2021, the forest department was present and it had suggested that notices be sent to the Saraipani residents to vacate the village.

According to the fact-finding report, Saraipani was reportedly attacked earlier too in 2004 and 2006. The village, comprising 21 households, falls in the reserve forest area of Bangabari panchayat, but it has not been given the status of a revenue village yet.

In 1968, the Kachru family from the Raut caste was one of the first families to move to the forest. Over the years, many other families migrated from nearby blocks and districts. The forest department and adjoining villages consider these families ‘encroachers’ and want to evict them. The fact-finding report notes that the forest department had used the neighbouring villages to intimidate and carry out organised attacks in the habitations it considered ‘illegal’. The Saraipani residents, meanwhile, continue to live on the land despite the attack and threats of eviction.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Demand for compensation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

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

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

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

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

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

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

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

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)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Residential area

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?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Author
Reported by
Deepika Joshi

Chhattisgarh

Kumar Sambhav is a social entrepreneur and award-winning journalist, leading innovative research in accountability investigations. He is the founder of Land Conflict Watch and is currently working as India Research Lead with Princeton University’s Digital Witness Lab.

Read More

Latest updates
Rajasthan
Rajasthan

UIT Bikaner's Jorbeer Housing Project on Stalls Following Rajasthan High Court Order

Rajasthan
Rajasthan

Jaipur Development Authority Acquires Land for Township Project, Ending Conflict

Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh

Farmers land acquired under Mansarovar Housing Scheme in Lucknow

Maharashtra
Maharashtra

Citizens unite against cycle track around Powai, Vihar Lakes in Mumbai

Jharkhand
Jharkhand

Families displaced by Mandal Dam in Jharkhand opppose project resumption

Jharkhand
Jharkhand

Jharkhand approves Adani's thermal plant, farmers allege violation of LARR Act

Gujarat
Gujarat

Pastoral Community in Gujarat's Banni Grasslands Demands Titles Recognising Community Forest Rights

Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh

Builder Encroaches Upon Farmers Land in Gosaiganj Lucknow, 150 Allottees in Lurch

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Demand for compensation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Chhattisgarh Forest Department Ransacks Homes of 17 Tribal Families in Kanker's Saraipani

Reported by

Deepika Joshi

Legal Review by

Anmol Gupta, Mukta Joshi

Edited by

Moushumi Sharma

Updated by

Updated by

Published on

March 24, 2022

March 4, 2024

Edited on

March 24, 2022

Sector

Conservation and Forestry

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Forest Administration (Other than Protected Areas)

Starting Year

2006

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

28

ha

Households Affected by Conflict

21

People Affected by Conflict

105

State

Chhattisgarh

Sector

Conservation and Forestry

People Affected by Conflict

105

Households Affected by Conflict

21

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

28

ha

Starting Year

2006

Location of Conflict

Saraipani

Sarona

Kanker

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Forest Administration (Other than Protected Areas)

Land Conflict Summary

On February 8, 2021, the forest department allegedly destroyed the homes of 17 tribal families living in Saraipani area in Kanker district’s Sarona region. According to the residents, a group of 50-60 people arrived in the village and started destroying the houses. The group reportedly included 10-12 beat guards and forest rangers, residents of the neighbouring Bangabari and Khallari villages and members of the Joint Forest Management Committee of the adjoining villages.

The officials allegedly ransacked the houses and stole farming equipment, ration, cash and poultry. A resident told LCW that they also threw away cooked food, and when a woman protested, a female forest officer manhandled her. Another resident added that the forest department destroyed items, including radio and clothes.

The village residents informed LCW that a 25-year-old youth, Dinesh Mandavi, was reported missing since the day of the attack. Some eyewitnesses claimed that he had run off to the forest after being chased by the group.

Following the incident, the affected families visited the Kanker police station on February 11 and submitted written complaints about the destruction of their properties and also filed a report on the missing youth. Mandavi was found two months later.** **The community has also been demanding compensation for the losses they have incurred in the attacks and due to the confiscation of their properties by the forest department over the years.

Speaking to a fact-finding team of the People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), of which this researcher was a member, the upsarpanch (deputy sarpanch) of Bangabari panchayat, Shivlal Singh Netam, said, “We were taken by the forest department” for the attack on Saraipani. They had arranged for a vehicle to take the group there.” He added that in a Gram Sabha hearing of Bangabari village in January 2021, the forest department was present and it had suggested that notices be sent to the Saraipani residents to vacate the village.

According to the fact-finding report, Saraipani was reportedly attacked earlier too in 2004 and 2006. The village, comprising 21 households, falls in the reserve forest area of Bangabari panchayat, but it has not been given the status of a revenue village yet.

In 1968, the Kachru family from the Raut caste was one of the first families to move to the forest. Over the years, many other families migrated from nearby blocks and districts. The forest department and adjoining villages consider these families ‘encroachers’ and want to evict them. The fact-finding report notes that the forest department had used the neighbouring villages to intimidate and carry out organised attacks in the habitations it considered ‘illegal’. The Saraipani residents, meanwhile, continue to live on the land despite the attack and threats of eviction.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Demand for compensation

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

Type of Common Land

Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

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

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

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

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

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

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

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

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)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Residential area

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?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006
Section 3 [Rights of forest-dwelling tribes to include right to hold and live on forestland]; Section 4(5) [Forest-dwelling tribes to not be evicted or removed from forest until recognition and verification of claims under this Act are complete]; Section 4(8) [Rights of forest-dwelling tribes to accrue when forest dwellers have been displaced from their land without compensation]
Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993
Section 49 [Powers and functions of Gram Panchayat include preservation and welfare of Panchayat Forests]
Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996
Section 4(m) [Gram Sabha or Panchayat to have the power to prevent alienation of land from Scheduled Areas and to take steps to restore such alienated land]
Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996
  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

Yes

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

The affected community filed an objection under Section 4(5) of the Forest Rights Act, which states that "no member of a forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribe or other traditional forest dwellers shall be evicted or removed from forest land under his occupation till the recognition and verification procedure is complete”.

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

No redressal

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Non-implementation/violation of FRA

Forced evictions/dispossession of land

Non-payment of compensation/promised compensation

Lack of legal protection over land rights

Violation of fundamental rights

Legal Status:

Out of Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Case Number

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

Displacement

Physical attack

Raid/break-in/theft

Other harassment

Reported Details of the Violation:

Forest department officials allegedly ransacked houses and stole farming equipment, ration, cash and poultry. A resident told LCW that the officials also threw away cooked food, and when a woman protested, a female officer manhandled her.

Date of Violation

February 7, 2021

Location of Violation

Saraipani village

Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Forest department

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:

Residents of Saraipani and Bangabari villagers

Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

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

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Resources

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Images

A damaged house in Saraipani village

Image Credit:  

Deepika Joshi

A house damaged by the forest department

Image Credit:  

Deepika Joshi

Video

Other Land Conflicts in Chhattisgarh

cross
    Not a member yet?
    Sign up now
    Conflicts Map
    Conflict Database
    About Us