In Barnawapara Wildlife Sanctuary, the administration displaced three tribal villages between 2010 and 2014. The sanctuary, located in Mahasamund district, had 25 villages within the reserved area, where the majority of the households belonged to the Kond, Saura and Binjhwar tribes and the Scheduled Caste. The families have been protesting since 2008 against their forceful relocation without compensation or rehabilitation packages. Reportedly, the displacements happened under the garb of protecting the wildlife, for which the state had partially utilised the Compensatory Afforestation Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) funds. In 2010, the state government decided to relocate all the villages in the 245square kilometre area of the sanctuary. In the first phase, the administration relocated Rampur, Latadadar and Nawapara villages, which affected 374 families. The environment ministry released funds to aid the relocation process, but according to a 2014 news report, there were discrepancies in fund utilisation. Also, while the government claimed in the 2013 State Assembly that the relocation of the affected families was complete and they had access to basic amenities and social welfare schemes, the families argued otherwise. Ground reports showed that the forest dwellers did not receive proper rehabilitation and compensation they were entitled to under the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972. In January 2013, the State Assembly decided to relocate Bafra, Gundagarh, Mudpaar, Bhimauri, Dheba and Akaltaraare villages in the second phase. But the relocation is not yet complete. According to a 2018 factfinding report, the families relocated from Rampur to Srirampur village did not have access to social welfare schemes. They claimed that the officials had promised them land allocation, but there were differences in the final allocation. They also claimed that the newly allocated land was difficult to cultivate. According to the report, the state has also failed to settle the community forest rights (CFR) claims. The factfinding report further stated that the families in Rampur who had refused to relocate faced threats and intimidation by forest officials. Over the years, the relocated families have raised their concerns several times with the block and district administration, but their issues remain unaddressed. In October 2017, the residents of the remaining 22 villages decided to launch a protest against the relocation plan under the banner of Dalit Adivasi Manch. They also demanded the settlement of their CFR claims first. On January 18, 2018, according to local testimonies, forest officials physically assaulted and abused a resident of Rampur village and his family for refusing to relocate. He was arrested and detained for 10 days. In protest, from January 25, the villagers organised an indefinite sitin demanding state action against attempts of forceful evacuation and instances of intimidation and casteism. They called off their protest in February after the subdivisional magistrate of Kasdol block intervened and verbally accepted the protesters memorandum of demands. In the same month, Dalit Adivasi Manch filed a petition with the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes demanding to stop the forceful eviction of the Scheduled Tribe community from the sanctuary. The villagers have reportedly reapplied for CFR entitlements with the support of their respective panchayats.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Complaint against procedural violations
Refusal to give up land for the project
Demand for legal recognition of land rights
Demand for promised land
Demand for promised compensation
Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources
Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Common
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?
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
Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict
Source/Reference
Total investment involved (in Crores):
₹
Type of investment:
Year of Estimation
Has the Conflict Ended?
No
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Central/State Government Policy, Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws, Other
Legislations/Policies Involved
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Forced evictions/dispossession of land
Non-implementation/violation of FRA
Non-rehabilitation of displaced people
Violation of free prior informed consent
Non-payment of compensation/promised compensation
Legal Status:
Out of Court
Status of Case In Court
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Yes
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:
Arrest/detention/imprisonment
Displacement
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Yes
Reported Details of the Violation:
Forest officials allegedly physically assaulted and abused a resident of Rampur village and his family for refusing to relocate. He was arrested and detained for 10 days. A fact-finding report also stated that the families in Rampur who had refused to relocate faced threats and intimidation by forest officials.
Date of Violation
January 18, 2018
Location of Violation
Rampur village
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Forest Department, Kasdol Block Administration
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?
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
Dalit Adivasi Manch
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?
Violent protest during public hearing for cement plant expansion in Meghalaya's East Jaintia Hills
Residents of Narela's Bajitpur Thakran oppose demolition of temples for defence institute, demand sports complex
Adivasis in Chhattisgarh's Hasdeo protest relentlessly against mining project in forest
Lawyer bodies protest against Assam government’s decision to relocate Gauhati High Court
Demands for Ram Temple, Babri Mosque at same site divides Ayodhya
Supreme Court Allows Land Reclamation for Mumbai Coastal Road Project
Farmers Refuse Land for Pune Outer Ring Road Project in Maharashtra
Slum Dwellers in Gujarat's Surat Stage Protest against Demolition, Forced Eviction