In New Delhi's Kathputli colony -- named for its high population of puppeteers -- homes of thousands of folk artistes have been demolished in lieu of a contentious in-situ rehabilitation and redevelopment project.
Kathputli Colony is touted to be the world's largest settlement of street performers. Folk artistes from Rajasthan had settled on this land in the1950s. Soon artistes and performers from other states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh followed suit, as land became increasingly available in the area. With time, the initial temporary settlements were transformed into a colony.
In 2007, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) sold the land to Raheja Developers as part of a Public Private Partnership project for the in-situ redevelopment of the area. In 2009, Raheja Developers announced the construction of Raheja Phoenix, a mega skyscraper housing [54 floors of luxury flats](https://cprindia.org/sites/default/files/working_papers/The Case of Kathputli Colony_CPRWorkingPaper (2)_1.pdf), on the Kathputli Colony plot. According to the plan, the residents of the colony needed to be temporarily relocated. For this purpose, the DDA established 2,800 temporary houses in a camp in Anand Parbat and another 492 lodgings in North-West Delhi’s Narela, five and 30 kilometres away, respectively. Later, within a time frame of three to five years, they were to be relocated to low-cost housing in the same area (2,800 apartments in six towers of 15 storeys each), next to Raheja Phoenix.
From 2013 onwards, when the residents of the colony found out about their potential eviction, they put up a stiff resistance. In March 2014, the DDA and local police forcefully entered the colony with bulldozers attempting to evict several residents. Many were injured, and the police slapped false charges on 23 people. On the night of August 11, 2014, Dilip Bhat, the chief of the colony, was allegedly picked up from his house and beaten up by the police.
In 2017, around 400 _jhuggis (slums) _in the colony were demolished by the DDA amidst protests by the residents. A report described the area as a "war torn" place. The police resorted to lathicharge and tear gas. According to the DDA officials, notices informing the residents of the impending demolition had been sent out ahead of time; the residents, on the other hand, denied receiving any such notification.
The two controversial aspects of the conflict are the modalities of the the rehabilitation and the incorrect number of families recognised as residents of the colony by the DDA (2,800 families against the 3,500 claimed by the people).
The colony continues to fight for its land. The residents have submitted numerous complaints and letters against the DDA, MLAs and MPs. After the relocation was complete in 2017, the families continued to struggle adjusting to the transit camps. Many decried the camps to be considerably smaller than promised, lacking proper water supply and sanitation facilities. In 2020, during the lockdown, the transit camps were hit by acute food shortage with residents struggling to access daily ration. While they continue their wait for permanent housing, many have been compelled to seek the help of social media to continue their performances. Others have resorted to odd jobs, unable to pursue their livelihood as artistes.
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?
Detention
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Released from detention
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
No
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
Indian Penal Code, 1860
Sections 186, 353, 34, 308
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
Religious/Sacred/Cultural value
Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict
Source/Reference
Total investment involved (in Crores):
₹
254.27
Type of investment:
Cost of Project
Year of Estimation
2009
Has the Conflict Ended?
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Central/State Government Policy
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
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:
Non-rehabilitation of displaced people
Forced evictions/dispossession of land
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:
Physical attack
Lathicharge/teargas/pellets
Arrest/detention/imprisonment
Judicial harassment
Displacement
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Yes
Reported Details of the Violation:
1. In March 2014, the DDA and local police forcefully entered the colony with bulldozers attempting to evict several residents. As per media reports, the police used tear gas on the residents and many were injured. The police slapped false charges on 23 people. On the night of August 11, 2014, Dilip Bhat, the chief of the colony, was allegedly picked up from his house and beaten up by the police. 2. During the demolitions in December 2016, men and women were lathi-charged and children were manhandled by the police. 3. Between 2016 and 2017, heavy police force was deployed in the area. During this period 12-13 police people along with 2-3 DDA officials would go into the homes of the residents and coerce them to sign the eviction slips. When the residents would hold public meetings, around 100 policepersons were always present. 4. Between 2016 and October 2017, there were a few instances where residents, mostly young men were picked up from the basti, taken to the police station and released within a few hours. This was used as an intimidation tactic by the police to instil fear in the community and those mobilising and organising protests. Those who were detained were usually family members of the mobilisers. 5. In 2017, around 400 jhuggis (slums) in the colony were demolished by the DDA amidst protests by the residents. The police resorted to lathi-charge and tear gas. Many women were also beaten by the police and few protestor, including residents, activists and reporters were detained at the Ranjith Nagar Police Station.
Date of Violation
October 29, 2017
Location of Violation
Kathputli Colony
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Delhi Development Authority (DDA)
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:
Raheja Developers
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
No
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
Residents of Kathputli Colony
What was the action taken by the police?
Detention
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Released from detention
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
No
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
Indian Penal Code, 1860
Sections 186, 353, 34, 308
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?
