Jenu Kurubas are the original inhabitants of the forests of Mysuru and Kodagu districts in Karnataka. The tribe primarily comprises hunter-gatherers. One among the 58 tribal communities in the state, the Jenu Kurubas were listed as a primitive tribe by the state government in 1986. Today, they have the status of a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group. Other than honey-gathering, the tribe also collects minor forest produce and practises shifting cultivation for sustenance. Historically, the Jenu Kurubas took care of elephants for the Pallava and Chola kings.
The tribe has been subjected to continuous multiple displacements historically. The displacement was two-fold – first, they were pushed away from the forestlands to make way for estates, and second, they were exploited as laborers at the same estates that displaced them.
Post-independence, when plantations reigned, the Jenu Kurubas were asked to leave their ancestral lands to facilitate the construction of the Kabini, Taraka and Nugu dams in the 1970s. These dams led to the submergence of large tracts of forestlands around Nagarahole and as many as 500 tribal families were displaced.
The Wild Life Protection Act of 1972 led to further displacement of the tribe. About 3,400 families were relocated outside the forest with the promise of rehabilitation with agricultural land, a promise that never materialised, like most other land-related promises made to the Jenu Kurubas over the years.
In 1983, Nagarahole was declared a national park and was later designated as a tiger reserve in 1999. To resist the anti-tribal campaign of the state, the tribal communities living in the forests of Nagarhole and Kakanakote formed the Budakattu Krishigara Sangha (the Indigenous Peasants’ Organisation).
According to a report in 2014, over 3,400 families were displaced between the 1970s and 1980s and the majority of them continue to be landless laborers today.
Even though the forest dwellers had applied for community forest rights under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) as far back as in 2009, they are yet to receive formal recognition of their rights. Although many did receive Individual Forest Rights, the community members continue to face harassment at the hands of the forest department, with court cases having been filed against six prominent tribal leaders.
In 2016, the tribal forum asked for rehabilitation measures. In May 2017, after the National Tiger Conservation Authority ordered against the distribution of FRA titles inside the core area of the Nagarhole Tiger Reserve, the tribal people protested before the district collector and called for withdrawal of the unconstitutional order.
In 2019, the Supreme Court ordered authorities to remove forest-dwellers in states where nearly two million claims had been rejected under the FRA. However, following nationwide opposition against the decision, the court later stayed its order to further review the claims.
In June 2019, LCW contacted the offices of Abhiram G. Shankar and Sreevidya P.I, the district collectors of Mysuru and Kodagu, respectively, for their response to the order that denied the tribespeople forest rights but was unable to get in touch with them. However, a source from the Kodagu administrative complex, who wished to remain anonymous, told LCW that the administration had been revisiting the number of FRA claims for review.
In 2021, it was reported that the community had launched an indefinite protest against their eviction in March this year. Additionally members have also been protesting against the government's bid to push eco-tourism in the ecologically sensitive Nagarhole National Park and Tiger Reserve. Several community members, including some prominent leaders, were reportedly subjected to repeated physical harassment, threats and intimidation by the forest officials.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Demand for rehabilitation
Demand for legal recognition of land rights
Complaint against procedural violations
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
Non-agri rural enterprise, Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Residential area
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
Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws, Environmental 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
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-implementation/violation of FRA
Lack of legal protection over land rights
Non-rehabilitation of displaced people
Forced evictions/dispossession of land
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Disposed
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
High Court of Karnataka
Case Number
W.P. no. 14379/1999
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Displacement
Other harassment
Physical attack
Blackmail/threats/intimidation
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
Yes
Reported Details of the Violation:
Tribal community members have also been protesting against the government's bid to push eco-tourism in the ecologically sensitive Nagarhole National Park and Tiger Reserve. Several community members, including some prominent leaders, were reportedly subjected to repeated physical harassment, threats and intimidation by forest officials.
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Forest Department
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:
Jenu Kuruba and Yerava tribes; Budakattu Krishikara Sangha
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