Karnataka
3km from Nanachi Gate
,
Nagarhole National Park
,
Kodagu
Published :
Aug 2017
|
Updated :
May 21, 2025
In Karnataka's Nagarhole, Jenu Kurubas fight to reclaim ancestral land amid delay in FRA claims settlement
Reported by
Anupriya S
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Amrita Chekkutty
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
3418
Households affected
16406
People affected
1978
Year started
0
ha.
Land area affected
3418
Households affected
16406
People Affected
1978
Year started
0
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Conservation and Forestry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Protected Areas
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
Sector
Conservation and Forestry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Protected Areas
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

After almost five decades of being forcibly evicted to create a protected area, in May 2025, 150 tribals attempted to exercise their ancestral land rights by entering the Nagarhole National Park and Tiger Reserve forest. The move is seen as a protest against the delay in addressing the forest rights claims raised by adivasis.

For years now, the tribes of Jenu Kuruba, Betta Kuruba, Yarava and Paniya have been demanding implementation of the Forest Rights Act (FRA) 2006, but no headway have been made in being granted "patta" in the area. 

On the evening of 5 May 2025, 52 Jenu Kuruba families laid claim to their rights to live in their traditional village by building homes for their sacred deities, which is a common practice in their community when they rebuild a village. On 6 May, over 120 officials from the Karnataka Forest Department and the Karnataka State Tiger Protection Force (STPF) sought to prevent the tribals from entering the forests.

The tribals claim that despite following all legal procedures, the Forest Department has been delaying both individual and community forest rights claims for years.

Historically, the Jenu Kurubas - the original inhabitants of the forests of Mysuru and Kodagu districts in Karnataka - have faced forced displacement and harassment. The tribe, primarily composed of hunter-gatherers, was listed as a primitive tribe by the state government in 1986 and today is classified as a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG). Besides honey-gathering, the tribe also collects minor forest produce and practises sustainable shifting cultivation for sustenance.

During the colonial era, the Coorg Forest Department imposed strict restrictions on forest dwellers' access to forest resources. After independence, the expansion of plantations forced the Jenu Kurubas off their ancestral lands to make way for the Kabini, Taraka and Nugu dams as well as plantation estates. These dams submerged large tracts of forestlands around Nagarahole, displacing as many as 500 tribal families.

The Wild Life Protection Act of 1972 further intensified the displacement. According to a 2014 report, over 3,400 families were displaced during the 1970s and 1980s, outside the forest with the promise of rehabilitation with agricultural land-promises that, like many others, were never fulfilled. The majority of the tribes are now working as landless bonded labourers on coffee plantations as bonded labourers. In 1983, Nagarahole was declared a national park and later designated as a tiger reserve in 1999. In response to the state's anti-tribal policies, the communities from Nagarhole and Kakanakote formed the Budakattu Krishigara Sangha (the Indigenous Peasants’ Organisation).

In December 2016, in Diddahalli, JCBs escorted by the Karnataka Police and CRPF entered on the orders of the forest department and demolished the tribal settlement without any prior notice or communication. Many residents were injured as their houses were razed. Trenches were dug to prevent their return. After protests and mounting pressure, the then Minister of Social Welfare, H Anjaneya, promised a resettlement plan and handed over a cheque of Rs 1 crore. The forcefully evicted tribal families were moved 50 km away, where the district administration used the allocated funds to build box-like tarpaulin sheds. Years later, almost all the resettlement sites still lack basic amenities such as medical care, schools and transportation facilities. The housing remains poorly constructed, with no functional toilets.

In May 2017, after the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) ordered against the distribution of FRA titles within the core area of the Nagarhole Tiger Reserve, the tribal community protested before the district collector, demanding the withdrawal of the unconstitutional order. In 2019, the Supreme Court of India ordered the evictions of forest-dwellers in states where nearly two million FRA claims had been rejected. Following widespread national protests, the court stayed the eviction order, allowing further review. In June 2019, LCW reached out to Abhiram G. Shankar and Sreevidya P.I., the then district collectors of Mysuru and Kodagu, respectively, for comment, but was unable to get a response. A source from the Kodagu administration, requesting anonymity, told LCW that the review of FRA claims was underway.

In March 2021, the community launched an indefinite protest against the evictions. They also opposed the government's eco-tourism push in the ecologically sensitive Nagarhole National Park and Tiger Reserve. Several community members, including prominent leaders, were reportedly subjected to threats, intimidation and harassment by forest officials.

Despite having applied for community forest rights under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) as early as 2009 and following up repeatedly, the applications were rejected in 2022 without any explanation. While some people received the Individual Forest Rights (IFR), the community continues to face harassment by the forest officials, including court cases filed against six prominent tribal leaders. In 2021-22, a joint verification process involving the forest, revenue, tribal welfare and panchayat raj departments was ordered but was only conducted in 2023-24. As of now, the Sub-Divisional Level Committee and the District Level Committee have yet to submit the re-verification data.

An interim fact-finding report published in 2023 highlighted the serious precarious living and working conditions of the Adivasi workers in the plantations. It also recorded that in the last few years, at least eight Adivasis have been shot dead by the Forest Department officials on different pretexts, but there has been no criminal conviction in any of these cases, nor any compensation to the families. The free, prior and informed consent of Gram Sabha, in writing, has not been taken before relocation, which is a mandatory requirement as per Section 4(2)(e) of the FRA, 2006. To break out from these chains of bonded slavery in coffee plantations, nearly 30 families living across Line Manes (workers' homes) have asserted their rights to their forest habitats by moving into Balekovvu and Nanachi Gadde Haadis and have been living there since 3 April 2023. 

Later in March 2025, former Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (PCCF) BK Singh urged Chief Minister Siddaramaiah to stop allocating three acres of land each to claimants in the National Park. Such interventions by forest officials, ex-officers, are seen as part of a sustained effort to obstruct the community's legally guaranteed rights under the FRA, amounting to systemic discrimination and violations against the tribe.

On 8 May 2025, the Forest Department served notices to the people who have been protesting in Atturukolli reserve forest in Nagaragole tiger reserve in Kodagu. Nagarhole wildlife subdivision Assistant Conservator of Forests said that the High Court has imposed a stay and has directed not to conduct any activities in Nagarhole tiger reserve till July 23. However, in a press note dated 19 May 2025, released by the Karadikallu Grama Sabha, upon legal consultation, it is found that no such stay order or notice has been issued by the High Court of Karnataka.

As the situation remained tense in Nagarhole, the Union Ministry of tribal affairs on 18 May 2025 [directed](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/centre-to-karnataka-mitigate-jenu-kurubas-woes/articleshow/121247504.cms#:~:text=BENGALURU%3A In a significant relief,challenges faced by the community.) the Tribal Welfare Department of Karnataka to take necessary actions to mitigate the challenges faced by the community, monitor the process of recognition and vesting of forest rights and resolve such field-level problems. 

On 20 May 2025, the adivasis of Karadikallu Attur Kolli held a gram sabha to formally resubmit their claims under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 and decided to file case against a local gram panchayat officer under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly meddling with the forest rights of Jenu Kuruba families.

2
Fact Sheet

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?

No arrest or detention. Accused filed a counter FIR and took anticipatory bail

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

Out on bail

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

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Sections 342, 353, 504, r/w 34

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?

The accused got anticipatory bail with the help of their association: Buddakattu Krishikara Sanghatane

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)

JA Shiva (one of accused). Sophie Grig, Survival International JA Shiva: 08197620535

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Residential area, Religious/Sacred/Cultural value

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?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Karnataka Forest Department, Karnataka State Tiger Protection Force (STPF)

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 | Karadikalu Forest Rights Committee, Nagarhole Adivasi Jammapale Hakku Sthapana Samiti

5
Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

No arrest or detention. Accused filed a counter FIR and took anticipatory bail

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

Out on bail

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

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Sections 342, 353, 504, r/w 34

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?

The accused got anticipatory bail with the help of their association: Buddakattu Krishikara Sanghatane

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

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Author
Reported by
Eleonora Fanari
Show more work
Fact sheet

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

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

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?

The accused got anticipatory bail with the help of their association: Buddakattu Krishikara Sanghatane

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

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Residential area, Religious/Sacred/Cultural value

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us