police terror

Charged with arson in Adivasi villages, Chhattisgarh police continues to light fires

Police constables burnt effigies of activists and journalists, and the Inspector General termed any opposition to the police as "anti-national".

On Monday afternoon, simultaneously in the seven districts of Chhattisgarh's Bastar region, groups of policemen set out from police stations with effigies made of cloth stuffed with hay.

Pinned on the effigies were the photos of five people: Nandini Sundar, Professor of Sociology at Delhi University; Soni Sori, Adivasi activist and member of the Aam Aadmi Party; Manish Kunjam, President of Adivasi Mahasabha and a former MLA of the Communist Party of India (Marxist); Himanshu Kumar, social activist; Bela Bhatia, researcher and activist.

The policemen gathered at road crossings, shouting slogans against them, calling them "traitors" who had betrayed the country. They punched, kicked and burnt their effigies. In some places, they were called Maoists, in other places, they were accused of working for them. As the protest gathered momentum, a sixth effigy surfaced: I had been added to the gallery of "traitors".

This isn't the first time that activists and journalists have been targetted in Bastar. The scenes brought back memories of February 2016 when a mob had shouted slogans against me in Jagadalpur, burning my effigies, building pressure which eventually forced me to leave the region.

Those protests were spearheaded by a civil vigilante group, Samajik Ekta Manch, which, an investigation showed, worked at the behest of the police, while retaining a veneer of independence.

Now even that fig leaf has been dropped. Instead of upholding the law, the police itself is openly and brazenly targetting people who question it.

Photo credit: Tayyab Sheikh
Photo credit: Tayyab Sheikh

Indictment of the police

The protests are a reaction to the events of last week. On October 17, the Central Bureau of Investigation held Chhattisgarh police responsible for acts of arson in three Adivasi villages of Sukma district in 2011. In March that year, more than 200 homes and granaries in Morpalli, Tadmetla and Teemapuram were torched by the police in the course of an anti-Maoist operation. Five years later, seven auxiliary constables (former special police officers) have been charged by the CBI, and will face trial in a special court in Raipur.

This is an extremely significant development. The state, which has been in the grip of an armed insurgency by Maoist guerillas, most of whom are local Adivasis, has seen several cases where security forces stand accused of violence against ordinary civilians in the name of anti-Maoist operations. But most of these cases go uninvestigated, since the local police has no incentive to probe itself.

This is a rare case in which a central agency was entrusted with the investigation by the Supreme Court. In the course of the final hearings of a petition filed by Sundar and others against Salwa Judum, the anti-Maoist civil militia propped up by the state government in 2005, the judges took note of a plea by Swami Agnivesh, who had been attacked by a mob while he was taking relief supplies to the arson-hit villages. The mob was made up of members of the Salwa Judum.

Several men who worked for the Judum had been absorbed by the state police as special police officers. In May 2011, the Supreme Court held Salwa Judum and the appointment of the SPOs as unconstitutional. The state government disbanded nearly 5000 SPOs, only to reappoint most of them as sahayak aarakshaks, or auxiliary constables.

Seven such constables had been charged by the CBI. The protests on Monday were mostly staged by policemen drawn from their ranks. But support has come right from the top: the seniormost police officer of Bastar has defended the constables.

Shifting stances

On Saturday, the Inspector General of Bastar police, Shiv Ram Prasad Kalluri, addressed the media in Jagdalpur. "Whatever happened was under my instruction," he said. In 2011, Kalluri was the senior superintendent of police of Dantewada district (Sukma was part of Dantewada then).

"Main koi kayar nahin hun," he continued. I am not a coward. "If any action is to be taken, it should be taken against me as I was the SSP then...the FIR clearly states the police went under the instructions of the SSP. I am responsible."

Defending the police's actions, he said when security forces go to Maoist areas, "war is bound to erupt".

He added: "There will be firing, there will be blasts, and when there are bomb blasts, the thatched roof houses are bound to catch fire. We never said houses did not catch fire, but it happened in the course of police action. The police did not set them on fire."

Kalluri’s admission that the houses got burnt "in the course of police action" was in complete contrast to the stance maintained by the police for five years. The First Information Reports filed by the additional superintendent of police, D S Maravi, who led the security forces in the March 2011 operation, state that in the exchange of fire between the Maoists and the security personnel, the Maoists "torched the houses on the night of encounter".

Instead of explaining the change in stance, Kalluri turned belligerent. "Creating an atmosphere of doubt and trying to break the morale of the police who are taking care of internal security is unfair and anti-national," he concluded.

Sweeping allegations

On Monday, a statement released by a collective of police constables on social media reflected Kalluri's tone and tenor, but went one step further in making allegations against the five activists. The statement said they were participating in the loot of Bastar, and colluding with the Maoists for monetary gain. The money extracted by the Maoists, it added, was split between the five of them.

The policemen alleged that the activists and others were spreading propaganda against them. Foregrounding their Adivasi identity, they said they would never harm other Adivasis, but only help them. They did not stop to reflect on the fact that two of the people whose effigies they had burnt were also Adivasis.

The constables accused the activists of remaining silent when security forces were killed by the Maoists. They said that when the security forces acted against the Maoists, the activists rushed to defend them by claiming those arrested or killed were not Maoists but ordinary villagers. This weakened the morale of the security forces, they said.

They justified their act of burning our effigies as the only option to expose us, who they termed as gaddars (traitors). It is only when such traitors leave, will Bastar improve, they said. The irony is that both Kumar and I have already been forced out of Bastar. Bhatia, Sori and Kunjam have been repeatedly targetted and harassed. Sundar, who lives in Delhi, has found it hard to travel to Bastar for her field work.

What more does the police want to do?

Photo credit: Tayyab Sheikh
Photo credit: Tayyab Sheikh

The rule of law

Can serving policemen take to the streets in protest against citizens?

A N Upadhyay, the Director General of Chhattisgarh Police, did not take phone calls that I made to his office.

But a senior police officer, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the action amounted to a contravention of the Indian Police Act. Legal action could be taken against not only those who participated in the action, but also those who condoned it.

Speaking to me on phone, Nandini Sundar put it succinctly: "This was not so much an attack on activists rather on the Constitution, the Supreme Court and the independence of the CBI."

She has filed a petition in the Supreme Court, asking for Kunjam to be assigned a security guard from a central force, and Chhattisgarh police and associated vigilante groups be refrained from public display of hostility.

Sundar has also asked for action against Inspector General of police, Kalluri, "for orchestrating and encouraging the lawlessness displayed by the SPOs and other members of the police force, as well as for his own intemperate, intimidatory and provocative statements against the petitioners and other social activists, which has encouraged violence against them in the past, and is likely to do so in the future too."

Support our journalism by paying for Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Why should inclusion matter to companies?

It's not just about goodwill - inclusivity is a good business decision.

To reach a 50-50 workplace scenario, policies on diversity need to be paired with a culture of inclusiveness. While diversity brings equal representation in meetings, board rooms, promotions and recruitment, inclusivity helps give voice to the people who might otherwise be marginalized or excluded. Inclusion at workplace can be seen in an environment that values diverse opinions, encourages collaboration and invites people to share their ideas and perspectives. As Verna Myers, a renowned diversity advocate, puts it “Diversity is being invited to the party, inclusion is being asked to dance.”

Creating a sense of belonging for everyone is essential for a company’s success. Let’s look at some of the real benefits of a diverse and inclusive workplace:

Better decision making

A whitepaper by Cloverpop, a decision making tool, established a direct link between inclusive decision making and better business performance. The research discovered that teams that followed an inclusive decision-making process made decisions 2X faster with half the meetings and delivered 60% better results. As per Harvard Business School Professor Francesca Gino, this report highlights how diversity and inclusion are practical tools to improve decision making in companies. According to her, changing the composition of decision making teams to include different perspectives can help individuals overcome biases that affect their decisions.

Higher job satisfaction

Employee satisfaction is connected to a workplace environment that values individual ideas and creates a sense of belonging for everyone. A research by Accenture identified 40 factors that influence advancement in the workplace. An empowering work environment where employees have the freedom to be creative, innovative and themselves at work, was identified as a key driver in improving employee advancement to senior levels.


A research by Catalyst.org stated the in India, 62% of innovation is driven by employee perceptions of inclusion. The study included responses from 1,500 employees from Australia, China, Germany, India, Mexico and the United States and showed that employees who feel included are more likely to go above and beyond the call of duty, suggest new and innovative ways of getting work done.

Competitive Advantage

Shirley Engelmeier, author of ‘Inclusion: The New Competitive Business Advantage’, in her interview with Forbes, talks about the new global business normal. She points out that the rapidly changing customer base with different tastes and preferences need to feel represented by brands. An inclusive environment will future-proof the organisation to cater to the new global consumer language and give it a competitive edge.

An inclusive workplace ensures that no individual is disregarded because of their gender, race, disability, age or other social and cultural factors. Accenture has been a leading voice in advocating equal workplace. Having won several accolades including a perfect score on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate equality index, Accenture has demonstrated inclusive and diverse practices not only within its organisation but also in business relationships through their Supplier Inclusion and Diversity program.

In a video titled ‘She rises’, Accenture captures the importance of implementing diverse policies and creating an inclusive workplace culture.


To know more about inclusion and diversity, see here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Accenture and not by the Scroll editorial team.