communal strife

Two Gujarat villages boycott Dalits because they refused to pick up animal carcasses

In October, upper-caste villagers in Par have denied Dalits food, work. In February, it was the same story in Rantej.

In August, Gujarat witnessed a mass movement of Dalits in the wake of the flogging of four members of the community by cow protection vigilantes for skinning a dead cow in Una town. During this unprecedented uprising, Dalits vowed never to pick up animal carcasses and, thereby, give up this traditional profession.

But such a decision was bound to have repercussions, and so it has in two villages in North Gujarat where the community is facing a socio-economic boycott for refusing to dispose of dead cows. They have been refused food and essentials by shops and are no longer being hired for work on the orders of upper-caste villagers. The few who have tried to help them have been punished for it. In such a situation, whole families have been forced to abandon their homes, villages and livelihoods. But the community are now fighting back.

No work, no food

In remote Par in Santalpur taluka, trouble started when Bhramar Sinh Shavji Sinh’s buffalo died in October. Sinh hails from the Darbar Kshatriya community that is considered a high caste. Like always, Dalits were called to dispose of the carcass, but they refused to do so. Angered by the refusal, upper-caste villagers decided to boycott the Dalits. In this village of 400 Darbar families and 14 Dalit families, the latter were left with no choice but to flee.

“The incident happened in October and since then, the Darbars of the village have methodically boycotted the Dalits socially,” said Narendra Parmar, a Dalit activist in the area. “Shops in and around the village refused to sell them grocery, vegetables or milk.”

He added, “Many Dalits of this village are labourers and they depend on the work they find in the village from these Darbars. The Darbars decided the Dalits of the village shall no longer be hired for any work.”

For two months after that, the Dalits managed to procure food, milk and other essentials from nearby villages. But eventually, unable to manage anymore in the face of the economic boycott, 74 community members left Par in December, moving into the homes of relatives and in-laws in the neighbouring areas.

Dalit residents of Par village protest on the footpath in front of the Patan collectorate.
Dalit residents of Par village protest on the footpath in front of the Patan collectorate.

However, on February 21, they gathered in Patan, the district headquarters 150 km from the village, and decided to fight the boycott. Since then, the 74 Dalits, including women and children, have made the footpath in front of the collectorate their home.

“It is not just about one incident,” said a Dalit woman from Par. “The collector may intervene and resolve the issue but we don’t want to return to Par. We are scared.”

She added, “We, Dalit women, have to endure the worst. Eveteasing has become a norm here. Whenever women step out in the village, the Darbar men pass lewd comments at them. Some of our kids are adolescents. It is embarrassing that mothers have to be at the receiving end of such lewd comments in front of their own children.”

She gave an example of one such incident of sexual harassment. “Last year, a drunken Darbar man came out of the blue and stopped me on my way home from a shop in the village, held my arm and even after repeated requests would not let me go,” she said. “Some elders intervened and I was saved somehow. I had injury marks on my wrist. We wanted to file an FIR but were refused by the local police station. The police personnel in-charge that day told me that this was a non- issue,” she added.

The protesting villagers have made the footpath their home since February 21.
The protesting villagers have made the footpath their home since February 21.

Even before the boycott, Dalits in Par, like in several villages of Gujarat, lived without the basic necessities. The absence of toilets meant they had to defecate in the open. Women had to be accompanied by the menfolk whenever they needed to relieve themselves after dark for fear of their safety.

“The 14 families own about 120 bighas of agricultural land in the village,” said Parmar. “They have their house and a life they built around it. But they are so scared that they are ready to give up everything for their safety. There are two women who are pregnant among the villagers. There are children whose education has stopped. Yet, they continue to live here in tents.”

Parmar said the collector had assured the community of a solution during a meeting with the villagers. But a week later, the Darbars had also called on the collector with a memorandum, claiming that the allegations against them were untrue and that the Dalits and Darbars lived amicably. “However, they ended the memorandum in a rather threatening note, declaring that there shall be consequences if any action is taken in the matter,” the activist added.

Villagers of Par meet the collector of Patan.
Villagers of Par meet the collector of Patan.

Discrimination and separate seating

It is a similar story in Rantej, a village in Becharaji taluka of Mehsana district – which is the home turf of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and has produced top Bharatiya Janata Party leaders such as former state chief minister Anandiben Patel and the current deputy chief minister, Nitin Patel.

On February 8-9, the Sikota Mata temple organised a community lunch to celebrate a murti sthapana (the placing of an image/idol in the shrine). The temple authorities invited everyone in the village, including the 45 Dalit families living there and also urged them to invite their married daughters and sons-in-law. But it soon emerged that the temple authorities had made separate seating arrangements for the Dalits some 50 feet away from the temple and its premises.

“This hurt our sentiments, especially since we had invited our sons-in-law who were insulted by the act,” said Amrutbhai Rathod, a Dalit resident. “When we asked them for the reason behind arranging a separate seating area for us, they told us they consider us unclean because we do the unclean job of picking up carcasses,” added Rathod, who was also involved in the profession. “So we all decided not to pick carcasses any more.”

Following this decision, upper-caste villagers called for a social and economic boycott of the community. Around eight of them publicly announced that no one from the village was allowed to give the Dalits food, milk or groceries, or hire them as labourers.

Rantej is home to some 80 families each of Darbars and Patels, 40 Rabari (a pastoralist community) households, 20 Brahmin houses and 10 Prajapati (a potter community) residences, all considered higher than the Dalits in the social hierarchy. All of them gave their assent to the boycott idea.

When some villagers helped the Dalits, they were fined Rs 2,100 for this act.

“When we started procuring food from neighboring villages like Ruppura and Rampura, which are 2 km to 3 km away, they sent a message to those villages asking them to not help us,” said Rathod. “Many were refused things of daily need by shopkeepers thereafter. Leelaben came back empty-handed after she was refused 2 kg of rice. She is 52 and has a family of six to feed. Another Dalit of the village was refused cooking oil.”

On February 17, the Dalits filed a first information report under the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the eight people who had made the boycott announcement, and submitted a memorandum to the collector the same day.

In the wake of this, DD Nayak, assistant social welfare officer in Mehsana, said a group comprising the sub-divisional magistrate, Becharaji taluka development officer, a police sub-inspector from Becharaji, Nayak himself and his deputy director held a meeting with both the groups. The villagers reached a compromise after the Dalits agreed to not pursue the matter further and the other villagers agreed to take back the boycott call. But that wasn’t the end of the community’s trouble.

“They have stopped the social boycott but they have still not begun to hire Dalit labourers,” said Kaushik Parmar, a Dalit activist from Mehsana who is associated with the Rashtriya Dalit Adhikar Manch, whose leader Jignesh Mevani was the face of the post-Una Dalit movement last year.

Mevani, who met the families of Par village recently, said “Una movement gave the Dalits a voice, but the resistance against Dalits by upper castes has also become stronger.”

Activist Jignesh Mevani addresses the Dalit community in Par village.
Activist Jignesh Mevani addresses the Dalit community in Par village.

A long fight

The case of Piyush Sarvaiya is perhaps one such example. In September 2012, an upper-caste mob burnt his brother alive in his house in Ankolali village in Una district, forcing the family of 14 to flee. They moved to another part of the district where they remain.

But they want a place of their own. And after much struggle, the Anandiben Patel-led BJP government approved their refugee status and ordered their rehabilitation. But in every village that the government found them land to settle in, the upper-caste residents resisted the move vehemently. Patel stepped down as chief minister in August and the Sarvaiyas are yet to be rehabilitated.

In the last week of February, Sarvaiya wrote to Chief Minister Vijay Rupani, the secretariat, the governor, a few Dalit ministers and the collector of Gir Somnath district, stating that his family would have no option but to commit suicide if the government did not address the issue immediately. He is yet to receive a response to his letter.

The house of Piyush Sarvaiya in Ankolali village in Una where his brother was burnt alive in 2012.
The house of Piyush Sarvaiya in Ankolali village in Una where his brother was burnt alive in 2012.
We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content  BY 

As India turns 70, London School of Economics asks some provocative questions

Is India ready to become a global superpower?

Meaningful changes have always been driven by the right, but inconvenient questions. As India completes 70 years of its sovereign journey, we could do two things – celebrate, pay our token tributes and move on, or take the time to reflect and assess if our course needs correction. The ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, the annual flagship summit of the LSE (London School of Economics) South Asia Centre, is posing some fundamental but complex questions that define our future direction as a nation. Through an honest debate – built on new research, applied knowledge and ground realities – with an eclectic mix of thought leaders and industry stalwarts, this summit hopes to create a thought-provoking discourse.

From how relevant (or irrelevant) is our constitutional framework, to how we can beat the global one-upmanship games, from how sincere are business houses in their social responsibility endeavours to why water is so crucial to our very existence as a strong nation, these are some crucial questions that the event will throw up and face head-on, even as it commemorates the 70th anniversary of India’s independence.

Is it time to re-look at constitution and citizenship in India?

The Constitution of India is fundamental to the country’s identity as a democratic power. But notwithstanding its historical authority, is it perhaps time to examine its relevance? The Constitution was drafted at a time when independent India was still a young entity. So granting overwhelming powers to the government may have helped during the early years. But in the current times, they may prove to be more discriminatory than egalitarian. Our constitution borrowed laws from other countries and continues to retain them, while the origin countries have updated them since then. So, do we need a complete overhaul of the constitution? An expert panel led by Dr Mukulika Banerjee of LSE, including political and economic commentator S Gurumurthy, Madhav Khosla of Columbia University, Niraja Gopal Jayal of JNU, Chintan Chandrachud the author of the book Balanced Constitutionalism and sociologist, legal researcher and Director of Council for Social Development Kalpana Kannabiran will seek answers to this.

Is CSR simply forced philanthropy?

While India pioneered the mandatory minimum CSR spend, has it succeeded in driving impact? Corporate social responsibility has many dynamics at play. Are CSR initiatives mere tokenism for compliance? Despite government guidelines and directives, are CSR activities well-thought out initiatives, which are monitored and measured for impact? The CSR stipulations have also spawned the proliferation of ambiguous NGOs. The session, ‘Does forced philanthropy work – CSR in India?” will raise these questions of intent, ethics and integrity. It will be moderated by Professor Harry Barkema and have industry veterans such as Mukund Rajan (Chairman, Tata Council for Community Initiatives), Onkar S Kanwar (Chairman and CEO, Apollo Tyres), Anu Aga (former Chairman, Thermax) and Rahul Bajaj (Chairman, Bajaj Group) on the panel.

Can India punch above its weight to be considered on par with other super-powers?

At 70, can India mobilize its strengths and galvanize into the role of a serious power player on the global stage? The question is related to the whole new perception of India as a dominant power in South Asia rather than as a Third World country, enabled by our foreign policies, defense strategies and a buoyant economy. The country’s status abroad is key in its emergence as a heavyweight but the foreign service officers’ cadre no longer draws top talent. Is India equipped right for its aspirations? The ‘India Abroad: From Third World to Regional Power’ panel will explore India’s foreign policy with Ashley Tellis, Meera Shankar (Former Foreign Secretary), Kanwal Sibal (Former Foreign Secretary), Jayant Prasad and Rakesh Sood.

Are we under-estimating how critical water is in India’s race ahead?

At no other time has water as a natural resource assumed such a big significance. Studies estimate that by 2025 the country will become ‘water–stressed’. While water has been the bone of contention between states and controlling access to water, a source for political power, has water security received the due attention in economic policies and development plans? Relevant to the central issue of water security is also the issue of ‘virtual water’. Virtual water corresponds to the water content (used) in goods and services, bulk of which is in food grains. Through food grain exports, India is a large virtual net exporter of water. In 2014-15, just through export of rice, India exported 10 trillion litres of virtual water. With India’s water security looking grim, are we making the right economic choices? Acclaimed author and academic from the Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi, Amita Bavisar will moderate the session ‘Does India need virtual water?’

Delve into this rich confluence of ideas and more at the ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, presented by Apollo Tyres in association with the British Council and organized by Teamworks Arts during March 29-31, 2017 at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. To catch ‘India @ 70’ live online, register here.

At the venue, you could also visit the Partition Museum. Dedicated to the memory of one of the most conflict-ridden chapters in our country’s history, the museum will exhibit a unique archive of rare photographs, letters, press reports and audio recordings from The Partition Museum, Amritsar.

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