INDIA: A Dalit brutally murdered by the dominant caste members in Gujarat

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information from Navsarjan, a human rights organisation working on Dalit rights in Gujarat about the murder of a Dalit (lower caste untouchable community according to the caste Hindus in India) by upper and dominant caste persons in Kasumbad village, Gujarat. The murder was the culmination of repeated acts of caste-based discrimination and caste-based atrocities committed against the victim, his family and the Dalit community since 2003. The police missed several opportunities to prevent the victim’s death by failing to act on five prior complaints lodged by the victim and his family against the perpetrators. The AHRC condemns the neglect of Gujarat’s law enforcement agency in protecting victims of caste-based atrocities, which eventually led to this heinous crime.

CASE DETAILS:

On 15 January 2006, 42-year-old Mr. Raman Dahya Makwana was brutally murdered by twelve villagers who belong to the Rabari community (an upper/forward caste) and the Bharvad community (a backward class), dominating Kasumbad village of Borsad Block in Anand district, Gujarat. It is reported that the victim was beheaded by the accused.

In Gujarat, the upper castes like the Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas are commonly referred to as forward caste while the lower caste like the Shudra is referred to as Other Backward Classes (OBC). The Dalits are even lower to Shudra and are considered as untouchable. The incident happened just about half a kilometer away from the local police station

BACKGROUND OF THE INCIDENT:

On 14 January 2006, Kasumbad village celebrated Gujarat’s traditional kite festival. Due to the force of the caste system in Kasumbad, the dominant caste communities of the village generally exclude the Dalits from partaking in the festival. The victim’s nephew Mr. Naresh broke the social custom by trying to join in the festivities. While Naresh was flying his kite, Mr. Mafat Prabhat, Mr. Natu Mansing, Mr. Pravin Natu and Mr. Dinesh Chandu, all belonging to the dominant caste communities–the forward caste and the OBC–intentionally cut the cord off from Naresh’s kite and laughed at him and made fun of Naresh.

When the victim and Naresh’s other uncles and community members asked the dominant caste persons to stop making fun of Naresh, the dominant caste persons threw stones at Naresh and his uncles. The victim, along with his family members, lodged a complaint against these men at Anklav Police Station; however, the police refused to register their complaint.

The next day on January 15, the victim appealed to the local Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA), Mr. Amit Chavda, who then faxed a letter to the concerned law enforcement officials.

On that same day, on his way home from working in the farm, the victim, Raman, his father Dahya, and his brother Kanti, were attacked by twelve dominant caste villagers including Mr. Mafat Prabhat Rabari (currently, the village head of Kasumbad village), Mr. Govind Ranchhod Rabari, Mr. Jitendra Mafat Rabari, Mr. Natu Mansing Rabari, Mr. Pravin Natu Chauhan, Mr. Dinesh Chandu Chauhan, Mr. Natu Kalu Chauhan, and Mr. Vikram Natu Chauhan, among others. These twelve villagers saying “…today we will finish you…” attacked the victim with knives and other deadly weapons. While Dahya and Kanti ran away to look for help, the victim was brutally murdered by these villagers. They beheaded him. The head that was severed from his body was again reportedly chopped into pieces by the accused persons causing it to rip open. (Please be noted that this photo may cause you uncomfortable: picture 1)

The alleged murderers are from the dominant caste–the Bharvad community (OBC) and the Rabari community (forward caste)–in Kasumbad village. They have been officially accused of engaged in caste-based discrimination and caste-based atrocities against the victim and his family five times since 2003; however, the police failed to conduct an investigation in any of those complaints.

In fact, before the victim was murdered, two constables attached to the Anklav police station were on duty for protection for the victim and his family. However, they merely patrolled around the victim’s house. They did not follow the victim and his family going for work to the farm. This neglect of police authority on protection for the victim and his family allowed the dominant caste members to commit a caste based murder.

The Anklav Police Station registered a First Information Report (FIR) number I 4/06 against twelve villagers, including four unnamed villagers, for the victim’s murder. The crimes registered in the FIR against the twelve villagers are under the Indian Penal Code 1860, Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 143 (unlawful assembly) ,147 (rioting),148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapons), 149 (offences committed by members of an unlawful assembly in prosecution of common object), 302 (murder), The Bombay Police Act 1951, Section 135 (contravention of a police order [forbidding weapons in public]), and The Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 Section 3(1) (x) (intentional insult or intimidation with intent to humiliate a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in public view).

Despite the passage of more than a year since the FIR for this crime was registered, the police have yet to complete their investigation, resulting in the delay of the prosecution of the accused.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

Since 2003, the victim and his family have lodged many complaints against the various atrocities the accused and their fellow community members have committed against them.

As early as 20 January 2003, Ms. Amba Dahya, the victim’s sister-in-law, lodged a complaint against five members of the Rabari community for throwing stones at her sons. Amba’s two sons were enjoying Gujarat’s Navratri (nine night festival) when the village head Mr. Jitu Mafat Rabari shouted at them for enjoying the festival with the implication that Dalits were not to join in the Navratri celebrations with the rest of the village.

When her sons were on their way home from the festivities, members of the Rabari community pelted stones at them, seriously injuring one of her sons. The following day, some non-Dalit villagers visited Amba’s home and asked Amba not to lodge a complaint with the police ensuring that her sons would not be harmed again. However, around the same time, the village head Mr. Jitu Mafat Rabari threatened to beat and kill Amba’s husband, causing him to stay home from work for four days in fear of his safety. After Jitu’s actions, Amba was not able to take the assurances of her sons’ safety seriously, and thus, lodged a complaint against the perpetrators.  However, the police took no action on her complaint.

After this complaint, the victim’s family lodged four other complaints against the accused and other dominant caste persons in 2004 and 2005 alleging that they destroyed some farmland and threatened to kill the victim’s family. After the police failed to investigate these cases, the victim’s family approached the Anand District Superintendent of Police to take action. While the District Superintendent of Police assured the victim’s family that such atrocities would not happen again, the accused were never prosecuted for their crimes.

The murder of Mr. Raman Dahya Makwana on 15 January 2006, thus is not merely the result of a petty dispute between his Dalit community and the accused’s dominant caste communities during the kite festival; rather, it was the result of long-term efforts on the part of the accused and other dominant caste persons to oppress the victim’s Dalit community.

The accused’s actions are reflective of the general social structure of Kasumbad village, where untouchability and other forms of discrimination against Dalits have been practiced for generations by the dominant caste communities.

In Kasumbad, the dominant caste communities, including the forward caste communities like the Patels and the Rabaris, as well as the OBCs like Bharvads, own most, if not all, of the agricultural land and the cattle. The Bharvad community is identified as a “Backward Class” by the state government in terms of their economic parity with the rest of the population in the state. However, in Kasumbad village, they are a socially dominant community equivalent to the Rabari community. While the Bharvard community owns little agricultural land, they possess many cattle. Together, these three communities discriminate, sometimes violently, against the Dalit community, who mostly work as agricultural labourers on the dominant caste communities’ farms. Because of their economic dependency on the dominant caste neighbors, Dalits very rarely fight against the atrocities committed against them.

As landowners, the Rabari community members are always elected as the village head. The current village head, Mr. Mafat Prabhat, and the previous village head, Mr. Jitu Mafat, both of the Rabari community, were involved in the victim’s murder and harassment of the victim’s family. The fact that the village head, who is supposed to work for the economic and social development of the village and the welfare of all villagers, plays a main role in atrocities committed against the village’s Dalit community illuminates the systematic and violent oppression under which the Dalit community lives in Kasumbad village.

Navsarjan Trust has documented specific forms of untouchability practiced against Kasumbad’s Dalit community. They are forbidden from entering the village temple. While working in the fields of the dominant caste villagers, they are offered water at a distance, so that the dominant caste persons do not get ‘polluted’. Their children are segregated in public school, during classes and the mid-day meals. Dalits are often verbally and physically abused by the dominant caste neighbors, but rarely report such incidents of abuse to the police.

THE LAW APPLICABLE IN THE ABOVE CASE

The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is a piece of Indian legislation that criminalises atrocities committed against the Dalits in India. Section 3 (2) (v) of this Act reads : “Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled caste or a Scheduled Tribe:-” … “commits any offense under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) punishable with imprisonment for a term of ten years or more against a person or property on the ground that such a person is a member of a scheduled caste or a Scheduled Tribe or such property belongs to such member, shall be punishable with imprisonment for life and with fine.”

Section 8 of the Act says “In a prosecution for an offense under this Chapter, if it is proved that – … (b) a group of persons committed an offense under this Chapter and if it is proved that the offense committed was a sequel [emphasis added] to any existing dispute regarding land or any other matter, it shall be presumed that the offense was committed in furtherance of the common intention or in prosecution of the common object.”

This means, that the offense of murder of a Dalit by a non-Dalit in which the element of mens rea of the accused is catalysed due to the caste identity of the victim is an offense punishable under the above said provisions of the law applicable in India. It also means from the facts and circumstances of the case, a prosecution in this case benefits the prosecution from a statutory presumption by law where the accused in this case will have to be presumed that they did the act in furtherance of a common intention, which makes the case for the defense a tight case to escape the liability. The state police have failed to charge the accused in this case with this part of the law, which also illuminates the connivance of the state agencies with the upper caste persons.

In fact, if read with the following Section of the same Act which says : “Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or any custom or usage or any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law.” [Section 20], it is mandatory for the police to book the accused under the above provisions of the Act, not just with the provisions contained in the Indian Penal Code 1860 alone.

The facts of the case suggest yet another lacuna, which one may attribute upon the law enforcements agencies in Gujarat as willful, for failing to take actions against the accused based on previous complaints against the accused by the victim and his family.

Section 4 of the Act says : “Whoever, being a public servant but not being a member of the Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, willfully neglects his duties required to be performed by him under this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to one year.”

By virtue of this provision of the law, the police officers who refused to register cases and investigate the complaints are also liable to be prosecuted for breach of official duty.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the authorities named below expressing your concern in this case. The facts of the case have to be thoroughly investigated and the alleged murderers should be punished. Please make a note that police failed to maintain the rule of law and protect the victim.

The AHRC has also written a separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance calling for an intervention in this case.

To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER