Companion to Indian Democracy

Resilience, Fragility, Ambivalence

Peter Ronald deSouza, Mohd. Sanjeer Alam, Hilal Ahmed

• Publisher: Routledge India
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000461589
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Democracy
• Index: Politics & International Relations

This book presents a comprehensive overview of the contemporary experiences of democracy in India. It explores the modes by which democracy as an idea, and as a practice, is interpreted, enforced, and lived in India's current political climate.

The book employs 'case studies' as a methodological vantage point to evolve an innovative conceptual framework for the study of democracy in India. The chapters unpack a diverse range of themes such as democracy and Dalits; agriculture, new sociality and communal violence in rural areas; changing nature of political communication in India; role of anti-nuclear movements in democracies; issues of subaltern citizen's voice, impaired governance and the development paradigm; free speech and segregation in the public sphere; and, the surveillance state and Indian democracy. These thematic explorations are arranged in an engaging sequence to offer a multifaceted narrative of Indian democracy especially in relation to the recent debates on citizenship and constitutionalism.

A key critical intervention on contemporary politics in South Asia, this book will be essential reading for scholars and researchers of political studies, political science, political sociology, comparative government and politics, sociology, social anthropology, public administration, public policy, and South Asia studies. It will also be of immense interest to policymakers, journalists, think tanks, bureaucrats, and organizations working in the area.

1 Democracy, Dalits and struggle for common land in Punjab

Jatinder Singh

DOI: 10.4324/9781003219477-2

Introduction

Presently, Punjab is witnessing two kinds of struggle with respect to the question of the land. The first is the struggle against the amendment made in the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 inter alia issues related to compensation of losses in agriculture. The fighting force of these struggles is mainly the landowning or dominant caste, i.e. jutt-Sikhs. The second is the struggle by Dalits to exercise their legal rights over the common land of the village. This legal right to common land was provided through Section 6 (1)(a) of the Punjab Village Common Land Rules, 1964, which states that ‘one third of the land proposed to be leased shall be reserved for giving on lease by auction to the members of the Scheduled Castes only’. The deprivation of the land is so acute that the Scheduled Castes (SCs), also known as Dalits, who account for about a third of the total population of Punjab, own just 1.5% of the total cultivable land. While the law is being followed in theory, the spirit is being continuously killed by ensuring the bidder among Dalits as dummy for someone from the dominant castes. In the past few years, Dalits of more than 40 villages have been struggling to exercise this right. In the recent past, in a few villages, they have rejected the fraudulent bidding process and taken possession of the reserved common land. They have sat on a dharna (sit-in demonstration) on the land itself to pressurise their demand for reserved part of the common land. The political establishment, civil administration and the police, rather than committing to ensure fair bidding, are trying to evict the protestors from the land by brutal force. It has resulted in a confrontation with the administration followed by severe lathi charge by police.¹ Although the struggle is currently limited to only a few villages, it is spreading very fast throughout Punjab.

This chapter is an attempt to present a detailed account of such struggles and to understand their implications for the idea and practice of democracy. The site of this study is Matoi village in the district of Sangrur.² The rationales for choosing this village are as follows. First, the struggle in this village, unlike others, was led by young Dalit women in their early and mid-20s. Secondly, it comes under the Lok Sabha constituency (Sangrur) represented by Bhagwant Mann, a member of parliament (MP) from Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which has gained ground among Dalits of late. The findings of this chapter are based upon the conversations, during my visits in the last three years (from 2014 to 2016), with the women activists who were leading and participating in the struggle to acquire common land in this village.

From safety to land struggle: a journey from self to collective

In February 2013, some of the young Dalit women of this village took the initiative to form a group called ‘Ekta Club’. It was in response to the rape and murder of Nirbhaya in Delhi.³ They all felt unsafe in their village and decided to deal with this threat collectively. Another source of inspiration was the news of a woman having been elected as sarpanch⁴ in a village of Haryana. This news made them realise that they could also achieve the same despite being women and Dalits. They initiated this step by thinking that ‘their acts would inspire the people (Dalits) of other villages to struggle for dignified living’. The name has its own significance, as their idea was to unite the entire Dalit populace of the village under this banner. So the name symbolises their dream and aspiration for Dalit unity. They wanted to overcome the ‘divide and rule’ policy of the dominant castes in their village. Their understanding is that the jutts are able to rule due to divisions within the Dalit community. This division was strikingly visible during the auctioning of the reserved common land; one or more members of the Dalit community stood with the land-owning dominant caste to oppose the demand of other section among Dalits for fair auction. The group started by providing financial help to patients of their village getting treatment at different government and private hospitals, and training to young Dalit women in self-employment like sewing in order to make them independent earners.

Very soon, the issue of reserved common land was brought up by an elderly woman from Ramdasia community to the members of the group. She narrated an incident where a landowner stopped her in the middle of the road and started to abuse her for entering his fields and cutting green fodder. He tried to forcefully snatch the bundle of fodder she was carrying on her head. However, she put up strong resistance and did not allow him to take it. She urged them to take up this issue rather than doing ‘insignificant’ work. Agreeing with her, they started a campaign to acquire the reserved part of the common land on lease with the idea that it would not be a problem since it was a question of exercising their legal right. For them, it was merely administrative anomaly. They were very hopeful about the support of the village sarpanch, as they had voted for him. Soon they were confronted with hard realities of caste, class and patriarchy.

In order to understand the pulse of the Dalit community, and with the aim to unite them, the group began with a signature campaign. They approached every family and tried to convince them and take their signature. An overwhelming majority of the families responded positively. Some families were not negative per se, but were weary about the effort. They believed that there was no escape from the routine of dependency on the dominant caste, which, according to them, had continued for long and would remain so. They warned against the dual nature of the Dalit families who had signed. They were apprehensive that someone among the Dalits would stand as a dummy for the dominant caste in the auction against their bid. They were more anxious about the members of their own community rather than about those of the dominant caste. They felt that it would be very embarrassing and humiliating if someone from their own community ditches them. They would become an object of ridicule and be laughed at. These apprehensions of betrayal were holding them back from this struggle.

A few of the members of the community scolded the group for trying to vitiate the ‘peaceful’ atmosphere of the village. They feared the possibility of enmity and violent clashes in the future in which their sons would be killed by jutt-Sikhs. They were saying that ‘you will go to your own homes, but we are going to stay in this village’. It meant that after getting married, the women would leave the village for their husbands’ homes, but the men who participated in the campaign would have to continue living in the village. So, the wrath of jutt-Sikhs would have to be faced by their sons. But these families were also divided from within. Some of their members appreciated this endeavour. The grandfather of one of the members of the group was opposed to the girl’s active involvement in this struggle, but her father was very supportive of her and argued with his own father. His daughter continues to be part of the movement.

During their campaign, they appealed to all Dalit families to not act as dummies for dominant castes during the auction. After the signature campaign, they met the village sarpanch and sought his support. On 23 May 2014, the day of the auction, Dalit women, without male members of their families, went to the village dharmshala (a place of social gathering consisting of one or more rooms with some open space) for placing their bid for the reserved part of common land. The first auction was for the ‘general’ land, which took place at Rs. 9,500 per bigha (1/4 of an acre). When it was the turn of the reserved land (17 bigha or approximately four acres) to be auctioned, the panchayat officials said that 15% would be added to the previous years’ price of Rs. 7,600, and the bidding would start from Rs. 8,200. These women protested and demanded to reduce the price as it was impossible to take this land at such a high price. But the male members of the dominant caste became very angry and started abusing them on caste lines. They were insisting on finishing the auction and accusing Dalit women of creating the ruckus. The women talked to the panchayat secretary about this matter, but his response was negative. As things were not moving their way, the protesting women insisted on the cancellation of auction. The sarpanch, who was a member of the ruling party Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) and a rich peasant, started shouting at the protesting Dalit women instead of taking their side. He started accusing them of getting all the favours from the government in the form of reservation in education and jobs and studying free of cost.

The ex-sarpanch, who was from the Congress party, told the officials that ‘if they give me ten thousand rupees, I would ensure the dummy for auction’. The protesting women warned the ex-sarpanch against indulging in such acts. They also requested the dummy bidders to side with them. Due to their strong protest, the first auction for the reserved common land was cancelled. On the next day, they (the Dalit women and men) met the Block Development and Panchayat Officer (BDPO) at his office. He was very annoyed and told them that they could not demand a reduction in the auction price. He threatened to report them to the higher authorities on the grounds that they were pressurising him to succumb to their demands. After a long period of persuasion, he agreed to fix the price of auction at Rs. 6,600, per bigha, based on the average of the three previous auctions.

On 30 May, during the second auction, things did not go the way they had been promised. Dalits, who were campaigning for common land, protested that this auction was not fair, and it would go to someone from the dominant caste. Joginder Singh, who belonged to the Bazigar caste, bid for it. ‘He’, according to Gurmeet Kaur,⁵ one of the activists, ‘was the dummy of Ajit Singh (jutt-Sikh farmer)’. So, the land, in reality, was handed over by a Dalit to someone of the dominant caste. While they were protesting, the members of the dominant caste started to laugh and clap to celebrate their victory. Angered by this defeat, the protestors marched towards the reserved common land and sat on a dharna. The village sarpanch threatened Ajit Singh with social boycott if he failed to take possession of the land. Interestingly, when Singh discussed the matter with his family members, they told him to give up the land. They did not want to take bad omen from these girls, which they thought would harm the family. His refusal angered the sarpanch further and he declined to accept Singh’s decision. He then went to the protestors and requested them to lift the agitation. They agreed, finally.

In the evening, the village sarpanch approached the protestors with an offer to agree to Rs. 7,000 this time and a promise that next year he would ensure that the rate would be Rs. 3,500. They all agreed to pay this price, with the idea of taking possession of the land at once. The money, which amounted to one lakh nineteen thousand, was arranged with contributions from families and relatives. Next morning, they went to the BDPO office and completed the paperwork. When the BDPO was about to sign, the ex-sarpanch came to the office and questioned the procedure of the auction. He alleged that the auction was not valid since it had not taken place at the village. Though, according to the activists, during his tenure as a sarpanch, he used to conduct auctions in the same manner. He kept the people unaware of the auction and decides according to his whims and fancies.⁶ The auction was annulled and the activists came back defeated. In hindsight, they consider this a conspiracy of the present and ex-sarpanch and BDPO to deprive them of the common land.

During the next auction, panchayat officials announced that the security fee to bid for the land has increased from one to five thousand. The trick was that Dalits would be unable to pay this amount and the land would be left for the jutt-Sikhs. This attitude was clearly vindictive towards the poor and the Dalits. Being defeated in the argument, the officials agreed to one thousand. But the jutt-Sikhs were very angry and shouted ‘These girls are crossing all their “limits”’. After their day-long protest, the auction was postponed and fixed for 23 June.

To ensure unity, the members of the group approached every family in the Dalit community. One Dalit woman strongly opposed their struggle and declared that ‘I would bid for the land and hand it over to a jutt-Sikhs.’ She was opposing the struggle because of a personal dispute with Sandeep Kaur’s family. Sandeep Kaur and her family were leading the struggle, and she wanted to take her revenge by defusing their initiative. On the day of the auction, when Sandeep Kaur entered the village dharmshala to deposit the security fee, a woman who was opposing the struggle uttered the same words again. Apart from her, the brother of a panchayat member from Ramdasia community was also ready to bid as a dummy. So, in case she refused, the other one was ready. While the woman who wanted to act as a dummy was talking loudly, the village sarpanch, BDPO, Naib-Tehsildar and others were laughing at Sandeep Kaur. Kaur came out of the dharmshala and narrated the whole incident to the others. They requested the police to let them go inside the place where the auction was taking place, but the police stopped their entry by force.

The activists staged a dharna outside the dharmshala and started raising slogans against the panchayat and the Punjab government. The Naib-Tehsildar came to them and announced that the auction was cancelled. The protestors said that if it is true then all must leave the venue immediately. But they took one more hour to come out. Sandeep Kaur recounted that,

When they came out we told the Naib-Tehsildar not to take us for fools, as it was quite evident that the auction was taking place and the bidder was signing on the paper. But he again paid no heed to our argument and said that it was cancelled.

On their way back, the nephew of the sarpanch, who was a Managing Director (MD) of a private school, teased them saying, ‘Have you witches chamaris (a word uttered as abuse to women belonging to chamar caste) got the land. The land is being taken by the jutts’. These words hit them so hard that they were filled with rage. They realised that the auction had taken place by keeping them in the dark. They all gathered again and decided to protest in front of the SDM’s office at Sangrur. They raised the slogan of ‘Long Live the Power of Guru Ravidas’ and started marching towards the city to protest. When they reached the entrance of the village, they were astonished to see jutt-Sikhs, 60–70 in total, advancing towards them with lathis. The jutt-Sikhs started abusing and beating up the male protestors. When the women tried to intervene, they were molested. Ironically, it was happening in front of the police.

They started saying, ‘Today we will give the land to you Chamars, dogs, etc.’. The village sarpanch was leading and instigating the crowd to thrash them. Not only this, some jutt-Sikhs picked up lathis from the police vehicles and put them back again after beating the protestors. The protestors complained to the police and argued, ‘On one hand you did not allow us to participate in the auction, and on the other hand, they are beating us up with your lathis. Do not you feel ashamed’? The SHO responded that he was not on the spot, as he has gone to the washroom and had no knowledge about this incident. When they confronted him further, he became furious and warned them, saying, ‘You chamars will be beaten up again if you try to enter the village’. The protestors told the police, ‘Whether you lathicharge, fire bullets, or put us behind bars, we will ensure the cancellation of the auction’. The village sarpanch threatened them with a police case. In response, they told him, ‘We are not worried about our case, but will ensure arrest of the village sarpanch.’ Undeterred, they reached the DSP’s office and started a dharna in front of his office. After eight hours of the dharna, the police filed an FIR against the village sarpanch and 17 others. But the police did not charge them under the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 [SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989], Though, the FIR had clearly mentioned the abuses on caste-lines by the jutt-Sikhs. The case was filed under the sections of beating and causing injuries. It was done to...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• Notes on contributors
• Prologue: the Question is Democracy!
• Acknowledgements
• List of abbreviations
• Introduction: the question indeed is democracy
• 1 Democracy, Dalits and struggle for common land in Punjab
• 2 Agrarian transformation, emergence of new sociality and communal violence in rural Western Uttar Pradesh
• 3 Electoral campaign as a performative plebiscite: mapping the changing nature of political communication in India
• 4 The role of anti-nuclear movements in deepening the meaning and practices of democracy
• 5 People, protected areas and political parties: a study of two protest movements in Odisha
• 6 Democratisation of communities through rural local governance
• 7 Regional movements in democracy: the case of Telangana
• 8 From land reform to guaranteeing title to land (secure property rights) in India: implications for democracy
• 9 From Jan Sunwai to social audit: trust, contention, and ‘workable democracy’
• 10 Democracy (practice) in question? subaltern citizen’s-voice, impaired governance and development paradigm
• 11 Election campaign in Mizoram
• 12 Making sense of democracy: Musahars of Eastern Uttar Pradesh
• 13 Political mobilisation of Muslims in Kerala: towards a communitarian becoming of democracy
• 14 Conceiving scientific expertise democratically: a study of Western Ghats ecological controversy
• 15 Free speech, democracy and the ‘hidden persuaders’: segregation in the public sphere
• 16 Regulatory reforms in electricity sector: systemic change or sabotage?
• 17 In pursuit of personal data: a survey on state surveillance and democracy in India
• 18 The contemporary moment of Indian democracy
• Bibliography
• Index