Legal collective urges revocation of ban on Adivasi group in Chhattisgarh

By A Representative
A group of 100 lawyers and legal professionals from across India has issued a powerful appeal to the President of India, the Governor of Chhattisgarh, and the Chief Minister, demanding the immediate revocation of the ban on Moolvasi Bachao Manch (MBM), a grassroots Adivasi rights group. The appeal also calls for the release of all its jailed members and the repeal of the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2005 (CSPSA), which the collective terms “draconian” and unconstitutional.
The appeal, issued by the National Alliance for Justice, Accountability and Rights (NAJAR), denounces the October 2024 declaration of MBM as an “unlawful organization” under the CSPSA. According to NAJAR, this ban is an attack on the right to freedom of association and reflects an alarming trend of criminalizing peaceful, constitutionally protected activities by Adivasi communities in Scheduled Areas.
The legal professionals’ concerns stem from the May 3, 2025 re-arrest of MBM members Suneeta Pottam and Dasru Podiyam by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), despite their prior judicial custody in unrelated cases. Both were remanded to five days of interrogation under a 2023 UAPA case before being returned to custody. This same case had earlier led to the arrest of MBM’s former president, Raghu Midiyami, and implicated members Gajendra Madavi and Laxman Kunjam.
NAJAR asserts that these arrests are part of a concerted strategy to incarcerate individuals merely for their past association with MBM, which had dissolved after the ban. MBM was founded in 2021 in the wake of the Silger firing—when security forces killed four Adivasis protesting the construction of paramilitary camps. From its inception, MBM operated openly, using petitions, public meetings, padyatras, and sit-ins to advocate for forest and land rights, Gram Sabha consent, and justice for state violence, relying on constitutional frameworks like PESA, FRA, and the Fifth Schedule.
The lawyers contend that at least 30 MBM members have been arrested in false cases. The first enforcement of the ban reportedly occurred in November 2024, when two members were detained simply for organizing a village meeting—without any allegations of incitement or violence. Even after MBM’s dissolution, its former members continue to face harassment and arrest, based only on their prior association.
The appeal highlights the case of Suneeta Pottam, a prominent activist who has been active in campaigns against displacement and militarization in Bastar. She has worked with organizations like Women Against Sexual Violence and State Repression (WSS) and the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), and was acquitted in 9 out of 12 previous cases. Her release was reportedly obstructed by a new arrest under the UAPA. Dasru Podiyam, a young organizer from Bijapur, faces a similar fate, leading to fears that former MBM members are being deliberately targeted through prolonged legal harassment.
According to NAJAR, this crackdown coincides with increasing public outrage over custodial torture, extrajudicial killings, and rampant militarization in Bastar. They argue that the ban is being used to shield these actions from scrutiny by delegitimizing Adivasi dissent as anti-national.
The government’s rationale for the ban—alleging MBM was instigating people against “development works”—was strongly refuted. The signatories argue that MBM’s resistance to road and security camp construction was grounded in legally recognized rights under the Constitution, PESA, and FRA, which require prior Gram Sabha consent for development projects in Scheduled Areas. They point out that adivasi communities, who have traditionally protected forests, are now being dispossessed in the name of development, violating human rights and contributing to ecological damage.
The lawyers emphasized that the CSPSA allows the state to outlaw organizations without requiring any proof of violent activity, lacks judicial oversight, and criminalizes mere association—making it incompatible with constitutional democracy.
Among the prominent signatories to the letter are Senior Advocate Gayatri Singh (Bombay High Court), Advocate Indira Unninayar (Supreme Court and Delhi High Court), Advocate Purbayan Chakraborty (West Bengal), Advocate Mini Mathew (Mumbai/Goa), Advocate Ritesh Dhar Dubey (New Delhi), Advocate Afsar Jahan (Telangana High Court), Advocate Vertika Mani (New Delhi), Advocate Rohin Bhatt (Delhi), and Advocate Dr. Shalu Nigam (Delhi NCR)
The letter concludes with five demands to the authorities: revoke the ban on MBM, release all its imprisoned members, repeal the CSPSA, stop the criminalization of Adivasi protests, and end all surveillance and harassment of former MBM members.
Calling this a test of constitutional fidelity, the signatories urged immediate action to restore the rule of law and protect the democratic rights of Adivasi communities in Bastar and across India’s Scheduled Areas.

Comments

Sergei Vasilyevich Gerasimov, the artist who survived Stalin's cultural purges

By Harsh Thakor* Sergei Vasilyevich Gerasimov (September 14, 1885 – April 20, 1964) was a Soviet artist, professor, academician, and teacher. His work was posthumously awarded the Lenin Prize, the highest artistic honour of the USSR. His paintings traced the development of socialist realism in the visual arts while retaining qualities drawn from impressionism. Gerasimov reconciled a lyrical approach to nature with the demands of Soviet socialist ideology.

Nepal votes amid regional rivalry: Why New Delhi is watching closely

By Nava Thakuria* As Nepal holds an early national election on Thursday (5 March 2026), the people of northeast India, along with other regional observers, are watching the proceedings closely. The vote was necessitated after the government of Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli collapsed in September 2025 following widespread anti-government protests. The election will determine the composition of the 275-member House of Representatives, originally scheduled for 2027, under the stewardship of an interim government led by former Supreme Court justice Sushila Karki.

From plagiarism to proxy exams: Galgotias and systemic failure in education

By Sandeep Pandey* Shock is being expressed at Galgotias University being found presenting a Chinese-made robotic dog and a South Korean-made soccer-playing drone as its own creations at the recently held India AI Impact Summit 2026, a global event in New Delhi. Earlier, a UGC-listed journal had published a paper from the university titled “Corona Virus Killed by Sound Vibrations Produced by Thali or Ghanti: A Potential Hypothesis,” which became the subject of widespread ridicule. Following the robotic dog controversy coming to light, the university has withdrawn the paper. These incidents are symptoms of deeper problems afflicting the Indian education system in general. Galgotias merely bit off more than it could chew.

'Policy long overdue': Coalition of 29 experts tells JP Nadda to act on SC warning label order

By A Representative In a significant development for public health, the Supreme Court of India has directed the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to seriously consider implementing mandatory front-of-pack warning labels on pre-packaged food products. The order, passed by a bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan on February 10, 2026, comes as the Court expressed dissatisfaction with the regulatory body's progress on the issue.

From non-alignment to strategic partnership: India's ideological shift toward Israel

By Bhabani Shankar Nayak* India's historical foreign policy maintained a notable duality: offering sanctuary to persecuted Jewish communities dating back centuries, while simultaneously supporting Palestinian self-determination as an expression of its broader anti-colonial foreign policy commitments. The gradual shift in Indian foreign policy under Hindutva-aligned governance — moving toward a strategic partnership with Israel while reducing substantive engagement with the Palestinian cause — raises legitimate questions about ideological motivation and geopolitical consequence.

Development vs community: New coal politics and old conflicts in Madhya Pradesh

By Deepmala Patel* The Singrauli region of Madhya Pradesh, often described as “India’s energy capital,” has for decades been a hub of coal mining and thermal power generation. Today, the Dhirouli coal mine project in this district has triggered widespread protests among local communities. In recent years, the project has generated intense controversy, public opposition, and significant legal and social questions. This is not merely a dispute over one mine; it raises a larger question—who pays the price for energy development? Large corporate beneficiaries or the survival of local communities?

Indian ecologist urges United Nations to probe alleged Epstein links within UN ranks

By A Representative A senior Indian ecologist and long-time United Nations environmental negotiator, Dr. S. Faizi of Thiruvananthapuram, has written to António Guterres, urging the United Nations to launch a high-level investigation into alleged links between certain current and former UN officials and the late American financier Jeffrey Epstein, following disclosures of email communications by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Vaccination vs screening: Policy questions raised on cervical cancer strategy

By A Representative A public policy expert has written to Union Health Minister J. P. Nadda raising a series of concerns regarding the national Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination campaign launched on February 28 for 14-year-old girls.

The new anti-national certificate: If Arundhati Roy is the benchmark, count me in

By Dr. Mansee Bal Bhargava* Dear MANIT Alumni Network Committee, “Are you anti-national?” I encountered this fascinating—some may say intimidating—question from an elderly woman I barely know, an alumna of Maulana Azad College of Technology (MACT, now Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology - MANIT), Bhopal, and apparently one of the founders of the MACT (now MANIT) Alumni Network. The authority with which she posed the question was striking. “How much anti-national are you? What have you done for the Alumni Network Committee to identify you as anti-national?” When I asked what “anti-national” meant to her and who was busy certifying me as such, the response came in counter-questions.

Search This Blog