Ambedkar’s radical legacy fueled resurgence in Gujarat Dalit agitations: Study

By Jag Jivan 

Over the past decade and a half, Gujarat has witnessed a remarkable resurgence of Dalit agitations that mark a decisive shift from accommodation to confrontation, according to a major new study published in the journal National Identities. The research, conducted by Mahendra Parmar of the Central University of Gujarat, draws on 18 in-depth interviews with victims and activists to document how B.R. Ambedkar’s radical thought has become the central political resource shaping Dalit identity and mobilisation in the state.

The study comes against a backdrop of rising caste-based atrocities across India. National Crime Records Bureau data shows reported cases against Scheduled Castes increased from 42,793 in 2018 to 57,582 in 2022. Rather than simply indicating worsening violence, the author argues, this trend also reflects “intensifying Dalit resistance” and growing willingness to pursue legal remedies.

Gujarat has emerged as a particular flashpoint. In July 2022, the central government designated eleven districts in the state as “Atrocity Prone Areas.” The state has witnessed repeated protests surrounding cases such as the Una atrocity, the Thangadh Dalit killings, the Ankolali murder, the Saroda land dispute, and the Kutch Dalit Land Movement. Across all these agitations, key symbols have remained consistent: Ambedkar’s photograph, the blue flag, and the slogan Jai Bhim.

The study distinguishes three forms of consciousness among marginalised communities. The first, “Untouchable consciousness,” is characterised by inherited self-hatred. The second, “Scheduled Caste consciousness,” looks to the state as the key to liberation. The third and most transformative is “Dalit consciousness” itself—a critical awareness that affirms self-dignity and fights for the dignity of the community. The author identifies this third form as increasingly visible in Gujarat’s contemporary agitations.

The 2016 Una atrocity case marked what the study calls a watershed moment. On 11 July 2016, four Dalit men skinning a dead cow were brutally assaulted by gau rakshaks who mistook the activity for cow slaughter. The victims were later attacked again in front of a police station while officers reportedly watched. As news spread, protests emerged throughout Gujarat. Jignesh Mevani, now a Member of the Legislative Assembly, emerged as a key leader. The movement unfolded through dharas, a Dalit Sammelan in Ahmedabad where thousands pledged to abandon degrading traditional occupations, a Dalit Pride March, and eventually a Gujarat Bandh.

Victim Vashram Sarvaiya told researchers that during the protests he first became familiar with the term “Dalit.” He reported a dramatic change in village dynamics following the agitation: “No one now dares to practise caste discrimination against us. Upper-caste residents now treat us politely.” He also confirmed that his family converted to Buddhism in 2018, inspired by Ambedkar’s rejection of a religion “that does not recognise us as human beings.”

Perhaps the most significant finding is the emergence of land rights as a central axis of Dalit agitations. The Saroda Land Movement, spanning 2006 to 2017, exemplified this struggle. Approximately 331 landless families were allotted government wasteland, but due to “caste biases among officials,” illegal encroachments remained for ten years. The community escalated through protests, detentions, and road blockades. In 2016, when officials visited the land, illegal occupiers attacked them with weapons. “The officers and police fled, but we stood firm, because we had nothing to lose,” one activist recalled. All beneficiaries ultimately received possession in 2017. Laxmiben Maheriya, a beneficiary, said: “Today, police encounters, court visits, protests, agitation, and detentions have become part of our lives because we have learned to fight for our rights.”

The Kutch Dalit Land Movement secured actual possession of approximately 2,200 acres between 2016 and 2023. On 14 April 2018, activists closed the only highway linking Kutch to Gujarat, prompting the government to act. For the first time, 40 FIRs were registered against illegal occupiers.

The study identifies a recurring pattern: movements begin with nonviolent constitutional methods—applications, rallies, fasts, dharas—but when institutional responses prove inadequate, participants express diminished faith in state mechanisms and adopt more confrontational tactics. The author notes that numerous victims reported a loss of faith in Hinduism, with many embracing Buddhism, a pattern that intensified after Una.

The study also documents the case of Bhanubhai Vankar, a retired village revenue officer who self-immolated at the Patan Collector’s office in 2018 after the administration ignored his complaint about illegal land occupation. More than 50,000 people joined his funeral procession. Following the movement, approximately 7,200 acres were transferred to landless Dalit farmers across Gujarat.

The Azadi Kooch (Freedom March) of 2017 demonstrated the movement’s strategic evolution. Although police withdrew approval, the march proceeded regardless. In a significant 2023 judgment, the Mehsana Sessions Court acquitted all accused, stating: “If in a democratic set-up, every dissent and peaceful protest is branded as an offence, then the right to freedom has no place.”

The study claims a decisive ideological shift away from Gandhi and towards Ambedkar. Quoting earlier scholars, the author notes that the anti-reservation agitations of the 1980s “have dealt a death blow to the myth of the Gandhian tradition. Gandhians and Gandhism have lost the Dalits of Gujarat. Ambedkar is their new hero.”

The study identifies three generations of Dalit leadership in Gujarat: the first emerged in the 1930s, the second in the 1980s, and the third during the Una movement of 2016. This newest cohort consists of “educated, new-age radical Dalit youth, many of them advocates, who combine legal interventions with street mobilisation.”

Despite gains, the study strikes a cautionary note. The SC/ST cell of the Gujarat police remains largely ineffective due to vacant posts, routinely delaying justice. The author concludes that these protests reflect a recognition that “the state, its police apparatus, and dominant-caste society frequently operate in ways that reproduce hierarchical social order. Justice is no longer pursued solely through institutional channels; it is increasingly compelled through organised and confrontational mobilisation.”

Ultimately, the struggle reaffirms a central Ambedkarite principle: “emancipation cannot be delegated; it must be led by Dalits themselves through sustained, conscious, and, when necessary, radical political action.” As caste-based atrocities continue to rise across India, the Gujarat experience offers a detailed portrait of how marginalised communities are transforming collective grievance into organised political power.