Jharkhand High Court Flags 'Parallel Administration' In Sahibganj, Orders Protection Of Pahariya Tribe After Alleged Socio-Economic Boycott

The Jharkhand High Court has directed the police and district administration of Sahibganj District to ensure protection of the constitutional and statutory rights of the Pahariya community, after taking serious note of allegations of social boycott, denial of essential services, and obstruction of religious celebration.A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sanjay Prasad was hearing a criminal appeal filed by three appellants seeking anticipatory bail, apprehending their arrest in connection with Barharwa P.S. Case No. 79 of 2025, registered under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2) and 109(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(x), 3(1)(y), 3(1)(za) and 3(1)(zc) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.According to the FIR, the informant and 17–18 neighbours belonging to the Pahariya Community were celebrating the Holi festival by dancing to music when members of the Muslim community, allegedly armed with lathis and dandas, arrived at the spot, forcibly stopped the music, and threatened them for celebrating Holi. It is alleged that the accused claimed numerical dominance and questioned the community's right to celebrate the festival. When the informant protested, a co-accused allegedly abused her, assaulted her, outraged her modesty, and hurled caste-based abuses. The FIR further alleges that the accused issued directions restraining shopkeepers from selling ration to the Pahariya community, doctors from providing medical treatment, and barred them from accessing government water taps, besides destroying a government well by throwing bricks and stones, thereby denying them food, water, medical care, and dignity.The appellants, who sought anticipatory bail, contended that they were not named in the FIR and that their names were subsequently introduced due to rivalry between groups. It was further submitted that the dispute had been amicably resolved and a joint compromise petition had been filed, which was supported by the informant. Opposing the plea, the State submitted that although the appellants were not named in the FIR, their involvement had clearly emerged from the case diary. Statements of witnesses from the Pahariya community identified the appellants as participants in restraining access to ration shops, medical treatment, employment, and government water facilities. It was further argued that multiple witnesses had spoken about a collective direction issued by the accused and others, enforcing a social and economic boycott of the Pahariya community.After considering the submissions and perusing the FIR and case diary, the Court observed that the materials on record revealed that certain persons in Sahibganj, including the appellants, were effectively running a “parallel administration.” The Court noted that the Pahariya community was not only restrained from celebrating Holi but was also systematically denied access to food, water, medical treatment, education, and other basic necessities. The High Court held that such acts amounted to a grave violation of constitutional guarantees, including the right to life with dignity. The Court further expressed serious concern over the manner of investigation, observing that the police had merely shown interrogation of the accused named in the FIR, who had simply denied their involvement, and had proceeded no further despite the case being under investigation. The Court held that this reflected complete negligence on the part of the Investigating Officer as well as the senior officers of the district police administration. Even after ten months of registration of the FIR, none of the accused or co-accused named in the FIR (including the appellants) had been apprehended, underscoring grave lapses in policing in Sahibganj district.The High Court further observed that the informant and her community appeared to have become minorities in their own district due to the influx of the accused persons, and were facing severe hardships in the absence of effective administrative support. The Court noted:“19. It appears that there is complete violation of fundamental rights of the Paharia Community in the district of Sahibganj at village Kasba, Sirasin for safeguarding the rights of the Tribal community and for giving them proper attention by the District Administration and as a result of which the informant had no other option but to get the case compromised and which is not appreciated by this Court.”Emphasising that no group can arrogate to itself powers vested in the State, the Court directed the police and district administration to ensure protection of the Pahariya community and to prevent any further denial of their fundamental rights. Accordingly, the Court also rejected the anticipatory bail application of the appellants.Title: Safikul Sheikh and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another.Case Number: Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 670 of 2025.Appearances: Mr....

Jharkhand High Court Flags 'Parallel Administration' In Sahibganj, Orders Protection Of Pahariya Tribe After Alleged Socio-Economic Boycott

Rushil Batra

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Rushil Batra

Jharkhand High Court Flags 'Parallel Administration' In Sahibganj, Orders Protection Of Pahariya Tribe After Alleged Socio-Economic Boycott

Rushil Batra

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Rushil Batra

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers