Bombay High Court asks report on excommunication cases in Raigad

The Bombay high court on Saturday directed the state government to file status reports of 48 cases registered in connection with excommunication of people in Raigad district within six weeks.

A division bench of Justice Naresh Patil and Justice Prakash Deu Naik was hearing a bunch of public interest litigations (PILs) filed by eight families claiming to have been ostracised by their village. The petition alleged that the village sarpanch ordered a boycott of two families after their members decided to contest a Panchayat Samiti election and other petitioners continued to be in touch with them despite the boycott order.

The petitioner on Saturday contended that the case be transferred to Mumbai. Senior counsel Gayatri Singh, on behalf of the petitioner, told the court that though the investigating agency had filed the chargesheet against the accused, the trial had not begun as one of the respondents was a very influential person. She informed the court that apart from being a member of a political party which is very powerful in Raigad, the person was also a member of Lok Adalat in Murud and hence, the trial had not commenced.

The bench, however, was not convinced with this and said, “It is a ‘misconception’ that if the respondent is a member of Lok Adalat, judges will have a soft corner for him and the trial will not proceed.”

The court was informed that on direction of the high court, the case had been transferred from local police to the crime branch and chargesheet in the matter had been filed in 2015. Following this, the bench observed that this meant the probe was over and nothing remained in the petition. “You (petitioners) should wait for the trial to begin,” said the bench. However, when petitioners insisted on transfer, the bench asked the state to submit status reports of 48 different cases of social boycott registered in Raigad district.

Jagannath Waghmare and seven others from Ekdhara village, which has 4,000 residents, contended they had been socially and economically distanced by villagers at the instance of village sarpanch, Motiram Patil. They implied everyone else in the village was forbidden from speaking, interacting or making business transactions with these families.