Allowed¶52

Krishi Kumar Maravi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC18 Jun 2025WPC/1606/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

social boycott; ostracism; Akhil Gond Samaj Jewra; Gond Samaj; samvilyan Mahasabha; community/Sabha decision; Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; WPC 1606 of 2024; Korba; Bilaspur; Protection of Civil Rights Act; Ishtgasa No. 220/2024; untouchability allegation (petitioner submission); writ petition allowed; impugned order quashed/set aside; Arvind Kumar Verma; 19/06/2025; 2025:CGHC:25978; NAFR.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed and disposed; impugned order of social boycott dated 06.06.2022 (printed as 16.06.2022 in para 9 of the order) set aside/quashed. ¶52

Krishi Kumar Maravi Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

2025:CGHC:25978

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 1606 of 2024

¶6

1 - Krishi Kumar Maravi S/o Late Budhwar Singh Maravi Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Lotnapara, Post Utarda, Police Station And Tahsil Hardibazar, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶7

2 - Heera Singh Karpe, S/o Late Ratan Singh Karpe, Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Korbi, Post And Tahsil Beltara, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶8

3 - Bundel Singh Jagat S/o Late Nemsingh Jagat, Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Dhaurabhata Post Nunesh, Tahsil Hardibazar, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶9

4 - Prayag Narayan Shandilya S/o Late Shiv Prasad Singh Aged About 54 Years R/o Nagar Panchayat Pali Post Pali District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶10

5 - Harishchandra S/o Shri Baratu Singh Aged About 56 Years R/o Village Korbi, Post Beltara, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶11

6 - Prahlad Singh S/o Ramkishun, Aged About 54 Years R/o Kasiyarapara, Village Limha Post Beltara, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶12

7 - Jeevan Singh Markam S/o Late Parmeshwar Singh Markam, Aged About 51 Years R/o Village And Post Ranjana, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶13

8 - Kumar Singh Maravi S/o Shivcharan Singh Maravi, Aged About 59 Years R/o Village Haranmudi, Post Baksahi Tahsil Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶14

9 - Fag Singh Sarote S/o Late Karan Singh, Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Limha (Limtara), Post Beltara, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶15

10 - Janakram Porte S/o Late Padum Singh Porte, Aged About 54 Years Posted Utarda, Tahsil Hardibazar, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶16

11 - Sunder Singh Markam S/o Late Ram Prasad Markam Aged About 59 Years R/o Village Ramdei, Post Shish, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶17

12 - Jaisingh Raj S/o Late Kitab Singh Raj Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Shaila, Post Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶18

¶19

13 - Shravan Singh Koram S/o Fatte Singh, Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Karrapara, Post Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶20

14 - Maha Singh S/o Gokul Singh, Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Shaila, Post Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶21

15 - Dushyant Uike S/o Shri Baldau Uike, Aged About 56 Years R/o Village Shaila, Post Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶22

16 - Vijay Bahdur Singh Jagat S/o Angur Singh Aged About 49 Years R/o Near Water Tank, Ashok Nagar, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶23

17 - Sunder Lal Maravi S/o Bhawar Singh Maravi Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Utarda, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶24

... Petitioner(s)

¶25

versus

¶26

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Social Welfare Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Naya Raipur Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶27

2 - Akhil Gond Samaj, Jewra, Through Its Chairperson Smt. Jam Bai Shyam W/o Ram Narayan Shyam Aged About 47 Years, R/o Village Pulalikala, Pot Office Pondi, Police Station And Tahsil Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶28

3 - Smt. Jam Bai Shyam, Chairperson Akhil Gond Samaj, Jewra, W/o Ram Narayan Shyam Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Pulalikala, Post Office Pondi, Police Station And Tahsil Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶29

4 - Geh Singh Uike, Upsabhapati Of Akhil Gond Samaj, Jewra, Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Pachri, Po Podi Dalha, Police Station And Tahsil Akaltara, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶30

5 - Gaya Prasad Raj Secretary Of Akhil Gond Samaj, Jewara, S/o Nanki Prasad Raj Aged About 58 Years, R/o Village Pipranar (Lutra), Po Khamhariya, Police Station And Tashil Sipat District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶31

----Respondents

¶32

(Cause-title	taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner For State	: Mr. Vaibhav A. Goverdhan, Adv. : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. A.G.
For Respondent No. 2 to 5	: Mr. Ashok Kumar Verma, Adv., along with Mr. Lekhram Dhruw, Adv.

¶33

¶34

Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board

¶35

19/06/2025

¶36

1. Counsel for the Petitioner prays for the following relief(s):-

¶37

(i)That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders and impugned order dated 06.06.2022 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent No. 2 may kindly be setaside against the petitioners, in the interest of justice.

¶38

(ii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders to take appropriate action against the respondent no. 3 to 5 to pass and to support the impugned order dated 06.06.2022.

¶39

(iii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.

¶40

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by the decision taken by the respondent No. 2 dated 06.06.2022, whereby the respondent No. 2 society and its office bearers have decided to socially boycott (Ostracism) the petitioners, only because of the fact that they have taken membership and posts in the samvilyan Mahasabha of the Gond Samaj, which was convened with an object to eradicate and oppose all the mischiefs prevailing in their society.

¶41

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that unfortunately, there is no specific law in the state of Chhattisgarh, which deals with such kind of malpractice and therefore few handful people take advantage of their position and power and dictate terms to run the society as per their own whims and wishes and the affected person has no remedy against it and they are helpless. It is submitted that, because of social boycott (Ostracism) of the petitioners, they are not able to marry their children who are marriageable age, they are deprived from appearing in any social

¶42

¶43

gathering, death rituals, program of Chhatthi (छठी) etc., even no one in their respective villages have courage to even talk to them and because of all these, the petitioners and their families are facing mental and social trauma.

¶44

4. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for petitioners that, being aggrieved by the illegal action of the respondent society the petitioner No. 2 & 13 made complaint dated 16.03.2023 & 30.04.2023 and have approached the police authority placing their grievance against the respondent authority and requested them to take necessary action against the respondent society available under the law but the police authority have failed to take any action against the respondent society till date. It is submitted that, the action taken by the respondent no. 2 to 5 is not only antisocial act but also unconstitutional and in fact it is an offshoot and misshaped form of untouchability. The impugned action and order dated 06.06.2022 on the part of the respondent no. 2 to 5 is absolutely illegal, arbitrary and erroneous, therefore, he prays for quashment of the impugned order dated 06.06.2022.

¶45

5. Learned counsel for the respondent/state would submit that authorities are taking steps and also registered Ishtgasa No. 220/2024 under Protection of Civil Rights Act. The authorities of the State are trying to ensure that no such uncalled decision are taken in any meeting/panchayat. In the present matter the state has also taken prevailing action against the concerned proceedings.

¶46

6. Learned counsel for the respondents No. 2 to 5 submits that the petitioners have not availed to approach the appropriate authority to redressal of their grievances, instead they filed writ petition after inordinate delay of 2 years of the alleged circular without explaining its delay.

¶47

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶48

8. From perusal of the complaint made by the petitioner, it appears that the petitioners are raising grievance that they and their family

¶49

¶50

members are socially boycotted by the respondents No.2 to 5 and and they are being excluded from various functions of Hindu Community.

¶51

9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Court is of the opinion that decision of Social boycott are certainly Social Evil and requires to be eradicated from the society to ensure that no individual is adversely affected by any harsh decision of any head of community /Sabha, thus the impugned order dated 16.06.2022 is unsustainable and the same deserve to be and is accordingly set-aside/quashed with consequences to follow.

¶52

10. According, the present writ petition stands allowed and disposed

¶53

Sd/-

¶54

( Arvind Kumar Verma ) Judge

¶55

Jyoti

Krishi Kumar Maravi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishi Kumar Maravi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Harbai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Arun Pati Tripathi Vs Directorate of Enforcement

Ram Lal Alias Gautariha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Suresh Singh Bhupal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Harsh Kumar Jain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shri Praveen Kumar Tandan Vs State of Chhattisgarh