Days after the state criminalised social boycott on July 3, a Nerul-based lawyer locked horns with his caste community in a Ratnagiri village over his family being subjected to the extrajudicial form of punishment for the last 11 years
Pratik Pawar
Days after the state criminalised social boycott on July 3, a Nerul-based lawyer locked horns with his caste community in a Ratnagiri village over his family being subjected to the extrajudicial form of punishment for the last 11 years.
ADVERTISEMENT
On July 10, Pratik Pawar, 27, sent a notice to the chairmen of the Bauddhajan Sahakari Sangh community committee of Khodade Bauddhawadi village in Guhagar taluka of the district, alleging that his family has been socially boycotted since his father, Pradeep, resigned from the vice-chairmanship of the committee in 2006.
While quitting the post, Pradeep had apparently made it clear that he wasn't relinquishing his membership from the committee, but the community heads passed an order forbidding any form of social contact with his family.
Total isolation
In his notice, Pawar alleged that the family was thereafter boycotted and not called for any social gathering, including funerals. Community members were warned that violating the order would invite further social boycott. Even at Pradeep's death in 2013, the committee refused to relent, and warned community members from attending his last rites. The family suffered the social exclusion in silence.
In 2015, a relative, Deepak, approached the committee and sought a membership, but he was told he would be allowed in only if he cut all ties with the Pawars. Deepak accepted the irrational condition and was welcomed into the committee.
A few days later, Pradeep's wife wrote to the committee, requesting a membership. A committee official agreed to set up a meeting with a chairman. But the family didn't hear back from the members.
In May this year, Pawar sought to become a member. A meeting was arranged the same month, to which he took his mother along. The committee questioned Pawar's sudden interest in participation, and cited a rule that only his mother could seek a membership. He, too, was allegedly told curtly that he could become a member in his individual capacity so long as he severed all links with his family. After the Maharashtra Prohibition of People from Social Boycott (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act became a law on July 3, Pawar sent the committee heads a notice.
Committee's response
The committee responded to the notice on July 19, denying allegations of social boycott. The respondents said they sought an "amicable solution" to the issue, but put a rider on accepting Pawar and his wife into their fold. They claimed they would wholeheartedly welcome the whole family back. If Pawar's mother and brother chose to stay away, the Nerul lawyer and his wife alone could get in, provided they make a monthly contribution to the committee, retrospectively from his date of employment. The committee, however, made it clear that if Pawar's mother and brother chose to not become a part of it, members would not attend any function, ritual or funeral of Pawar's mother or his brother.
Punishable offence
Lawyer Prakash Salsingikar said social boycott is a cognisable and bailable offence, which attracts a jail term of seven years and/or fine of up to R5 lakh. "The onus of proving that no act of social boycott has been committed falls on the accused. There is a provision for a quick trial within six months of filing of the chargesheet. The complainant can directly move the magistrate, who will order the police to investigate the case." Pawar plans to register an FIR against the committee by July 31.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
