Jharkhand:
Increasing Volatility
Ajit
Kumar Singh
Research Fellow, Institute for Conflict Management
On April
8, 2017, two Policemen were killed in an encounter with
cadres of the People's Liberation Front of India (PLFI),
a splinter group of the Communist Party of India-Maoist
(CPI-Maoist),
at Mahabung village in Simdega District.
On April
4, 2017, two youth, identified as Birsa Purti (25) and
Bandeya Munda (22), were shot dead at Toner village under
Murhu Police Station in the Khunti District of Jharkhand.
Police claimed that Bagrai Champia, an ‘area commander’
of the PLFI, was involved in the twin killings. However,
the reason behind the killings is yet to be ascertained.
On March
27, 2017, PLFI cadres killed a civilian, David Soy (20),
outside his house in Gompilla under the Torpa Police Station
in Khunti District. They suspected him of being a ‘police
informer’.
On March
24, 2017, three cadres of the Tritiya Prastuti Committee
(TPC),
another splinter group of the CPI-Maoist, were killed
in an internecine clash at Seeta Chuan under the Mohammadganj
Police Station in Palamau District. One of the killed
TPC cadres was identified as ‘zonal commander’ Ajay Yadav,
carrying a reward of INR 500,000 on his head. The other
two killed were identified as ‘area commanders’ Krishna
Kharwar and Ravindra Mahto. Police recovered one AK-47
rifle, one INSAS rifle, one semi automatic rifle, one
.303 rifle, along with 630 live bullets, 23 magazines,
11 cell phones, several Improvised Explosive Devices
(IEDs), 50 meters of Codex wire, and six back packs.
On March
20, 2017, a group of CPI-Maoist cadres killed a teacher,
identified as Charku Yadav aka Sandip Yadav (30),
at Jori village in Gumla District. CPI-Maoist cadres also
left a pamphlet which labelled Yadav a ‘police informer’.
According
to partial data collated by the South Asia Terrorism
Portal (SATP), at least 22 persons, including 13 civilians,
two Security Force (SF) personnel, and seven Left Wing
Extremists (LWEs), have been killed in LWE-linked incidents
in Jharkhand in 2017, thus far (data till April 9, 2017).
During the corresponding period of 2016, there were 30
such fatalities
(seven civilians, seven SF personnel, and 16 LWEs).
The spike
in fatalities among civilians in the recent past is worrisome.
Civilian fatalities through 2015 stood at 16, the lowest
number of such
fatalities
recorded in the State during the course of a year since
the formation of the CPI-Maoist on September 21, 2004.
The number doubled, at 32, in 2016.
Though
no fatality has been registered in the SF category so
far in the current year, SF fatalities had also doubled
to 10 in 2016, as compared to five in 2015. Significantly,
as in the case of civilians, 2015 had recorded the lowest
ever fatalities in the SF category since the formation
of the CPI-Maoist. A previous low of six SF fatalities
was recorded in 2007.
Though
the number of militants killed increased from 37 in 2015
to 40 in 2016, there was a significant dip in the kill
ratio achieved by the SFs, which dropped to 1:2 in 2016,
from 1:5 in 2015. Out of 37 LWEs killed in 2015, at least
25 were killed by the SFs, while 12 were killed in internecine
clashes. Similarly, out of 40 LWEs killed in 2016, at
least 20 were killed by the SFs while remaining the 20
were killed in internecine clashes.
Overall
fatalities in 2016 increased by 39.65 percent, as compared
to 2015, from 58 to 81. Overall fatalities in 2015 were
the lowest to be recorded in the State since 2006, when
they were 94.
Unsurprisingly,
other parameters of violence in the State also registered
a significant surge in 2016. According to SATP
data, the state recorded at least eight major LWE-linked
incidents (each involving three or more killings) resulting
in 36 fatalities, including 10 civilians, seven SF personnel
and 19 LWEs in 2016, as compared to three such incidents
in 2015, resulting in 18 fatalities, including three civilians
and 15 LWEs. LWEs also triggered at least 12 bomb blasts
in the State in 2016, as against seven such incidents
in 2015. Further, the Maoists gave bandh (total
shut down) calls on 11 occasions in 2016, as compared
to six such bandh calls in 2015.
The number
of Districts from where killings were reported also increased
through 2016 as compared to 2015. Out of a total of 24
Districts in Jharkhand, fatalities were reported from
13 in 2016: Gumla(14); Khunti and Palamu (13 each); Ranchi
and Latehar (11 each); Giridih and Simdega (four each);
West Singhbhum (three); Bokaro, Hazaribagh and Lohardaga
(two each); and Chatra and Seraikela-Kharsawan (one each).
12 Districts recorded such fatalities in 2015 – Palamu
(15); Khunti and West Singhbhum (six each); Gumla and
Hazaribagh (five each); East Singhbhum, Lohardaga and
Ranchi (four each); Latehar (three); and Chatra, Giridih
and Godda (two each).
Another
dimension of concern is the fact that activities of Maoist
splinter groups also increased through 2016. The prominent
among these include PLFI, TPC, Jharkhand Prastuti Committee
(JPC), Jharkhand Sangharsh Jan Mukti Morcha (JSJMM), and
Jharkhand Jan Mukti Parishad (JJMP). Out of the 31 civilians
fatalities recorded in 2016, while 14 civilians were killed
by the CPI-Maoist, 16 were killed by these various groups
– 12 by PLFI, two by JPC, and one each by JJMP and TPC.
One civilian was killed during cross firing between CPI-Maoist
and PLFI. All the 10 killings in the SF category were,
however, carried out by CPI-Maoist. The 40 LWEs killed
belonged to four groups – PLFI (18), CPI-Maoist (15),
JJMP (three), TPC (three), and JSJMM (one). In 2015, CPI-Maoist
was responsible for all the 16 civilian and five SF personnel
deaths. 35 of the 37 LWEs killed belonged to four groups
– CPI-Maoist (26), PLFI (five), two each from JPC and
TPC. The group identity of the remaining two could not
be ascertained. Reports indicate that there were, in fact,
around 19
LWE groups operating in and out of
Jharkhand.
The surge
in LWE activities in Jharkhand was in conformity with
the rising trend recorded across
the country through 2016.
Though
the recent surge gives legitimate cause for concern, SFs
have managed to keep the situation well under control.
It is useful to recall that, at the peak of Left Wing
insurgency in 2007, Jharkhand had recorded a total of
217 fatalities. The highest number of civilian fatalities
stood at 79 in 2011, while the maximum of 67 deaths among
SF personnel was registered in 2009.
SFs have
arrested a significant number of Maoists in Jharkhand
over the past years. According to data provided by the
Union Ministry of Home Affairs (UMHA) at least 462 LWEs
were arrested in 2016 in addition to 381 such arrests
in 2015. At least 396 Maoists were arrested in 2014 and
332 in 2013. Mounting SF pressure also resulted in the
surrender of 40 Maoists in 2016, as against just 14 such
surrenders in 2015. There were 19 surrenders in 2014.
Meanwhile,
in addition to several
measures taken in the past to strengthen
the security apparatus in the State, the Central Government
increased the existing strength of Central Armed Police
Forces (CAPFs) deployed in the State in 2016. According
to reports, as on November 30, 2016, there were 40 battalions
of CAPS in Jharkhand – 22 Central Reserve Police Force
(CRPF) battalions, 10 Jharkhand Armed Police (JAP) battalions
and eight Indian Reserve Battalion (IRB) battalions.
This apart,
the Jharkhand Cabinet, on special instructions from State
Chief Minister Raghubar Das, approved the formation of
Civil Defense Volunteers units in 19 Districts. 100 volunteers
would be roped in for each District and would receive
five sessions of training for six days each. The volunteers
are to be trained to handle law and order issues arising
at the local level, and would be paid INR 250 for each
training day and the same amount for each day of service.
The districts to be covered under the scheme included
Chatra, Deoghar, Dhanbad, Dumka, Garhwa, Giridih, Gumla,
Hazaribagh, Jamtara, Khunti, Koderma, Latehar, Lohardaga,
Pakur, Palamu, Ramgarh, Saraikela, Simdega and West Singhbhum.
The successes
of such measures, however, heavily depend on the strength
and quality of the State Police Force as it is the Police
Force that constitutes the first line of defense against
any kind of internal threat. Regrettably, however, Jharkhand
continues to suffer significant deficits on this count.
According to the latest data provided by the Bureau
of Police Research and Development (BPR&D), the
State had a police-population ratio (policemen per hundred
thousand population), as on January 1, 2016, of 167.92,
significantly lower than the sanctioned strength of 229.19,
though much higher than the national average of 137.11.
The Police/Area Ratio (number of policemen per 100 square
kilometers) stands at 70.49, as against the sanctioned
strength of 96.21 (the national average is 54.69). At
least 20,503 Police posts are vacant in the State, against
a sanctioned strength of 76,692. Moreover, there were
just 113 apex Indian Police Service (IPS) Officers in
position as against the sanctioned strength 149, undermining
the effectiveness of operations and decision making.
Jharkhand
has been the second
worst Left Wing Extremism affected
State since 2007 (Chhattisgarh leads the table), with
the exceptions of 2013, when Jharkhand topped the list
followed by Chhattisgarh in 2013; and 2010, when West
Bengal led the table followed by Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand,
but has succeeded in controlling the menace to a large
extent. As compared to the situation between 2006 and
2011, when overall fatalities, on year on year basis,
increased every year with the exception of 2010, such
fatalities have declined between 2011 and 2015, with an
aberration in 2013. However, in view of the recent spike
in LWE activities in Jharkhand, it will be premature to
suggest that the problem is on a consistent path to resolution.
It is useful to keep constantly in mind the fact that
LWEs have, on several occasions in the past in almost
all the areas of their influence, fought back successfully
to revive flagging capacities, and this has been the case
in Jharkhand as well. There is, consequently, need to
urgently address capacity deficits and retain both political
and operational focus to ensure that the relative gains
of the past years are not dissipated as a result of any
neglect or complacence on the part of the state and its
agencies.
|