A tribal family in Chhattisgarh’s Bijapur district has accused security forces of killing an innocent man in a staged encounter during an anti-Maoist operation inside Indravati National Park. The deceased, Mahesh Kudiyam, a 35-year-old mid-day meal cook at a government school, was among the seven individuals declared Maoists killed in the June 10 operation. His family and local villagers insist he had no Maoist affiliations and was simply tending cattle when he was detained and later reported dead. Police, however, maintain that Kudiyam had links with Maoists and that the operation was based on actionable intelligence.
Allegations of a Staged Encounter
The death of Mahesh Kudiyam has ignited controversy in the conflict-ridden Bastar region. According to his widow, Sumitra Kudiyam, Mahesh left home on June 10 to retrieve cattle from the forest and never returned. By the next day, his name was listed among seven Maoists killed in a joint operation led by security forces targeting militants in Indravati National Park.
“He was not a Maoist,” Sumitra said. “We are poor but honest. My children keep asking when their father will come back. I have no answer.”
Eyewitness accounts from villagers corroborated the family’s narrative. A local resident, Irma Veladi, claimed that Mahesh was apprehended near the forest, unarmed, and without resistance. “He was searching for cattle, not fighting a war,” Veladi said.
Mahesh Kudiyam: A Cook, Not a Cadre?
Mahesh had been working as a mid-day meal cook at a primary school in Irpagutta village since 2023. His appointment was facilitated through the local school management committee, and his attendance was confirmed by the headmaster, Ramesh Uppal.
“Mahesh was employed at our school and last reported to work in April,” Uppal stated. “He earned Rs. 1,200 per month and was regular in his duties.”
Despite his modest background and civil employment, Mahesh’s name appeared on the official list of deceased Maoists released by the Bastar police.
Police Rebuttal and Intelligence Claims
In a press briefing on Sunday, the Bastar police confirmed that Mahesh was one of seven individuals killed during a gun battle with Maoists on June 10. The operation, police said, was based on credible intelligence and targeted high-value Maoist leaders, including Central Committee member Sudhakar and State Committee member Bhaskar Rao.
A police statement described Mahesh as a “party member” of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist), involved in its National Park division operations. It acknowledged his past employment as a cook but claimed he had maintained links with Maoist factions.
“Available intelligence suggests Mahesh had affiliations with the outlawed CPI (Maoist),” said Inspector General Sunderraj P, Bastar Range. “However, we remain open to a thorough and impartial inquiry should contradictory evidence emerge.”
Call for Transparency and Accountability
The conflicting narratives—between a grieving family and law enforcement—underscore the fragile trust between state institutions and local tribal communities in conflict-prone zones like Bastar. Human rights observers have long argued that the war against Maoist insurgency, while necessary for national security, must not undermine due process or the rights of civilians caught in the crossfire.
The police, while defending the integrity of their operation, have acknowledged the need for scrutiny. “Any credible contradictions will be investigated impartially,” the statement read.
Officials reiterated a warning to those associated with Maoist groups—directly or indirectly—to sever ties, citing the personal risk and public safety concerns involved.
Conclusion: Justice or Collateral Damage?
Mahesh Kudiyam’s case raises critical questions about the execution and oversight of anti-Maoist operations in India’s red corridor. If proven innocent, his death would not only represent a tragic loss for his family but also erode public confidence in counterinsurgency efforts.
As investigations proceed, it is imperative that both the state and civil society ensure transparency, accountability, and justice—not only for Mahesh’s family but for all tribal communities vulnerable to the dual threat of insurgency and state action.
Comments