Talk:Development Cooperation Handbook/Stories/Responsible Development - Varanasi

Vrinda Dar, the Secretary of is fighting for her personal liberty after being target of two criminal FIRs by district authorities in Varanasi.

is an Indian Non-governmental organization with an internationally open membership and worldwide operation.

KS was originally founded in  India, in 1994, by a group of students and scholars of Indian philosophy to promote Indian studies and interfaith dialogue. From a mainly academic concern, gradually the Society expanded its scope to include social action and media production. It also manages a study centre cum residency in Varanasi for direct personal interactions.

So how is it that a "Society for Intercultural Dialogue" is being prosecuted by District Authorities?

Being Harassed by Local Authorities
After the Allahabad High Court Order made it clear that the Varanasi Development Authority officers and the Varanasi Divisional Commissioner in person (Mr. Chanchal Tiwari) were responsible for serious negligence, the KS became a target of institutional harassment. Two s were officially lodged against the Kautilya Society; wherein local authorities levied criminal charges on the top management of the KS.

"Obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions"
The First was lodged by the Varanasi Development Aauthority against Vrinda Dar, the General Secretary, and Debashish Paul, the Treasurer (and manager of Filocafè) of KS, on charges of "assault or criminal force to deter public servants from discharge of his duty" (Section 353 of IPC), "obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions" (186), "intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace" (504).

Misinformed local press gave ample resonance to this sensational news but did litle to conduct an independent analysis of the happening. . The KS has denounced the entire affair as a form of misuse and abuse of power by public officers that were brought to task by the Allahabad High Court on the basis of the PIL suit. However the FIR has not been withdrawn and the case is presently pending in the Varanasi court.

The case has many blatant incongruities. To the point of appearing almost comic.

The incident, that the VDA referred to in its FIR, happened when a team of four officers from the Varanasi Development Authority came to the premises of the Kautilya Society in Varanasi on an announced inspection alleging that an illegal construction was being carried out in the Kautilya Society premises. At the time of their arrival, the persons incriminated in the FIR were not present. One of them, Vrinda Dar, was not even in India but was in Afghanistan, on an assignment of the World Bank. Only women staff of the Kautilya Society were present in the building, along with ordinary members residing in the study centre. The Society personnel are under contractual obligation not to let any person go to the upper floor, unless she/he is a member of the Kautilya Society or has an official authorisation. The team of VDA inspectors had neither an authorisation letter, nor did they submit their identity cards. Instead, the VDA officers treated the KS employees harshly. The Society employees suspected that they were not truly VDA persons also because that day was an official holiday and the personnel of VDA are not particularly known for working extra hours.

The staff members of the Kautilya Society that were present in the premises that day, did allow these VDA officers to enter the building and asked them to sit on the ground floor but refused to allow them to go upstairs without official authorisation or presentation of identity cards. Nevertheless, the VDA officers tried to force their way up the staircase, pushing and manhandling Mangala Devi, the 57 year old lady cook, who was preventing them. The 4 members of the VDA assault platoon where so "assaulted" by Mangala who used "criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of their duty". The VDA officers forced their way upstairs and called uniformed police officers to assist them. By that time, Debashish Paul, the KS Secretary, also arrived to the KS headquarters and recognised the VDA officers. The VDA team conducted the inspection of the premises.

Well! the VDA officers entered the building, they found evidence of what they thought was the “evidence of crime” of the Kautilya Society. Did they find secret documents? No! Illegal constructions? No! They found only some cement bags and some piled Chunar stones! Oh! And that seemed to be enough to prove that the Kautilya Society had wrong intentions to build an unauthorised floor! They went to the press and declared that they found illegalities in the KS premises. That was a sensational news! The very society that champions heritage protection is then found guilty of illegal constructions! So newspapers as serious as the Times of India, which previously reported regularly on the VDA inefficiency to protect the heritage zone, acted as a sounding board of denigrative language and went on to publish the news on “Kautilya Society landed into troubles”. VDA's joint secretary and zonal officer for Dashswamedh zone, Satish Chandra Mishra, said when the VDA officials entered the building, the care taker of the building, Debashis, not only tried to make them hostage but also interrupted the process of inspection. The matter was reported to the senior officers including the vice chairman and SSP, following which the police reached there. Debashis fled from the scene, added Mishra.

He added that an FIR had been lodged against the building owner Vrinda Dar Sauntis and Debashis for violating HC's order regarding restriction on new construction in prohibited zone along Ganga and construction without seeking permission of VDA, he added."

In fact, VDA officers never sent any notice of irregularities found in the inspection. Storing some repair material in the house for use in ordinary maintenance work of an old building is definitely not an offence. And these officers did not mention any special findings of this instance in successive hearings of the Allahabad High court where they continued to report what they had been doing in order to "restore legality" in Varanasi heritage zone.

The VDA, however, filed an FIR for obstructing public servants in discharge of public functions; and this was not addressed towards the brave Mangala who stopped them at their arrival. But against Debashish, who allowed them in and against Vrinda, who was in Afghanistan! What sense did it make to lodge an FIR when the Society employees did not obstruct inspection but allowed the VDA officers to enter the premises once they were identified as such? And what sense did it make to lodge an FIR when, contrary to press reports, the inspection found no irregularities and no notice was served to the owner of the building where they came to inspect irregularities?

Vrinda Dar, fearing that the Varanasi authorities would use the non-bailable sections quoted in the FIR to prevent her from appearing in the hearings of the Allahabad High Court hearing (or at least be sufficiently harassed to withdraw the PIL from the High Court) reported the whole issue to the Varanasi Superintendent of Police and asked them to verify if there was any improper use of power by the VDA against her or the Kautilya Society. Until now, there has been no answer from the Senior Superintendent of Police in this regard.

On asking the Public Information Officer about the reason for the raid, through the Right to Information Act, Satish Chandra Mishra, the VDA officer leading the inspection team declared that "he organised the raid (on a holiday) because he was solicited by Mr. V.K.Singh, the Vice Chairman of VDA who had "personal hostility" against persons of the Kautilya Society. This is the official recorded written statement!

Finally some response did come from the Varanasi Superintendent of Police. But it was not a response to the report of the Kautilya Society on misuse of power by VDA officers. And what was it? Another FIR!

"Punishment for cheating by personation"
The second FIR was lodged on the direct and explicit instructions of Mr. Ajay Kumar Mishra, Senior Superintendent of Varanasi Police, on indication by the Varanasi Divisional Commissioner, Mr. Chanchal Tiwari. It charged all 9 founders of Kautilya Society of non-bailable criminal offences like "cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property (IPC 420), forgery of valuable security (IPC 467)," etc. The allegations that have been made do not give specific instances of irregularities but make general accusations that the KS has many foreign members and that the KS receives funds from foreigners. Both facts are true, but neither of them is an offence. All KS activities are implemented as per its bylaws and as per the rules and regulations of the country.

The Times of India, in its article reported Vrinda's statement, "since the filing of PIL we are being harassed in similar style as not only the local authorities but the entire machinery has been exposed on the issue of illegal construction in the prohibited zone. But we are prepared for it and under no circumstances will we withdraw the PIL". As in the case of the other FIR, Varanasi newspapers that were previously supporting the KS against the inefficient local administration have generally given ample resonance to the lodged FIRs without counter-checking the issue with the KS.

The KS is contesting the charges and believes that it is a blatant case of malicious institutional harassment and misuse of government power.

The main accusation is that Kautilya Society has foreign members in its Managing Committee. Sure, it is an NGO where foreigners are among its founding members as well as its current ordinary members. All foreigners who become members and sometimes also reside in the Kautilya Society premises are duly reported to the Local Police Office. The names and details of the Managing Committee members and the organisational activities have always been reported to the Registrar of Societies that has approved and renewed the official status of the organisation. The KS receives donations in Indian rupees from both Indian and Foreign members who avail of its services within the society premises and this is an activity within the bye laws of the Society, it is permitted under the FCRA (Foreign Currency Regulation Act 2010, Clause 2, Explanation 3) and it is regularly assessed and reported to the Income Tax Authorities through audited accounts.

In a written reply to the District Authorities, the KS stated that:
 * "We have always declared the organizational activities and regularly audited and declared the financial transactions to concerned offices. In fact, our Society was accorded renewal in 2008 on the basis of our regular functioning;
 * The Society has foreign members in accordance with its byelaws and the Memorandum of Association that is in accordance with the Indian Society Registration Act 1860 that permits foreigners to subscribe to the Memorandum of Association of a Society. The names and details of the members of Kautilya Society Managing Committee has always been shared with the concerned offices.
 * The names and details of all foreign members who consult our study and resource centre, visit, work with us or stay in our premises have always been declared to the Local Foreign Registration Office.
 * Our funds are always audited and submitted to the concerned offices. In a recent scrutiny conducted by the Income Tax Department of the Govt. of India, our financial details and accountancy were considered as per laws and clear.
 * Not only are our activities and documents regular but they have regularly been submitted to concerned authorities and received official approvals.

Also in this very FIR, the 9 founder members are accused, in a confused manner, of “forgery” because one of the members, Vrinda Dar, transferred part of her property to another member Pietro Cocco as an individual; a transfer that was done legally and registered with the property registration office as per the FEMA rules and regulations and with approval from Income Tax Authorities."

When the KS management went to meet the Varanasi District Magistrate to object about the FIR, he was apologetic, saying that an FIR is not malicious and that it is just a necessary step taken by the Varanasi police after receiving many complaints from local people (on Facebook!). Perhaps it is true. But one can surely suspect malice because non-bailable charges in the FIR have been made on a very well known organization that has been a partner of the District Authorities for many years and with which, in the past five years, there has been a fierce, but until now honest, litigation in the Allahabad High Court. (See the draft report prepared by the KS on Varanasi's heritage is published on its web site).

And what is particularly inappropriate is the accusation of "Forgery for purpose of cheating" (469 of IPC) and "using as genuine a forged document" (471) concerning the authorisation by Indian authorities to carry out civil society activities in Varanasi, when in fact the authorisations have been given in writing by the Indian authorities themselves.

Vrinda thinks that both FIRs are basically forms of harassment and mental torture meant to discourage her from proceeding with the PIL. But she wants to continue and she wants the Varanasi people to be informed about what is happening. She has shared a video interview on  ⇒ the TVP channel.

On the facebook page of the Kautilya Society, she sent an appeal to all members and friends to share her message, and this article, as widely as possible so that she is not left alone in bearing harassment in return for demanding legality in Varanasi; and for trying to preserve as much as possible of the Varanasi heritage so that future generations can better understand the values of the Indian traditional culture.

The video has been widely shared by the social media, largely divided in support or opposition to the KS advocacy efforts.

The PIL
As the PIL continues, there is undoubtedly a noticeable sharp decline in new illegal constructions in the heritage zone of Varanasi and ample public debate has taken place on the kinds of laws that should be designed and enforced in Varanasi in order to balance heritage protection and economic development.

The local community is increasingly demanding that it is consulted on programmes and plans for its city and that the VDA, the Varanasi Municipal Authority and other government agencies respect the needs and hopes of local residents and listen to people's voices brought across by civil society organisations. The press is also increasingly demanding that the existing laws are equally imposed upon all and not only on those that don't have enough resources to obtain privileged treatment form the local authorities; and if there is a need to change existing laws, that these are changed equally for all and communities are involved in policy making. The KS also has submitted draft heritage legislations to the High Court, demanding that the VDA constitute a Heritage Conservation Committee that develops guidelines and plans for the heritage zone and proposes modifications in existing laws in consultation with the citizens of the city.