Dr. Sivaramakrishna, known as ‘Gendada Panthulu’ was arrested allegedly with no substantial reason.

With no political affiliation, Dr. Sivaramakrishna has been working as a catalyst between tribals and government agencies to ensure benefits sanctioned to the tribals reach them.

He helps them from falling into the minds of middlemen, who often exploit them. He teaches them latest farming techniques.

Dr. Sivaramakrishna has been propagation social foresty programme sponsored by the .... Tribal Development Agency. He had been conferred doctorate for his research on tribals and their culture and traditions.

It is alleged that the arrack contractors and the police themselves were behind the arrest.

Dr. Sivaramakrishna told ENS recently that he was not given the reason behind the arrest. He alleged that the police were not allowing him to talk to them.

He charged that the police pressurising people to compromise with the arrack contractors ‘for their selfish ends’ was not justifiable.

The police allegedly lent a deaf. ear even to the recommendation of the taluk second class inagistrate for his immediate release on the grounds that he was a, social worker having no concern with any political party.

The police have reportedly violated the rule that the arresting should be produced before the court within 24 hours of the attention.

Moreover, Dr. Sitaramakrishna alleged that the police were pressurising him not to get into confront with them and the arrack contractors.

The reasons behind the whole issue was said to be the objection for selling of arrack at Kakavada village its residents some time ago.

The tribals of the village have requested the arrack contractors not to sell arrack at their village. Even the excise officials have ordered the contractors to discontinue their sales at the village.

But the police, camping at the village to check extremist activities in the taluk, have reportedly pressurised the contractors for the supply of arrack. But the tribals have obstructed the sale. The police, suspecting the hand of Dr.Sivaramakrishna behind their objection, reportedly had a grouse against him, which eventually is stated to have led to his detention.

When the correspondent met the circle inspector recently, he reportedly said that he was on sick leave and was ignorant of the arrest.

Even the sub-inspector, who was reportedly out of station on the time of the arrest, said that he did not know the reason behind the arrest of Dr.Sivaramakrishna.

Meanwhile, the villagers of Kakawada have alleged that the police have been restricting their movements.

The fight put up by the tribals, has ultimately forced the excise department officials to direct the arrack contractors to close down the shop and leave the village.

The curtain was rung down on the drama, subsequent to the opening of the "unauthorised" arrack shop when the excise officials visited the village a few days ago and ordered the contractors not to make any more efforts to carry out their trade there.

Much to the elation of the villagers, Mr.M.Sivaramaiah, Assistant excise superintendent, Kakinada, who visited the village accompanied by Mr.K.G.Krishna murthy, excise circle inspector, Rajahmundry, asked the villagers to bring to his notice if attempts were made by the contractors to sell arrack in the village in future.

It may be recalled that some of the educated tribals, helped by some social workers have launched an agitation against the location to the "unauthorisied" arrack shop in the village, and demanded its closure.

SAKTI a Voluntary organisation based at Rampachodavaram has asked her to file a case before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, (Sub Collector, R.Chodavaram) and helped her to engage a lawyer also. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, passed maintenance decree and ordered that the contractor should pay Rs.300/- for Gangamma and Rs.200/- for the blind son per month.

The Contractor appealed in the District Court. The Court struck down the lower court judgement saying that proof of ‘valid’ marriage is necessary for a ‘wife’ to claim maintenance.

The lawyer pleading for Vempa Gangamma in the District Court felt that, while drafting the petition in the lower court itself one must be careful. In view of the clear admission in the petition before the Sub Divisional Magistrate Rampachodavaram that there was no marriage, under the provision of Cr.PC Vempa Gangamma is not entitled to claim maintenance and therefore there is little one can do in defending the respondent Vempa Gangamma in appellate Court.

Than Gangamma filed a writ petition in High Court submitting her argument that the learned sessions judge over looked the fact that in tribal societies there will not be a marriage in the legal sense of the term and more particularly when the male partner is a non-tribal and hence the order is bad and further she pleaded that in evaluating the merits of the case involving tribals, the normal rules of evidence need not strictly be followed and case can be based on probabilities. The petition is pending before the High Court of A.P.

The learned lawyers started applying same yard stick of legal marriage and legal divorce to the cases between the tribals also.

One Kukkara Lalitha a tribal lady of Ginnepalli village of Rampachodavaram mandal filed a petition for maintenance and a share to her children from the property of her husband who is also a tribal. The argument of the defence counsel of the husband is that Lalitha earlier married one tribal and later she started living with the present husband from whom she is claiming maintenance and property to her children, and that the first marriage was not ‘legally’ dissolved under the provisions of Cr.PC. A Concubine however long and exclusive the cohabitation might have been, is not entitled for maintenance. This is the argument of defence counsel.

These are some of the cases of tribal women who are sexually exploited and deserted and the agonising trial they are facing. When they moved the courts for legal redressal, though the courts are unable to do justice, they are able to label them as concubines. Concubines and prostitutes are part of the Hindu value system ‘Marriage by capture, mutual love and elopement, marriage by service are socially accepted ways of acquiring mates among the tribals, where as these ways of acquiring mates are socially prohibited in the Hindu Society.

Further levirate type of marriage, divorce, widow marriage are also customarily practised in the former community where as they are tabooed in the latter community’ The Primitive marriage are totally absent and even the vestiges of the institution could not be traced in the non-tribal communities. In a tribal society according to their customary law all the above practices of elopment, mutual consent or widow remarriage are presumed a marriages. For a non-tribal who ‘uses’ her, she is concubine. Living together is a marriage for tribals. Since tribals practise bygamy – any tribal women goes with a man as a wife or cowife not as a concubine. Some time the cowives live under the same roof also.

The primary courts, which deal with these matters give a sympathetic judgement either in favour of tribal or go by the public opinion i.e. Some convenient settled legal position. Rarely they take pains to elicit the information of the customary practices, the efforts the non-tribal has made toe win over the tribal girl in a village (Public) Court and record the whole situation elaboratly in their judgement. So these judgements some times fail before the eagle eyes of manipulation in High Courts.

These cases of tribal women are not simply individual grievances. Whole tribal society is taken for a ride under the shelter of these conflicting value systems. The bias of local jury who are almost non-tribals is also clear.

So in pursuing these cases at different courts SAKTI has gathered a lot of literature on tribal customary laws available in the ‘confidential’ documents of Government and from the published works of the anthropologists, SAKTI appeals to active feminists to take up this issue to wider forums. To man has a right to enjoy women and call them concubines, and escape responsibility. Shall we conclude that bulldozing the customary practices which upheld human values by Hindu marriage Act is the blessing. We can offer to our tribal communities.