-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.164 OF 2004 The Secretary, ) All India Biodynamic and Organic ) Farming Association. )...Petitioner. Vs. The Principal Secretary to the ) Government of Maharashtra & Ors. )...Respondents. .... Mr. S.P. Anand, Petitioner appearing in person. Mr. Ravi Kadam, Advocate General, with Mr. A.A. Kumbhakoni, Associate Advocate General, for the State. CORAM : KSHITIJ R. VYAS, C.J. & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. DATE: May 05 , 2006. JUDGMENT (Per Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) : The genesis of these proceedings is an alarming occurrence of suicides by cultivators in diverse parts of the State of Maharashtra. All India Bio Dynamic and Organic Farming Association addressed a letter to the Chief Justice expressing serious concern over suicides by farmers in the District of Jalna. The Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) was impleaded as a party to these proceedings and was requested, to submit comprehensive report dealing with the causes of -2- suicide by farmers in the State. The State Government and the Union Ministry of Agriculture were called upon to respond to the serious issues which are raised in these proceedings. 2. On 11th January 2005, the Chief Secretary to the State Government stated before the Court on affidavit that between 1st January 2004 and 31st December 2004, there were reports of 294 cases of suicide by farmers. Of them, the largest number – 109, was from Yavatmal, followed by 39 in Buldhana, 37 in Washim and 35 in Amravati. The State Government informed the Court that as and when such cases are brought to the notice of Divisional Commissioners, an enquiry is carried out by Tahsildars or by Sub Divisional Officers to ascertain the causes for suicide: if it is established that the indebtedness of the farmer either through formal or informal sources is one of the primary factors of suicide, the case is treated as one of suicide related to agricultural indebtedness. The Government stated that it has no formal scheme for providing assistance to families of farmers who have committed suicide, but assistance to the extent of Rs.1 lakh is provided on a discretionary basis through the Chief Minister's Relief Fund. The criterion that is applied is that agricultural indebtedness should be -3- established as the cause for suicide. 71 out of 294 cases were accordingly reported to have been found eligible for assistance from the Chief Minister's Relief Fund. In November 2004, the State Government commissioned the services of the Indira Gandhi Institute for Development Research, Mumbai, to conduct a study on the problem in Maharashtra. The efforts which were being undertaken to promote the interest of the agricultural sector were stated to be as follows : “The State Government and the Government of India are, continuously, concentrating their efforts in the direction of making available good quality inputs like seeds, fertilisers, pesticides, promoting organic farming, making available timely and adequate credit, power availability and methods of optimising existing irrigation facilities by way of sprinklers, drip irrigation and other water conservation activities followed by regular agricultural research and extension activities.” The State Government informed the Court that it has taken a decision to remit interest on crop loans of farmers who had availed of loans during Rabi 2003 and Kharif 2004 to the extent of Rs.570 crores. Farmers who had suffered losses exceeding 50% during Kharif 2004 in Vidarbha and Marathwada regions had been granted compensation to the extent of approximately Rs.84 crores. -4- 3. By an order dated 12th January 2005, the District Judges of Beed, Jalna and Parbhani were directed to submit report before the Court. The reports submitted by the District Judges as well as the report of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences were considered by the Court on 16th February 2005. Prakash Gopalrao Pohare filed an application for intervention with a list containing information relating to farmers who had committed suicide in the State. The list showed that from 1st March 2001 to January 2005, 371 farmers had committed suicide. The State Government was directed to reinvestigate the matter and to submit its report. A further affidavit was filed by the Chief Secretary on 10th March 2005 informing the Court that the list submitted by the intervenor together with the reports of the District Judges had been forwarded to the Commissioners in the concerned Divisions for verification. Government stated that in the Aurangabad, Amravati, Pune, Nagpur and Nashik Divisions, 64 suicides had been reported in 2001, 131 in 2002, 180 in 2003 and 524 in 2004. For the year 2004 the number of deaths by suicide was revised upwards from 294 as originally reported to 524. Government stated that the Divisional Commissioners had recommended assistance to 17 families over and above the 71 -5- families which had been referred to earlier. The investigation by the Government in respect of 524 cases was stated to be in progress and the Court was informed that Government would expedite the finalisation of the enquiry in all matters and provide assistance to eligible families. 16 cases were pending with the Chief Minister's Relief Fund office for awarding assistance and 125 cases were pending further enquiry. On 20th July 2005, this Court directed that enquiries in 125 cases which were in progress must be conducted on priority and be concluded as expeditiously as possible. In a further affidavit dated 29th September 2005, the Chief Secretary stated that since the filing of the earlier affidavit, 16 additional families had been given financial assistance. The investigation in 125 cases was completed and of them, 21 families who were found to be eligible had been granted financial assistance. The remaining 104 cases were not found to be eligible for assistance. In a further affidavit of 6th December 2005, this Court was informed that investigation into 524 cases of suicide for the year 2004 had been completed and of them, 109 cases have been found eligible for financial assistance from the Chief Minister's Relief Fund. The remaining 415 cases had not been found to be eligible since the cause of suicide was reported to be other than agricultural indebtedness, pressure to repay -6- loans and crop failure. The reasons for ineligibility were stated to be as follows : Reasons of ineligibility No loan from formal instituti onal source s Does not own land in his/his family' s name Family Proble ms & conflict s Addicti on to alcoho l Illness Accide ntal Death Unem ploym ent Others Total 73 27 157 34 49 10 1 64 415 Government stated that of the 12 cases which had been mentioned in the affidavit of the Intervenor of 24th June 2005, 6 cases were found to be eligible to whom Rs.1 lakh each had been provided, whereas 6 cases had not been found to be eligible. 4. On 18th January 2006, the State produced enquiry papers probing into the reasons for suicides by six farmers. A concession was made on behalf of the State that the conclusion in the investigation that a particular farmer – Hiraman Bhau Patil had committed suicide as he was depressed on the death of his wife was not correct. The State in -7- fact, conceded that as a matter of fact, the wife of that farmer had died nearly 15 years before the farmer committed suicide. Accordingly the AGP stated that the legal heirs of the farmer would be paid compensation since they were eligible. This Court was informed that the legal heirs of 109 farmers who had committed suicide had been found eligible to receive compensation out of a total of 524 cases. Government was directed to file an affidavit setting out the details of the remaining 415 ineligible cases, explaining the grounds of ineligibility. 5. The State has now filed an affidavit on 1st March 2006 of its Deputy Secretary in the Revenue and Forests (Relief & Rehabilitation) Department in which it has been stated that in relation to 414 cases, information has been analyzed for submission to the Court. However, it has been submitted that in view of an important policy change that has taken place upon the issuance of the directions by this Court on 18th January 2006, it may not be necessary for the Court to proceed on a case to case basis. The State Government has informed the Court that initially cases of financial assistance were being dealt with through the Chief Minister's Relief Fund which was discretionary. The State -8- Government has now taken a policy decision to render assistance not from the Chief Minister's Relief Fund, but from the Social Security and Welfare Fund which is a regular budgetary head. The State Government is stated to have made sufficient funds available under this budgetary head at the disposal of all Collectors. 6. On 23rd January 2006, a policy decision has been taken by the State Government to constitute a separate and independent Committee for each District with the Collector as its head. The Committee is to consist of (i) A representative of agriculturists; (ii) A representative of Non-governmental organizations; (iii) The Chief Executive Officer, of the Zilla Parishad; (iv) the Superintendent of Police; and (v) the Superintending Agricultural Officer. All cases relating to suicide by farmers are to be considered at the District level by the Committee constituted for each District and the disbursement of assistance is to be made strictly by the Committee from the funds available at its disposal. Each of the Committees has been directed to decide every case in 15 days of the occurrence of the incident. The State Government has further submitted that initially assistance was being rendered in only those cases which satisfied a triple test namely; -9- (i) The deceased farmer should be an agriculturist; (ii) The deceased farmer should have been indebted to a financial institution that had disbursed a loan to him; and (iii) There should have been pressure for the recovery or repayment of a loan at the behest of the creditor. On 27th February 2006, the State Government has taken a policy decision to broaden the criteria for rendering financial assistance to families of those farmers who have committed suicide. Under the new criteria, the deceased farmer is to be presumed to be an agriculturist if any member of the family holds agricultural land. All such cases will be considered to be eligible where the loan has been obtained by any member of the family of the deceased farmer from a Nationalized Bank, a Co-operative Bank, Co-operative Credit Society or licensed money-lender and where on account of non-payment of loan installments, there are outstanding overdues. Accordingly, a Government Resolution has been issued on 27th February 2006. The State Government has decided to reconsider all such cases of suicide where the occurrence has taken place on or after 1st January 2001. Government has agreed to reconsider all those cases as well where claimants upon enquiry had been found to be ineligible and assistance had been declined. This would include the 414 cases adverted to in the order dated 18th January 2006 of this Court. -10- 7. In other words, the cumulative effect of the change of policy by the State Government is thus: (i) The State Government has now constituted new Committees, which will operate at the District level. Cases shall be disposed of by each of these Committees which is headed by the District Collector and disbursement of financial assistance shall take place at the level of each Committee. The Committee shall take a final decision within fifteen days of the occurrence of the incident; (ii) The criteria for determining eligibility for the grant of financial assistance have been broadened; and (iii) Government has decided to reconsider all incidents of suicide by farmers for the grant of financial assistance where the occurrence had taken place on or after 1st January 2001. This would also include a reconsideration of 414 cases which were found earlier to be ineligible for assistance. The TISS Report : 8. In this background, it is now necessary to set out the outcome -11- of the study undertaken by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) in its final report submitted to this Court on 15th March 2005. The report is titled “Causes of Farmer Suicides in Maharashtra: An Enquiry”. This Court must record its appreciation of the meticulous research and painstaking field work carried out by TISS and its researchers towards the actualization of a socially purposive project, which we will now proceed to analyze. TISS has carried out a pioneering study on the subject. The report notes that until December 2004, 644 suicides by farmers were reported with most of the deaths occurring in the Vidarbha, Marathwada and Khandesh regions of the State. The research team analyzed a sample of five percent, namely, 36 cases for the study. Detailed case studies, adopting a life history approach of all the families in these 36 cases were carried out. Focus group discussions were held. 9. The TISS report outlines the genesis of the agrarian crisis to which the emerging pattern of suicides by farmers can be traced. The agricultural sector accounts for 25% of total GDP. 75% of India's population lives in rural areas and in hilly terrains. Between 60% and 70% of GDP from agriculture is derived from subsistence agriculture. -12- Despite a 25% share in GDP, Indian agriculture accounts for a negligible 0.7% share in world imports and 0.6% in exports. Investment in agriculture has witnessed a serious trend. The report notes that while investment (at 1980-81) prices stood at Rs.1,266 crores in 1950-51 and rose to Rs.5,246 crores by 1978-79; it declined thereafter to Rs.4,692 crores in 1990-91. Agricultural investment came down from 22% in 1950-51 to 19% in 1980-81 and thereafter to 10% in 1990-91. This has adversely affected public sector investment in irrigation as more than 90% of the total public investment in agriculture goes into irrigation. Investment in rural development in India has reduced to 5.9% of the GDP in the 10th Plan. Added to this, are factors such as environmental degradation resulting from deforestation, depletion of water availability and a threat to bio-diversity. 10. The TISS report notes that of the 644 deaths reported till December 2004, the Amravati region accounted for 448, Aurangabad for 90, Nagpur 66 and Nashik, 38. The report furnishes a family profile of the 36 cases which were studied in detail. By way of illustration, we would advert to cases 1, 2, 11 and 15 which are as follows : “Case 1 : A Scheduled Caste (SC) household where the -13- female head of household committed suicide. The household head was looking after all the agrarian operations and managing a landholding of 15 acres. The family purchased six acres of the land in the year 1969 by wealth earned through labour. The major crops were cotton, tur and jowar. The eldest son in the family is a vegetable vendor and the younger son has slight mental disability. The husband of the household head has been physically disabled for the last 15 years. The entire burden of the decision-making in the context of agrarian operations has fallen on the female household head alone. The family incurred a loan on account of crop and construction of well to the turn of Rs.27,000. This loan could not be repaid due the crop failure for three consecutive years. Hence, another loan was taken from private sources. The total cumulative loan from private sources amounted to Rs.33,000 at 5% interest per month. Even this loan could not be repaid and the cumulative loan and the interest amount multiplied. This increased the burden on the household head enormously. She committed suicide on 29.12.03. The government gave no compensation. Case 2 : The farmer was a male head of an SC household. This household had received two acres of land under the Ceiling Act and further hired three acres of land for cultivation. The husband and wife also undertook agricultural wage work apart from being cultivators. The major crop in the field was cotton, jowar and tur. The family incurred a loan Rs.25,000 at the rate of 10% per month in the last three to four years on account of agrarian operations. This loan was from private sources, as the formal credit for the family seemed to have dried up. The crops failed in both the owned as well as in the leased land. This resulted in an increase in the drinking habits of the farmer. The input cost could not be recovered from the production. The -14- household head committed suicide on 11.08.03. Now the family has taken a decision to sell their pair of bullocks to repay part of the loan. They received Rs.600/- per month under the 'Sanjay Niradhar Yojana'. The government offered no compensation. Case 11 : This family belongs to the denotified community. The total landholding of the family is six acres out of which one acre is irrigated. The farmer incurred an expenditure of Rs.40,000/- on the marriage of his daughter five years back. After that, due to repeated crop failures of the principal crops of tur, cotton and jowar, he further incurred a loan to the tune of Rs.35,000/- as term loan from a bank. He also had a crop loan that was a regular account. He had to sell off his gold, three buffaloes and utensils. The community opined that the cost of cultivation increased and the output reduced by 50%. He had two more daughters to be married. He committed suicide on 25.06.04. The family received a compensation of Rs.1 lakh from the CM's Relief Fund. It was also reported that a 10% bribe had to be paid to obtain bank loan. Case 15 : This family belongs to a Backward Caste group. The total landholding is 4.5 acres. The major crops are cotton, jowar and tur. The family was cultivating as well as running a barber's business. One loan of Rs.13,000/- was taken 13 years ago and not paid. Recently another loan from a money lender was taken (Rs.40,000/-) at 5% interest per month. Due to the tensions of loan repayment resulting from crop failure, he had to sell his business. He committed suicide on 19.09.01. The moneylender is still after them and has manhandled the father of the deceased. The family received compensation of Rs.1 lakh from the CM's relief fund. The family is under tremendous pressure from the moneylenders to repay the sum from the compensation received by them.” -15- 11. The study notes that (i) There is almost an even match between small landholders and the marginal and large landholders across caste groups; (ii) Of the total landholders, 50% belong to small landholdings, 43% to medium and 5% and 2% respectively to large and no landholding; (iii) Tribal groups are primarily small landholders; (iv) The overwhelming numbers are reflected in small and medium sized holdings. This is suggestive of a problem that is widespread cutting across caste and class barriers. Small sized landholding families in the married category have been affected the most in the case of a suicide of their household head. Of the sample, 19% are non-literate and the remaining 81%, literate. Within the non-literate group, 43% belong to the Scheduled Castes and 57% to the nomadic and denotified tribes. Out of the total sample, 18% were entirely dependent on agriculture with no back-up system. Of the remaining 82%, 70% are cultivators and agricultural labourers. This is demonstrative of the fact that the practice of cultivation is not enough to guarantee a livelihood. The educational profile of the victims suggests that most of them were educated, the comparatively high levels of literacy being due to the fact that almost all -16- the victims were males. 12. The TISS report identifies a fundamental problem, namely, of a substantial increase in the cost of cultivation as a result of higher input prices without a corresponding increase in the prices realised by farmers of agricultural produce. The report contains the following observations: “There has been a substantial change in the composition of the input structure in the recent past. The cost of cultivation of most crops has increased due to higher input prices and increased density of purchased inputs, coupled with the high cost of labour. Therefore, demand for cash inputs has increased, thereby inflating the cost of production. Higher cost of production, in the absence of a corresponding increase in prices, affects the viability of farming. On the one hand, the cost of production increases due to increased input prices and at the same time market imperfections do not allow the farming household to generate sufficient profits to cover household expenses, exigencies and expenditure on social or family functions. This increases the stress on the farm family, the natural outcome of which is for farmers to approach moneylenders to meet their cash requirements.” 70% of the cultivators grew cotton as their primary cash crop. The cost of cultivation as a paid out cost is between Rs.2,500/- to Rs.3,000/- per acre. Another 5% of the cultivators took to horticulture as a major cash crop where the cost of cultivation is between Rs.18,000/- and -17- Rs.20,000/- per acre. The remaining 20% cultivated tur, udid, soyabean, jowar, vegetables and sugarcane. The first choice of cultivators is towards growing cash crops. 13. Minimum Support Prices are fixed and declared by the Ministry of Agriculture of the Government of India before the sowing season. The Joint Director in the Agriculture Price Cell has been quoted in the report as having stated that Minimum Support Prices have “not done full justice to the farmers of Maharashtra”. The report in that regard is to the following effect: “Favourable/Unfavourable agro climatic situation among the State leading to variation in per hectare yield: The agro climatic situation varies from State to State. This leads to variation in per hectare yield. The per hectare yield in Maharashtra State is less in comparison with the yield of other States due to inadequate irrigation facilities and unfavourable agro climatic situations. This leads to more cost of production. However, due to favourable agro climatic situation and sufficient irrigation facilities, the per hectare yield in Haryana and Punjab is more. Therefore, the cost of production of these States is conducive for the State where a particular crop is grown on a large scale. This adversely affects States like Maharashtra who have unfavourable agro climatic situation and higher cost of production. The Minimum Support Prices declared by Government of India does not cover the cost of production of the agriculture producer to the full extent. Therefore, the Minimum Support Prices do not give full justice to the farmers of the State having high cost of production. Therefore, instead of declaring one Minimum -18- Support Price at the National Level, separate support prices may be declared for groups of States according to the cost of cultivation.” The average gap in the minimum support price and the cost of cultivation per crop has been worked out over a period of eight years, for 1996-2004 and the difference which is given in a minus percentage is as follows : “Paddy: -38%; Bajra: -48%; Groundnut: -32%;Tur: -40%; Cotton: -38%; Sunflower: -50%; Mug: -50%; Udid:-47%; Soybean: -37%; Sugarcane: -12%; Wheat: -47%; Gram: -47%; Safflower: -39%.” Thus, according to the report, all crops are being cultivated at a loss to cultivators, which varies between 38% at the minimum and 50% at the maximum. The exception is sugarcane where the loss is minimised at 12%. 14. Faced with a situation where minimum support prices are not adequate to cover the cost of production, farmers are increasingly found to be indebted. The trend from Primary Agricultural Cooperative Institutions showed that almost 40% of the victims had not availed of loans from such institutions. Out of the remaining, 20% had availed of -19- loans upto Rs.10,000/-, and 25% had obtained loans between Rs.11,000/- and Rs.30,000/-. These were primarily farmers of the small and medium category. Out of total lending, the report