top of page

By:

Correspondent

23 August 2024 at 4:29:04 pm

Deadly Neglect

The deaths of three tribal girls following a snakebite at a residential school in Gadchiroli have cast a distinctly unfavourable light on the standards of care in Maharashtra’s tribal hostels. A total six girls were bitten while sleeping on the floor, raising questions about basic accommodation, preventive measures and the oversight of institutions entrusted with the care of some of Maharashtra’s most disadvantaged children. A properly maintained hostel and basic preventive measures can...

Deadly Neglect

The deaths of three tribal girls following a snakebite at a residential school in Gadchiroli have cast a distinctly unfavourable light on the standards of care in Maharashtra’s tribal hostels. A total six girls were bitten while sleeping on the floor, raising questions about basic accommodation, preventive measures and the oversight of institutions entrusted with the care of some of Maharashtra’s most disadvantaged children. A properly maintained hostel and basic preventive measures can certainly reduce the likelihood that a snakebite becomes a mass casualty event. Residential schools for tribal children exist precisely because many of their students come from remote and disadvantaged communities. The state assumes responsibility for their education, accommodation, food and safety. The inevitable official response of a detailed inquiry into the tragedy is hardly reassuring. The district administration has said it will establish whether adequate protective measures were in place and whether the school management complied with safety rules. The Maharashtra administration has conducted enough inquiries till now to know that the discovery of a lapse is not the same thing as fixing the system that produced it. The questions are elementary. Were sufficient beds available? If not, why not? Was the hostel building properly sealed? Were doors, windows and drains inspected? Was pest and snake control undertaken? Were mosquito nets and other basic protective equipment provided? Was there adequate lighting and night supervision? How frequently had the hostel been inspected? And were funds allocated for these facilities actually spent on them? The last question deserves particular attention. Tribal residential schools have for years been vulnerable to the familiar maladies of public administration, most notably gross corruption. Inadequate oversight, poor maintenance, opaque procurement and the fact that money and food intended for children disappears somewhere between the budget and the beneficiary has become all too common. More crucially, Gadchiroli is not politically ownerless. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis is its guardian minister, making the quality of governance in the district an especially important test of the state government’s claims about tribal development. The answer cannot be another round of condolences followed by an inquiry whose findings gather dust. The government should use this tragedy to conduct a comprehensive and independent safety audit of every tribal residential hostel in Gadchiroli, with the findings and corrective measures made public. Beds, sanitation, building maintenance, pest control, emergency medical arrangements and night-time supervision should be treated as measurable standards, not discretionary amenities. Three girls have died in the most appalling manner. The least the state can do is ensure that their deaths expose a failure that is then corrected, rather than an outrage that is briefly mourned and administratively forgotten.

Sacred Attire

Updated: Jan 30, 2025

The Siddhivinayak Temple Trust’s recent decision to implement a dress code prohibiting short skirts, torn jeans and other revealing attire is a necessary move to uphold the sanctity of religious spaces. Temples are spiritual spaces where devotees seek solace, offer prayers, and connect with the divine. Temples are not mere tourist attractions but sacred sanctuaries. The least that visitors can do is dress accordingly.


The Jagannath temple in Puri, Odisha, and the Banke Bihari temple in Vrindavan have already implemented similar rules, reflecting a growing recognition that religious spaces require a modicum of decorum. In the case of Siddhivinayak, the temple attracts thousands of devotees daily, many of whom have expressed discomfort over attire that they feel clashes with the temple’s spiritual ambience.


Few would question the need for decorum in a courtroom, a government office, or even an upscale restaurant. Yet, when religious institutions enforce dress codes to preserve their sanctity, a chorus of indignation often rises in the name of personal freedom, with such ‘critics’ arguing that such rules reflect moral policing or an imposition of traditionalist values.

But this argument confuses religious sanctity with public space liberalism. No one is being compelled to enter the temple, and those who do should respect the customs that govern it. Even in non-Hindu religious spaces, dress codes are the norm. One does not enter a gurdwara without covering their head, nor a mosque or church dressed in attire deemed unsuitable for prayer. The sanctity of a religious institution should not be sacrificed at the altar of modern whims.


To dismiss this as an encroachment on personal liberties is to misunderstand the nature of such spaces. Religious sites operate under different expectations than public thoroughfares or commercial hubs. They are designed for reflection, devotion, and ritual. While Indian society has rightly evolved towards greater personal freedom in many spheres, faith-based institutions must be allowed to maintain traditions that are integral to their identity. The temple trust has made it clear that its goal is not to impose regressive restrictions but to ensure that all visitors feel comfortable and that the sanctity of the temple is upheld.


Moreover, the argument that religious sites must remain entirely open-ended in their dress codes simply does not hold water. Many of the people who object to these restrictions would scarcely question the need for appropriate attire at a formal event or while meeting a dignitary. The principle is the same -respect for the setting dictates the mode of dress. Those who seek to frame this as a battle between liberalism and conservatism fail to grasp that such measures are about propriety, not repression.


In an era where the lines between cultural expression and decorum are increasingly blurred, it is worth remembering that not every rule is an infringement on liberty. If people can abide by dress codes in secular spaces, they should extend the same courtesy to places of worship.

Comments

bottom of page