Madhya Pradesh
,
Bhainsaghat
,
Damoh, Sagar and Narsinghpur
Published :
Aug 2025
|
Updated :
September 18, 2026
Displacement, FRA violations, and compensation struggles in Madhya Pradesh’s Rani Durgavati Tiger Reserve
Reported by
Taskeen Khan
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Amrita Chekkutty
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
15160
Households affected
72772
People affected
2023
Year started
233912
ha.
Land area affected
15160
Households affected
72772
People Affected
2023
Year started
233912
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Conservation and Forestry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Protected Areas
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Unclassifed
Sector
Conservation and Forestry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Protected Areas
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

Established in September 2023, the Rani Durgavati Tiger Reserve, also known as the Veerangana Durgavati Tiger Reserve, was formed through the merger of the Rani Durgavati Sanctuary and Nauradehi Wildlife Sanctuary. It is located primarily in the Sagar, Damoh, and Narsinghpur districts of Madhya Pradesh and spread across 2,339 square kilometres. 

A total of 93 villages fall within the boundary of the reserve. Before the region was declared a tiger reserve, 42 of these villages had been relocated between 2014 and 2023, and work is presently being done to relocate seven more in 2025.

However, tensions between local communities and conservation authorities have increased as a result of plans to relocate the remaining 51 villages. The affected villagers have raised concerns over the relocation plan, loss of customary cultural practices and livelihoods, and the compensation. In the Muhli village, in Sagar district, villagers say the "Rs 15 lakh compensation offered is too little to buy land, build a house, and restart their lives."

Displacement is a major economic and social issue since many people depend on agriculture, forest products, and natural resources for their livelihood. Communities have alleged that their consent was not sought before designating the area as a tiger reserve, which in violation of provisions under the Forest Rights Act (FRA) of 2006 and the Wildlife Protection Act (WLPA) of 1972. Some residents claimed forced relocation and non-acknowledgment of their legal entitlements.

Forest Department officials, however, maintain that all relocations have been voluntary and that eligible families have received appropriate rehabilitation packages. Based on these complaints, the MoTA directed the Madhya Pradesh government on 23 December 2024, to look into the matter of forced evictions and take action in consultation with concerned ministries and district administration.

Since January 2025, the conflict around the Veerangana Durgavati Tiger Reserve has continued to centre on the relocation of forest-dependent communities, recognition of forest rights and the adequacy of rehabilitation. In January 2025, The Indian Express reported that the Union government had sought a probe after receiving representations from 52 Gram Sabhas in Damoh, Narsinghpur and Sagar. The Gram Sabhas alleged that forest rights claims had not been properly recognised and that villagers were being pushed to relocate, raising concerns under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 and the Wildlife (Protection) Act. The government reiterated that relocation from critical tiger habitats must be voluntary and follow the required legal safeguards.

The scale of relocation subsequently increased substantially. In August 2025, the Union government reported that 2,428 families from 20 villages had voluntarily relocated from Veerangana Durgavati since January 2022. This figure should be treated as a government-reported figure for that particular period rather than added to later cumulative figures.

By July 2026, the latest NTCA STRIDES data showed that 43 villages and 5,701 families had been relocated from the reserve's core area. At the same time, 50 villages and approximately 8,800 families were still awaiting relocation/remained within the core area. Veerangana Durgavati had the highest number of relocated villages and families among India's tiger reserves. Nationally, the NTCA report recorded 298 villages and 32,198 families relocated from notified critical tiger habitats, while nearly 98,000 families remained.

The 2026 figures indicate that relocation has progressed considerably but remains far from complete. The continued presence of around 8,800 families across 50 villages makes the implementation of relocation, recognition of rights and rehabilitation an ongoing issue. This is particularly significant in light of the earlier Gram Sabha complaints concerning FRA claims and access to forest resources. The NTCA's relocation framework requires the process to be voluntary and linked to settlement of rights and appropriate rehabilitation.

Alongside the relocation process, the reserve has also become an important site for the expansion of Project Cheetah. In December 2025, the Madhya Pradesh government announced plans to develop Veerangana Durgavati as the state's third cheetah habitat after Kuno and Gandhi Sagar. By June 2026, preparations in the Nauradehi landscape had advanced: the Forest Department reported that a 439-hectare enclosure was 75 percent complete, staff were being trained and awareness activities for local communities were being conducted through Cheetah Chaupal.

The cheetah project should, however, be treated as a parallel conservation development rather than directly as a cause of displacement, unless evidence establishing such a connection emerges. By mid-2026, the reserve was therefore facing a dual conservation agenda: continued relocation of villages from the tiger-reserve core and preparation of part of the landscape for cheetah reintroduction.

Overall, all the recent developments show that the conflict remains unresolved. Although relocation has expanded significantly, 50 villages and around 8,800 families remain in the core area, while earlier complaints regarding forest-rights recognition and the conditions surrounding relocation remain relevant. The central issue continues to be how wildlife-conservation objectives can be pursued while ensuring voluntary relocation, settlement of FRA rights, informed consent and adequate rehabilitation for affected communities.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Refusal to give up land for the project

Demand for more compensation than promised

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Project completed

Original Project Deadline

2023

Whether the Project has been Delayed

No

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Dwelling/habitation use, Agricultural land, Other natural resource collection/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

No

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

₹

745

Type of investment:

Investment Expected

Year of Estimation

2025

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) and Madhya Pradesh Forest Department

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Madhya Pradesh Forest Development Corporation (MPFDC), National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), Wildlife Institute of India (WII), and Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Development Corporation (MPSTDC)

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

-

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

None (although at Regional Industry Conclave held in September 2024, Taj Hotels expressed interest in establishing a resort within the reserve)

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

No

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Gram Sabha and Community

5
Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Author
Reported by
Taskeen Khan
Taskeen is an environmentalist and entrepreneur with a solid academic foundation from the National Institute of Technology and the University of California, Los Angeles. Holding a Master of Science in Environmental Science and a Master of Technology in Remote Sensing and GIS, she has combined her technical expertise with real-world experience at organisations like Google, ParkMe Inc., Santa Monica, and Global Citizen Year. Currently, she leads a sustainability-focused firm, aiming to create impactful solutions for a greener future.
Show more work
JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us