Tension has surfaced in Ghoti-Nandora village of Balaghat district after ten Muslim families alleged they were subjected to a social and economic boycott following a resolution adopted at a community gathering, raising concerns about communal harmony and the enforcement of constitutional protections at the village level.The families say the decision was taken at a mahasabha held in January, where participants resolved that Hindu households would not engage with the Muslim families in either commercial or personal matters. According to the affected families, the directive covered everyday interactions such as purchasing food and household goods, accessing grocery shops, and availing barber services, effectively cutting them off from routine village life.
Residents belonging to the Muslim families said the impact was immediate and far-reaching. Daily wage work within the village became scarce, shopkeepers declined to sell essential items, and social interactions that had existed for years abruptly ceased. Some families reported having to travel to neighbouring villages to buy basic provisions, increasing both cost and hardship, particularly for elderly members and children.
Community elders from the Muslim families maintained that there had been no prior dispute severe enough to justify such a measure. They said attempts to seek clarification from those who attended the mahasabha were met with silence or warnings not to defy the decision. Several families alleged that informal pressure was exerted to ensure compliance, with the fear of escalation discouraging open dissent.
Village representatives associated with the gathering have contested parts of the allegations, suggesting the resolution was aimed at addressing local grievances rather than targeting a religious group. However, no written copy of the resolution has been made public, and the absence of formal documentation has complicated efforts to verify the exact wording and intent behind the decision.
Local administrators confirmed they were aware of the complaints and had sought preliminary reports from revenue and police officials. Officials indicated that any form of social boycott based on religion would be unlawful and could attract penal provisions, stressing that village-level assemblies have no authority to curtail fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
Legal experts pointed out that social boycotts have been addressed by courts in several states, with judicial rulings consistently holding that such practices violate the right to equality, freedom of movement and the right to livelihood. They noted that even informal or unwritten community sanctions can amount to coercion if they result in systematic exclusion from essential services.
Civil society groups working in the region said the allegations reflect a broader pattern in which informal community mechanisms are sometimes used to enforce social conformity, often at the expense of minority groups. They argued that economic boycotts are particularly damaging because they leave little visible evidence while inflicting sustained pressure on affected families.
The situation has also drawn attention to the role of local mediation. Community leaders unaffiliated with the mahasabha have urged dialogue to prevent further polarisation, warning that prolonged exclusion could deepen mistrust and disrupt the social fabric of the village. Some residents said privately that the standoff had created unease even among those not directly involved, as routine interactions became fraught with tension.