With 72 security personnel killed in Maoist-related violence in 2017, it is already the deadliest year in the past seven years for the CRPF, according to an IndiaSpend analysis of data from the South Asian Terrorism Portal (SATP).
On April 24, 26 Central Reserve Paramilitary Force (CRPF) jawans were killed in an ambush by Maoists in Chhattisgarh’s Sukma district. The encounter with the 74th Battalion of the CRPF occurred at Kala Pathar near Chintagufa in Sukma, the worst Maoist violence-affected district.
Also Read: Live: CRPF Revises Death Toll to 25
We are proud of the valour of our @crpfindia personnel. The sacrifice of the martyrs will not go in vain. Condolences to their families.— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) April 24, 2017
Extremely pained to know about the killing of CRPF personnel in Sukma. My tributes to the martyrs and condolences to their families. 1/2— Rajnath Singh (@rajnathsingh) April 24, 2017
Maoist outfits cause the most terror-related deaths in India, IndiaSpend reported on November 19 2015.
Maoists, who are attempting to overthrow India’s government, inflict the highest death tolls in a wide swathe of mineral-rich, forested tribal lands, extending from Maharashtra to West Bengal. Tribals account for a third of the 21 million people displaced by development projects, as IndiaSpend reported on June 17 2014, fuelling a resentment that the Naxals exploit.
April 2017: Deadliest Month in Past Seven Years
With 49 deaths, April 2017 is the deadliest month for the security forces in Chhattisgarh in the past seven years. The deadliest month in the past decade was April 2010, when 76 security personnel died in Dantewada in the deadliest Maoist ambush ever.
More security forces have died in Chhattisgarh (235) than in any other state between 2011 and 2015, IndiaSpend reported on April 14, 2015.
(The article has been published in an arrangement with IndiaSpend)
(Deavaik Saha is an MA (Gender and Development) student at Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex. The views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)