Thorny roofs, hired guard and mass killing claims: Chhattisgarh village’s langur problem

Devgaon has faced frequent langur raids for about a decade. Hundreds reportedly enter the village on an average day, climbing roofs, entering kitchens, blocking roads, and damaging homes and crops. Residents hired a guard to drive them away for 2 kg of rice per household each month.

The controversy began when Jagdish Manikpuri recorded two dead langurs and alleged that 22 had been shot. He said the guard had a gun and claimed he had seen monkeys shot in recent months, though he admitted having no proof for the figure of 22. Other villagers denied the allegation.

Because grey langurs are legally protected, harming or killing them is a criminal offence. The Forest Department is investigating the deaths and the allegation against the hired guard. The inquiry must establish what happened, rather than relying only on the viral claim.

Grey langurs are the protected monkeys entering Devgaon homes, roofs, roads, and fields. The article describes their behaviour and conflict with residents, but it does not provide a biological definition or explain why this species received its legal status. It identifies their protection under India’s Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

The law places grey langurs under Schedule II. That status means people cannot hunt, capture, or harm them. In Devgaon, residents say they hired a guard only to chase the animals away. Santosh Sinha also said villagers told the guard not to use a gun and would stop his service if a monkey were harmed.

This protection makes the alleged shootings a serious matter, not simply a village nuisance. The Forest Department’s inquiry will examine whether langurs were killed and who may be responsible. The article does not state the exact punishment that a court could impose.

The conflict is large in both daily intensity and geographic spread. Devgaon has about 600 residents, while villagers report that hundreds of langurs descend on it on an average day. They cross rooftops and roads, swarm fields, raid kitchens, and damage property.

The problem is not limited to one settlement. Forest officials concede that the langur menace affects as many as 50 villages in the Bemetara-Nawagarh block, about 100 kilometres from Raipur. In Devgaon, residents say the situation has worsened in recent years, with families guarding food and avoiding outdoor activities.

These figures show why individual fixes have not solved the conflict. Thorny branches and a daytime guard may protect some homes, but the animals range across many villages. The article points toward safer habitats as the broader response, while the Forest Department continues examining the alleged deaths in Devgaon.

Grey langurs have legal protection under Schedule II of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. The article states that hunting, capturing, or harming them is strictly prohibited. Therefore, alleged shooting would move the issue beyond a local nuisance and into criminal law.

That rule matters in Devgaon because a guard was reportedly hired to chase langurs, not kill them. Villager Santosh Sinha said residents clearly instructed him not to use a gun. Jagdish Manikpuri’s video showed two dead langurs, and he alleged that 22 had been shot, though he acknowledged having no evidence for that number.

If an investigation establishes that langurs were shot or otherwise harmed, those responsible could face criminal proceedings under the Act. The article does not specify the exact punishment, charges, or court process. It says the Forest Department inquiry is underway against the man villagers hired as a guard or “hunter.”

The village guard has a practical, immediate role: patrol the lanes during the day and drive langurs away. Devgaon hired Kalam Pardhi for this work, paying him 2 kg of rice from every household each month. Residents said his job was to scare monkeys, not shoot them.

The Forest Department has the official investigative role. It began an inquiry after a video showed two dead langurs and allegations that 22 had been killed. The department must examine the deaths and the allegation against the hired man. The article also says forest officials recognise the wider conflict across as many as 50 villages.

The article does not mention the police or district collector taking action, so their specific roles cannot be established from this account. It also does not describe a formal coordination plan among these authorities. The immediate village response remains patrols, while the inquiry addresses possible wildlife-law violations.

Experts cited in the article link the village invasions to habitat loss. Langurs are straying into settlements because changes in farmland have reduced the natural spaces that once supported them. This shifts contact from forests and field edges into homes, roofs, roads, and crops.

Agricultural fields have grown larger over recent years. As plots expanded, many traditional field bunds, or raised boundaries between fields, disappeared. Trees along those bunds were also cut. Mansoor Khan says the monkeys therefore lost natural habitat, helping explain why they now cross Devgaon’s rooftops and raid kitchens and fields.

The current conflict shows the cost of that change. Residents use thorny branches and guards, but these are stop-gap measures. The article says the effective approach is to provide monkeys safe habitats. Protecting or restoring suitable tree-filled spaces could reduce pressure on villages, although the article does not give a detailed restoration plan.

Thorn barriers and guards respond to each langur visit, but they do not address why the animals enter villages. The article presents habitat loss as a central cause of the conflict. A durable response would therefore provide monkeys safe habitats outside homes, kitchens, roads, and fields.

The key mechanism is the loss of trees along traditional field bunds. As farms became larger, bunds that separated plots were reduced, and trees on them were cut. Mansoor Khan says this removed natural habitat. Protecting remaining trees and restoring suitable tree-covered spaces would follow the article’s suggested direction.

Devgaon’s guard may still offer immediate relief, but the village has needed such a service twice in 10 years. A habitat-based approach could benefit the wider area, where up to 50 villages are affected. The article does not provide a detailed funding or implementation plan, so those practical steps remain unresolved.