Studying the spatial exclusion of Dalits is distinct from looking at caste as an axis of spatial organization in the city. The “urban” is not just a location for mapping the social geography, but a mode that engenders spatial inequality. This article probes the spatial strategies of urban planning, between the 1920s and 1970s, which produced exclusionary spaces and masked the dynamics of caste within its techno-managerial rationality. It refocuses the lens of scholarship on Bombay from the urban periphery moving beyond the three popular sites of Bombay’s historiography: the factory, the neighborhoods of mill district, and the Island City. Exploring the politics of urban expansion, it illustrates how the planning regime reproduced hegemonic caste-class relations, which relegated Dalit migrants to the city’s fringes, on low-quality lands, and in segregated neighborhoods. Based on life histories, this article shows how Dalits created spaces for living, linked inextricably to their labor, and contests the abstract notions of space like “slum” that identify and mark people and their spaces. It also explores the affective relations nurtured and solidarities forged in the Dalit neighborhood on the terrain of urban politics, which recognizes Dalit actors and their struggles for redistribution and dignity.

This article explores the lives of tawaifs, baijis or courtesans (the terms used interchangeably) in a contentious space marked by the location of Congress House in Bombay/Mumbai through the 20th century. The tawaifs' kothas are interestingly in the vicinity of Congress House, which was the hub of the Indian nationalist struggle from the 1930s onwards, the two sites coming into existence almost simultaneously and coexisting for many decades as this article demonstrates. However, there were various efforts during the last decades of 20th century to remove the presence of tawaifs from this neighbourhood, through the heightened interest of real-estate players in urban gentrification, and increased surveillance by the police and the citizens' forum. Given this contemporary situation, the attempt of this article is (i) to historicise the performance of mujra in Bombay and explore the contribution of courtesans to the enrichment of Hindustani 'classical' music and (ii) to spatialise the presence of tawaifs in the nationalist hub of Bombay and reflect on the Indian Journal of Gender Studies 23(2) 191-217 politics of their economic and cultural deprivation. This article, thus, reflects on the contested meanings of the space inhabited by the courtesans with its continued devaluing, disciplining and restructuring as well as the increased stigmatisation, criminalisation and marginalisation of the women. It also reads into newer modalities of regulation and the hegemonic processes of urban renewal.

The “refugee crisis” after the 1947 Partition of British India generated new contestations over urban resources, especially for securing accommodation. It resulted in a proliferation of encampment laws and policies with outcomes at multiple levels: city, neighborhood, and community. This article traces the uneven geographies produced by Bombay’s encampment laws and the (spatial) politics of refugee rehabilitation. It focuses on the state’s use of “camps” to segregate impoverished refugees and consolidate the urban periphery. The article explores the interplay between law, space, and property to illustrate how refugee entitlements created and sustained various forms of power and precarity in the metropolis. Refugee camps provided “conditional access” to shelter for indigent Sindhi refugees and became markers of social identification. Middle-class Sindhi refugees, on the other hand, secured their place in the city by establishing cooperative housing societies. This article highlights how caste and regional distinctions in pre-Partition Sindh translated into class-based spatial divisions among the displaced Sindhis in post-colonial Bombay.