The New Lords of Bihar

THERE IS A VILLAGE near Nawada in Bihar named Dedaur where a hamlet inhabited by Mahadalits has been burnt by a group of more than a hundred people. This reminds us of the pre-1990s situation when incidents of burning bastis (slums), huts and mud houses of marginal communities were commonplace in Bihar. The cause of this atrocity is being reported as a land dispute, in which the Mahadalit community had submitted the land where they had built their homes as ‘na-aabad sarkari’ land while the group that allegedly burnt the village has been claiming it as its own, purchased for a person called Ramzan Miyan.

The Mahadalit community that fell victim to the violence constitutes mostly Musahars, traditionally known as rat-catchers who later diversified. They use the Manjhi surname. There was also a house belonging to the Ravidassia community, who are cobblers. The Ravidassia community has also been categorised as Mahadalit by the Bihar government in recent decades. Those who committed the alleged crime belong mostly to the Paswan community, traditionally called the Dusadh caste, which is the largest among Dalits in Bihar. According to the recent caste survey, Paswans constitute 5.3 per cent of the population, which makes them not just the largest among Scheduled Caste (SC) communities but also the second-largest among all communities in Bihar. The largest community are the Yadavs, who constitute 14.2 per cent of the state’s population.

There is a stereotype of upper-castes committing atrocities against backward and Dalit communities. But if the nature of such violence in Bihar after independence is analysed, it becomes obvious that gradually the class and caste characters of the atrocities have changed. While the victimised communities remain the same, the oppressing caste or class is now different.

Since land reforms have not been implemented in Bihar, the possibility of land grabbing is still there. If a community, or a section of it, emerges as a new landed gentry, its greed for land grows continuously. Such greed produces violence

Share this on

Since the 1970s, many massacres have taken place in Bihar, such as the Belchhi, Parasbigha, and Dohia incidents, or the Bhojpur killings and the Pipra massacre. In most of these cases, instead of communities like Kshatriyas and Bhumihar which are traditionally seen as oppressors, the criminals and land grabbers belonged to sections of the middle castes like Yadavs and Kurmis. This is not an accident or coincidence but the result of the socio-economic and political transformation of Bihar.

Even during colonial times, along with upper castes like Brahmins, Thakurs and Bhumihars, the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) as well as Dusadhs (Paswans) and Harijans, who had a big share in the population, started struggling to capture the political space. After independence, these communities took advantage of government schemes, welfare programmes and social justice opportunities. Many started buying land in rural Bihar, which was mostly sold by the upper castes. At the time of the Naxal violence, many upper-caste peasants began selling their land and migrating to urban areas. Because of this, sections of Yadavs, Kurmis, et al began buying land in villages, grabbing, as well as violently evicting the most marginalised. This socio-economic transformation contributed in a big way to changing the grammar of dominance and nature of atrocities against Bihar’s poor. It changed the malik-kamia relations. In most parts of rural Bihar, a few OBC communities have emerged as malik (landlord) while most Dalit communities have remained kamia or landless labourers.

Again, due to the size of their population, electoral weight, and unequal distribution of welfare resources, these communities have acquired political power which allows them to be aggressive, which in turn is reflected in incidents of violence against vulnerable communities like Musahars and Ravidassias.

So, the landholding patterns of rural Bihar have slowly changed and sections of these communities have emerged as the landed caste, with political power. Since land reforms have not been implemented in Bihar, the possibility of land grabbing is still there. If a community, or a section of it, emerges as a new landed gentry, its greed for land grows continuously. Such greed produces violence as in Dedaur near Nawada.

As it happens, people from communities like Yadav and Kurmi, among OBCs, and Paswans dominate the discourse on social justice while they have themselves begun crushing the rights of the most marginalised in their own categories. Who, then, will protect the interests of the most marginalised among OBCs and SCs? This question is critical when the victims are socially smaller in number, politically and economically vulnerable, and lack any capacity to aspire and assert for their proper share in social justice opportunities and in democracy.

About The Author

Badri Narayan

Badri Narayan is a director and professor at GB Pant Social Science Institute, Prayagraj. He is the author of, among other titles, Republic of Hindutva

•