Atrocities on Dalits Since the Partition of Bengal- A Human Rights Question

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

Partition of Bengal on communal basis in the wake of Independence of India brought complete disaster in the life of Dalits. particularly of those who belonged to Namasudra community, which by far outweighed the misery of the displaced Hindus, who belonged to higher castes. The plight of Dalits in India, who were forced to flee to save their lives, leaving their hearth and home, is no less than those who continued to stay in East Pakistan, risking their lives and properties, and also those, who once migrated but went back getting assurance from both the governments, India and Pakistan, of security and dignity a citizen of a civilized democratic country can expect. The betrayal and brutality that started before Partition still continues in different forms, both in India and in Bangladesh, erstwhile East Pakistan, to secure political mileage to parties in power, which often go to the extent of social discrimination and physical elimination, till today. All these eventualities of the Partition should have raised Human Rights question in a big way, at the national and international levels. But unfortunately, they have not yet done. In an endeavour to make out a case for Human Rights Commission and Human Rights activists, light has been thrown in this monograph on some relevant aspects of this issue, like, the upper caste Hindus belonged to rich, literate and land owning class and the Dalits and Muslims were mainly poor cultivators and illiterate, who were more attached to land for their livelihood than the upper caste Hindus; the fraternity of low caste Hindus and Muslims, who were equally hated by the upper caste Hindus, used to be interfered with by the land owning class inciting kazia in their own interest; the opinion of the people was tactfully avoided in the decision of partition; Nehru-Liaquat Ali Pact was a hoax; U-turn of the Left Front government and the carnage of Marichjhapi; connivance and apathy of the Central and State governments to the detriment of the refugees; indifference of the governments and the intelligentsia towards ethnic cleansing of the Hindus in Bangladesh, who belong largely to low caste Hindu community. etc. Another question that is raised by the analysis of all the stories of apathy and atrocity is whether this fate of the victims is because they are mostly Namasudras.

DILIP HALDER (b. 1940), is the President of Indian Association for Human Sciences and a Guest Faculty of the Institute of Business Management, National Council of Education, Bengal; formerly, Professor and Head of the Department of Economics and Co-ordinator of the Centre for Transport Studies, Jadavpur University, Kolkata. He has authored and edited nine books on economic and socio-political problems and published 150 papers and articles in various national and international journals, periodicals and dailies. He is the Life Member of National Council of Education, Indian Institute of Public Administration, Indian Economic Association, Bengal Economic Association, Regional Science Association of India, Institute of Urban Transport (India), Association for Transport Development in India and Past- President of the Peoples' Education Society.

This monograph is the revised version of the paper entitled 'Dalits are the Worst Victims of the Partition of Bengal: A Human Rights Question', presented in the National Seminar on 'Reviewing the Partition: Dalit Life and Dalit Vision in Eastern India', jointly convened by the Centre for Refugee Studies and the Centre for Ambedkar Studies, under the auspices of Jadavpur University, during March 21-22, 2003. The idea developed in the paper, amply expressed in the lengthy title of it, has been improved before putting it under a more focused title as "Atrocities on Dalits Since The Partition of Bengal: A Human Rights Question'.

The decision to partition Bengal on communal basis, in the wake of Independence of India, without giving any chance to the people of Bengal to express their opinion, brought about a disaster in the peaceful life, particularly of the dalits of East Bengal, who were largely illiterate cultivators. The miserable life of the dalits, that started with partition of Bengal still continues, not only with those who migrated to India after partition of Bengal, but also with those who did not migrate to India. The misery of dalits in India was of one nature and that of those in Bangladesh was of different nature. But the ultimate result is more or less the same; in sum, extinction and elimination. The enormity of its impact has not yet been assessed, nor adequate compensation has been paid to them. On the contrary, apathy of the Central and State governments of India and the inimical attitudes of the fundamentalist section of the population and government of Bangladesh perpetrated the misery. The hospitality that should have been accorded to those, who were thrown out of their homeland for no fault of theirs, was not done, rather, the hostility that was shown to them from Indian side, following withdrawal of all relief and rehabilitation facilities, particularly to the dalits, who came to India later than the upper caste Hindus, has hardly any parallel in recent history. These dalits, who largely belonged to Namasudra community, constituted the largest sub-caste in Bengal. Considering the sequence of events since the partition, genuine Human Rights question arises. To appreciate this question properly, the stream of events, which should have been placed in right sequence in the context of social, political, economic and imperial interests, was unfortunately not done in the contemporary history of this sub-continent. Communalization of power politics in imperial interest, continuing imperial influence by creating division in the sub-continent, immobility of the poor peasantry from their tradition-bound occupation in agriculture, social distance between upper caste Hindus and dalits etc., combined with illiteracy of a closed society of the dalits, went a long way in deepening the damage done by the design of partition of Bengal, which lacked vision and respect for social ethics. A number of socio-economic parameters, which took shape in this part of India for historical reasons, could be used in terms of some premises, to show how justice has been denied to the partition victim dalits, and to validate the human rights question.

The argument is that the plight of dalits in Bengal, which was due to the partition, could be avoided by accepting the option of independent and undivided Bengal or could be reduced to a great extent by proper timing of the transfer of power. But was not done, suspectedly, to consolidate Hindu majority to capture political power after the partition by a section of leaders in Indian part of Bengal. This argument finds support in the fact that the opinion poll was tactfully avoided and the declaration of Dominion Status to India was preponed with desperate haste, at the instance of some Indian leaders. Because, it was feared, if opinion poll were conducted, the majority opinion might go in favour of undivided independent Bengal, which would ultimately give birth to a Muslim majority Bengal. However, dalits would have been gainer in that option, as in undivided independent Bengal they would not loose their hearth and home and occupation. Even if Muslims would have been majority in undivided Bengal, it would not create much of a difficulty for them, as the social distance between low caste Hindus and Muslims was much less than that between them and upper caste Hindus. Both Muslims and low caste Hindus shared in common the hatred and exploitation of the upper caste Hindus, who were mostly landlords. In undivided independent Bengal the dalits would have been next to Muslims in number and with upper caste population being added to it the difference would have been marginal.

Nobody would controvert the fact that the dalits (used to denote the namasudras) were the worst victims of the Partition of Bengal in 1947 as stated by Professor Dilip Halder in his monograph entitled, "Atrocities on Dalits since the Partition of Bengal: A Human Rights Question" Mahatma Gandhi was then in Noakhali for restoring communal harmony. He was confronted with the sad plight of the Hindus without any class distinction arising out of the riots there. He received complaints both from the upper and lower stratum Hindus about the atrocities on them. All these are recorded in the Diary of Nirmal Kumar Bose and dailies of that time. Communal passion was so intensified that the Muslim and Namasudra peasants could not move together in rural Bengal to frustrate the games of religious-sectarian groups. The powerful Tebhaga Movement started centering round the economic issues could not keep rural Bengal free from communal tension for long. Those who nurtured a dream of emancipating the namasudras from the clutches of upper caste Hindu Zamindars and domination of the upper caste Hindus in the social life in collaboration with the Muslim League and stood in support of a separate homeland for the Muslims, were greatly disillusioned few days after the birth of Pakistan in August 1947.

The country was divided on religious ground; and, Pakistan emerged as an Islamic state. That was quite natural. It was well- known that the movement for a separate homeland for the Muslims was founded on the ideals of two-nation theory as propounded by M. A. Jinnah as the leader of the Muslim League. He could allure and enlist the support of a few leaders of the Namasudra Community by floating the concept of Muslim-Dalit unity against the Congress and upper caste Hindus. The Muslim Press gave a rosy picture of Pakistan State free from the control of British and Marwari capitalists and Hindu Zamindars.

Book's Contents and Sample Pages