Books

back to issue

THE BROTHERS BIHARI by Sankarshan Thakur. Harper Collins India, Noida, 2015.

FOR political pundits, researchers and journalists flying in from Delhi and elsewhere, the Bihar elections were nothing short of a mystery. But, for those with their ears and boots on the ground, the signs were clearly visible. The most eloquent among them was Sankarshan Thakur, roving Editor of the English daily Telegraph. ‘I sense that Bihar is on the eve of a historic verdict that will resound well beyond its boundaries,’ he tweeted, days before the verdict. Thakur, a veteran journalist who prefers to be known as a reporter, has been covering Bihar elections since 1990. This time around, he spent three months on the road, criss-crossing not just district headquarters but remote areas of Bihar, producing a detailed and comprehensive reportage every alternate day, if not daily.

The Brothers Bihari is a merger of what was originally published as two separate books, Subaltern Saheb: Bihar and the Making of Laloo Yadav (2006, 2000) and Single Man: The Life and Times of Nitish Kumar of Bihar (2014). Not surprisingly, the book is a first-hand account of making and remaking of two significant political figures of our times, namely Laloo Yadav and Nitish Kumar. It draws heavily on the author’s vast experience and extensive network. Though there are no footnotes and bibliography at the end, it is a product of rigour. Ostensibly about two ‘individuals’, the book covers a wide range of socio-political and economic issues of Bihar in the last three decades, and uncovers many areas hitherto unknown or ignored. In doing so, he builds a powerful and engaging narrative around Bihar, its geography, sociology, polity, economy and its development, or rather lack of it.

The first chapter is rather instructive. It starts with stories from mid-1995, the year Laloo’s political career appeared at its nadir. After the remarkable victory in the 1995 assembly elections, and against all odds, he had become the only Bihar chief minister, other than Srikrishna Sinha, to complete a full term in office and retain power. ‘Laloo Yadav’s politics was an angry revolt against sahebdom, against the age-old order dominated by upper caste haves of Bihar’, notes Thakur. ‘But in time, he became the biggest Saheb of them all’, he adds (p. 21). ‘So much so that his own wife, and later chief minister of the state, Rabri Devi, started addressing him as Saheb instead of "eeh", a commonly used pronoun by wives in some parts of Bihar who do not take their husband’s name’, claims the author. This chapter captures not only the peak of Laloo’s politics but also what is often considered as the beginning of his fall in the wake of the infamous fodder scam. In three subsequent chapters, Thakur vividly describes Laloo’s early life and politics, starting from life in his ancestral village, activism during the JP movement, participation in student politics, the beginning of his political career and ultimately, his coronation as ‘the king’. Additionally, the fodder scam and its short and long-term impact on Laloo’s politics have been dealt in greater detail in chapter seven, ‘Fodder and Fall’. In the final two chapters, ‘The Bonfire of Promises’ and ‘Myths to Die by’, Thakur illustrates how Laloo failed himself and his own politics and its promises, which were radical enough if not Marxist.

Thakur is correct in suggesting that ‘Laloo Yadav must be judged by the standards he set and the difference he promised to make. He turned out to be no different from Jagannath Mishra, the man whose misrule he had promised to end…the Laloo Yadav of 2000 was very different from the Laloo Yadav of 1990, though the Bihar of 2000 wasn’t’ (pp. 179-80). Jagannath Mishra, an academician turned Congress politician, ruled the state for almost six years between 1975 and 1990. It is important to note that if the Laloo Yadav-Rabri Devi years in power were ‘jungle raj’, then the Bihar of late ’70s and ’80s was ‘the end of the earth’, as the late Shiva Naipaul called it after a foray into the countryside to a scene of atrocity. According to a report by Farzand Ahmad (a senior journalist, who has been quoted by Thakur at various places in the book) and his colleague Ajay Kumar, published in India Today (31 December 1986): ‘Roughly one caste-cum-class carnage has been perpetrated here every four months over the last nine years. Among the major massacres have been Parasbigha (2 February 1980; 11 killed), Pipra (25 February 1980; 14 killed), Arwal (19 April 1986; 23 killed) and Darmia (10 October 1986; 11 killed).’

The section on Nitish begins by showing how Nitish’s period marked a change, ‘There’s probably no better place to get a sense of the changes that have come about almost imperceptibly in Bihar than the precincts of its most famous address: 1 Anne Marg, official residence of the chief minister. Under Laloo Yadav, it was a subaltern, open house, overrun by cattle at the back and all hues of lounge lizards up front – socialists and scamsters, scribes and favour seekers, sycophants and scoundrels, in-laws and outlaws, a whole confederacy that first put Laloo out of touch with his rooted reality, and then out of power… Nitish Kumar had slowly banished all that and hung a placard at the entrance: Man at Work’ (pp. 201-02). In subsequent chapters, the author traces the early political life and career of Nitish, which includes his years with the JP movement alongside Laloo Yadav.

The fourth chapter, ‘For Laloo, Reluctantly’ has various details about Nitish’s personal and private life, and stories of his struggles while retaining his idealism to become a successful politician. In ‘The Hesitant Rebel’ and ‘Caste No Bar’, Thakur focuses on Nitish’s differences with Laloo Yadav’s brand of politics and how he forged a new alliance where caste was no bar. The next chapter, ‘Naya Bihar’ is obviously about Nitish’s vision of a new Bihar and his governance model. Thakur writes with appreciation: ‘Bihar’s new, much-improved development indices were not privileged information. They have claimed themselves year after year in the government’s annual reports that have become ten times more voluminous since Nitish started the practice of producing them in 2006. The numbers were written about and crunched, in newspaper columns, academic treatises and panel presentations, across books spawned by the new interest in Bihar, like rash on the worldwide web: tap a keyword on Bihar and the computer screen began to cascade’ (p. 360). The concluding chapter chronicles Nitish’s break with the NDA on the issue of Narendra Modi’s prime ministerial candidature, and defeat in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. In the postscript, Thakur briefly discusses the upcoming Bihar assembly polls, Brand Nitish and the alliance with Laloo, the man Nitish fought bitterly with for over a decade.

Excellent in prose, rich in information and insight, the book is not without its flaws. While bias may be an inappropriate word, there is an underlying tone of contempt and the language is scathing particularly while writing about Laloo in comparison to a relatively sympathetic approach towards Nitish. For example, if not read carefully, Laloo comes across as bereft of ideology, power hungry, opportunist and casteist, more akin to a clown in contrast to the idealist, selfless, well read, casteless and genuinely pro-people Nitish. Note that while Nitish’s repeated assertion of ‘end justifies the means’ (Satta prapt karunga by hook or by crook, lekin satta leke achcha kaam karunga, p. 285, 289) is seen as reflective of virtue, Laloo’s attempt to acquire power is derided as playing the role of a king’s courtier (chapter 3, pp. 58-68) in order to attain authority. There are some glaring lapses too when it comes to providing details of criminal and mafia groups active in the Laloo-Rabri years. While one finds special mention of the Pappu Yadavs and Mohammed Shahabuddins, there is silence about the Pappu Devs and Anand Mohan Singhs. Nevertheless, the book is a must read for all those interested in Bihar and its politics. Given Thakur’s vast experience and first-hand knowledge, one hopes that he might consider writing a book on Bihar which can become a sequel of Arvind Das’s, Republic of Bihar.

Mahtab Alam

Lloyd Law College, Greater Noida

 

MUSLIM POLITICS IN BIHAR: Changing Contours by Mohammad Sajjad. Routledge, New Delhi, 2014.

BARRING the widely cited and justly acclaimed work of the late historian Papiya Ghosh, the history of Bihari Muslims has received scant attention. One possible reason could be the proclivity of historians to equate the experience of the Muslims of Bengal, Punjab and UP with those of ‘all-India’ Muslims. Fortunately, the work of Mohammad Sajjad provides a much needed and welcome corrective.

In a book that traces the history of Bihari Muslims since the late 19th century, Sajjad argues against subsuming their experience under the grand narrative framework of Muslim separatism. Detailing the political course of Bihari Muslims, Sajjad contends that their politics has largely been anti-colonial, anti-League, pro-Congress, secular and pluralistic. The last two chapters of the book discuss the role and experiences of Bihari Muslims in the post-Independence period. Particularly noteworthy is the final chapter on the changing contours of Bihari Muslims in an era of post-Mandal politics, when lower caste Muslims, also known as pasmanda Muslims, launched a scathing critique of upper caste (ashraf) Muslim hegemony.

However, the central argument of the book is a powerful indictment of the historiography of nationalism, communalism and Partition that squarely blames Muslims for separatism and division of the country. Problematizing such a narrative, Sajjad shows that the Muslims of Bihar consistently opposed the demand of Pakistan and stood for the unity of the country, believing in the idea of a composite nationalism (mushtarakah wataniyat).

To substantiate his argument, the first few chapters document how the political course of Bihari Muslims was different from those Muslims who made up the social base of the Muslim League (henceforth the League). For example, Bihari Muslims, unlike their co-religionists in UP, ‘did not follow any "antagonist" and "exclusivist" path against Hindus, either in establishing their educational institutions or in taking up positions against colonial rule’ (p. 11).

Note that the educational and economic conditions of Muslims in the colonial period varied from one region to another. For example, Muslims were under-represented in higher education and employment in Bengal, while their representation was much better in provinces such as UP and Bihar. The perceived backwardness felt by a religious community vis-à-vis another community often fuelled competition and antagonism in different regions. However, such antagonism, according to the author, was relatively weak in Bihar where Muslims worked either with the Congress or community organizations allied to it.

Related to the issue of Muslim separatism was their ‘alienation’ from the Congress party, which was accused of being a ‘Hindu’ party by the League. For example, Syed Ahmad Khan of the Aligarh movement asked Muslims to ‘stay away’ from the Congress. However, such appeals to Muslims to maintain a distance from the Congress did not find many takers in Bihar, according to the author. Problematizing the popular generalization that Muslims always supported the League, Sajjad gives the example of the early Congress (Bihar unit), which was in fact dominated by Muslim leaders rather than Hindus (pp. 10-11). Prominent Muslim leaders of the Bihar Congress included Nawab Sohrab Jung, Syed Wilayat Ali Khan, Syed Fazal Imam, Wazir Ali, Abdul Qaiyum Ansari, Mazharul Haq, Shafi Daudi, Maghfoor Aijazi, among others.

The cultural and political organizations of Bihari Muslims too, shared a strong feeling of comradeship with the Congress. For instance, the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Hind (f. 1917), the Imarat-e-Shariah (f. 1921) and the Muslim Independent Party (f. 1921) remained allies of the Congress. Even the Sufi shrines (khanqah) such as Khanqah-e-Rahmaniya (Munger) and the Khanqah-e-Mujibiya (Phulwari Sharif), ‘played a remarkable role in the freedom movement, and were against the League’s policy of separatism’ (pp. 53-54). It is to be remembered that the Sufi shrines of Bihar contrasted sharply with those of the Punjab region that were used by the League for propagating ‘separatist’ politics as argued by some historians.

Since the beginning of the 1920s, the Hindu-Muslim fabric in Bihar began to get strained by the rise of communal politics. As argued by Sajjad, the Shahabad riots (1917), communal electoral politics of the 1920s and 1930s, the refusal of the Congress to share power with the Muslims in its ministry (1937-1939) and the 1946 riots were some of main reasons behind the increased alienation of Muslims from the Congress. However, the blame of separatism, Sajjad rues, has been unjustifiably placed on the Muslims who continued to bat for Hindu-Muslim unity. Therefore, the Muslims, the author suggests, did not willingly join the separatist politics of the League but the situation was poisoned by communal politics to such an extent that all options, except for looking up to the League, were closed. In this entire process the biggest beneficiary was the League that did not miss any opportunity to cash in on the ‘injured’ feelings of Muslims.

For instance, the Shahabad riots that broke out over the issue of cow slaughter polarized ‘the texture of Bihar politics’. By that time, Hindu right wing organizations such as the Gaurakshini Sabha, the Sanatan Dharma Sabha, the Arya Samaj and the Hindu Mahasabha had already succeeded in mobilizing Hindus against Muslims on the cow issue. The Congress, instead of sticking to its ideology of secularism and Hindu-Muslim unity, often colluded with these organizations, particularly the Hindu Mahasabha. Many top leaders of the Bihar Congress such as Rajendra Prasad and Sri Krishna Singh, the first chief minister of Bihar in independent India, were associated with the Hindu Mahasabha (p. 330), thereby lending credence to the League’s charge that the Congress was a party of Hindus.

Yet another development, particularly after the 1920s, that created a rift in Hindu-Muslim relations, was the defeat of many nationalist Muslim candidates in local body elections which had no provision of a separate electorate for Muslims. Many Hindu candidates openly played the Hindu card in order to polarize voters on religious lines. The ‘greatest stalwart of nationalist Muslims, Mazharul Haq, was also a victim of such communal politics, and lost the election, stoking fear among Muslims of being overwhelmed by ‘majoritarian’ Hindus in the electoral fray.

The shocking defeat frustrated Mazharul Haq to the extent that he retired from politics by 1929. Another prominent nationalist Muslim, Shafi Daudi, left the Congress after suspecting betrayal by Congressmen in the 1926 elections to the district board, creating a vacuum in Bihar politics at precisely ‘a time when they were needed most to bridge the widening gulf between the two communities, and take constructive stands in the developing scenario’ (p. 123). Unfortunately, there was no serious and genuine attempt by the Congress to remove Muslim grievances. Rather, the party was getting closer to the Hindu Mahasabha in the decades of the 1920s and the 1930s. As Sajjad notes, while the share of Hindu Mahasabha sympathizers in the Congress began to increase, Muslim share in the party simultaneously decreased in the early 1930s. Hindu upper castes such as Bhumihars and Rajputs began to dominate the party and nationalist Muslims like S.M. Zubair, Abdul Bari and Syed Mahmud were marginalized.

The process of alienating Muslims was to continue. For example, when in 1937 the Congress ministry was formed in Bihar, it did not include the Muslim Independent Party, nor did it address their grievances. Worse still, Syed Mahmud, who was arguably the most deserving candidate for the post of chief minister, was passed over in favour of Sri Krishna Singh, an issue that Maulana Azad discussed in India Wins Freedom.

By the late 1930s, the League which had till then almost no presence in Bihar began to experience exponential growth. In the coming years, as terrible communal riots engulfed different parts of the country, the rift among Hindus and Muslims widened. Bihar, too, witnessed horrible communal riots (1946) in which, allegedly, many Congress leaders were involved. These incidents, according to the author, threw Muslims into ‘the vortex of pro-Pakistan and anti-Pakistan politics’ (p. 326).

Further, Sajjad challenges the view that considers ‘the astonishing electoral success’ of the League in Bihar as an indicator of Muslim support for the demand of Pakistan. It cannot be denied that the League won 34 out of 40 seats that it contested in Bihar, polling 73.88% of Muslim votes, while the Congress could win just one seat and the Momin Conference of Abdul Qaiyum, an old ally of the Congress, bagged just five seats. For Sajjad, the electoral success of the League was not a pointer to Muslim approval for the demand of Pakistan. As the right to vote was restricted and largely based on property criterion, it excluded a majority of lower caste and lower class Muslims. The electoral success, he contends, had less to do with Muslim masses than with minority elite Muslims. Continuing his argument, Sajjad points to the fact that several key Muslim organizations such as the Imarat-e-Shariah and the Momin Conference continued to oppose the idea of Pakistan. Other lower caste Muslim-led organizations, as well as the Shia Political Conference, too raised their voice against the politics of the League. Thus, the book persuasively argues that the success of the League in the 1946 elections cannot be construed as conclusive proof of Muslim separatism in Bihar.

Apart from detailing Muslim politics during the colonial period, the author also discusses their political trajectory in post-1947 Bihar. While the issues of Urdu and security, in his view, were at the centre stage of Muslim politics until 1989, post-Mandal Muslim politics in Bihar has been more informed by the movements of social justice. Put differently, the lower caste Muslims increasingly asserted themselves against ‘the ashraf-led feudal leadership’. But in the last elections, pasmanda politics, as observed earlier, failed to carve out an independent space for itself in the wake of the looming threat from Hindutva forces. The politics of social justice among the Muslim community, thus, was often constrained by the larger discourse of communalism and secularism.

Finally it needs to be reiterated that Sajjad’s work is a valuable contribution to the under-researched area of Muslim politics in Bihar. However, one big drawback of the book is its repetitiveness; for example, nationalist Muslim leader Qaiyum Ansari’s dismissal of the Jamat-e-Islami Hind as a ‘communal body’ has been repeated in almost similar words as many as three times (on page 242, 261 and 277). Barring such minor quibbles, this work is recommended for researchers of history, political science and other disciplines of the social sciences as well as for general readers.

Abhay Kumar

PhD candidate, Centre for Historical Studies, JNU, Delhi

 

COMMUNITY WARRIORS: State, Peasants and Caste Armies in Bihar by Ashwani Kumar. Anthem Press. New Delhi, 2008.

Ashwani Kumar attempts to understand the emergence of the caste armies in the 1970s in Bihar in the larger context of a failure of the state and the continuing dynamism of caste identities. Any effort to engage with the question of caste solidarities and its manifestation in the form of an army has to confront many challenges. The researcher must be extremely cautious while unearthing facts and figures pertaining to the issue of caste. Concepts and phenomena around caste in a contemporary scenario are heavily imbued with multiple narratives and discourses which are not necessarily corroborated by data, facts and figures; equally the theoretical approach in understanding these hard facts is limited.

The author of Community Warriors: State, Peasants and Caste Armies in Bihar begins his exploration by confronting these very challenges. He argues that different approaches to comprehending the emergence of the Ranvir Sena have remained confined to their pigeonholes without accounting for the social realities that may seriously question extant understanding. The Marxist approach reduces the analysis to a crude unfolding of a class struggle. Scholars like Francine Frankel, Pranab Bardhan, Terence Byres, and Ashok Rudra argue that the tension between the peasants and the big farmers are essentially class struggles caused by ‘impact of market and other forces of modernization’. Such a structural and economic interpretation fails to take into account the role of the state and the dynamism of the caste system in Indian society. The other approaches which take the state and caste into account also fall into the trap of either solely focusing on the role of the state or by adopting an extremely narrow and restricted understanding of caste. The latter posits caste as a category frozen in an era long past.

The book attempts to break away from these constricting and set moulds and juxtaposes the role of the state with the fluidity of caste to understand the emergence of the Ranvir Sena in Bihar in the 1970s. He argues that the state and society proximity is much more than usually assumed; that they are ‘deeply embedded in each other’. Likewise, caste does not remain unchanged with the interaction of state and society. The resilience of caste to reshape and renew itself in the wake of ‘democratization of political life, new caste free occupations, modern education, growth of secularism and a modern economy, etc. has opened up newer spaces for conflict between the rural poor and the rich peasantry comprising of upper castes and a section of the backward castes.

The first chapter focuses on the changing role of caste in the forming and break-up of new alliances in response to the changing socio-economic context. It historically locates the emergence of, what the author calls, the ‘kulaks’, a combination of Yadavs, Koiris and Kurmis, against the backdrop of the variegated terrain of Central and North Bihar and their respective agricultural developments. He argues that there was a transformation of feudal landlords in Central Bihar, where the kulaks became the capitalist lords. Their urge to climb up the ladder of success could be traced to 1933 when they had first demanded reservation in the Bihar and Orissa Provincial Service from the colonial state.

Along with this, the fight was also with the upper castes. Even as the book manages to encapsulate the struggle for recognition by these upper backward castes, it still falters in contextualizing the peasant resistance. While the struggle of a section of the backward castes to gain recognition has been well established, the struggle of the Scheduled Castes and lower backward castes has been given short shrift. The book could have explained how the Triveni Sangh, formed in 1933 and comprising of these three castes, moved away from its agenda which was to uplift the ‘kisan, mazdoors and small traders’.

The jump from the formation of the Triveni Sangh to the emergence of the Naxalite movement could have been averted had the struggle of the most oppressed been historicized as the author himself rightfully points out: ‘The arrival of ‘spring thunder’ and the newly formed Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) in 1967 was not a historical accident.’ Moreover, the horizontal caste alliances of the kulaks on one side – the upper castes comprising of Rajputs, Bhumihars, Kayasthas and Brahmans – needs further elaboration. The narration could have focused more on aspects other than the caste affiliations of leaders.

In the next chapter, the author elaborates upon the state-society line of argument by expounding on the role played by different regimes in making the state dysfunctional, thereby ceding space to the caste armies. The state of Bihar was engulfed in a fierce battle between warring leaders for control of the state machinery. After the phase of factional fights of the Congress party, the era of unstable coalitions gave way to the leadership of a towering Yadav leader from the student movement of 1974, who while speaking of the emergence of the backward sections of society failed to provide ‘an institutionalized democratic political culture’. He was followed by Nitish Kumar, a Kurmi leader, in 2005, resulting in fresh caste calculations in the form of an alliance between the upper castes and lower backwards and Dalits. It remains to be seen if the precarious alliance can contain the inherent discontent and its violent expression.

The third chapter focuses on how the private caste senas effectively became the surrogate army of the state. The author argues that political parties across the spectrum had to succumb to the exigencies of the situation by allying with these emerging caste armies in one way or the other, the collusion most visible during elections. The political parties had to rely on these senas for assistance in booth capturing and mobilizing voters. The context of this complex interplay of caste armies and the state was the laggard implementation of land reforms and the Green Revolution, which led to the emergence of a section of landlords from the backward caste who were not supported by the state. The emergence of these sections created circumstances for the rise of both the Maoists and private senas. However, not all the privates senas could survive; most of them except the Ranvir Sena have either withered away or joined other political parties. The lack of a well defined ideology and appropriation of these armies by political parties are the reasons stated for their short existence.

The survival and transition of the Ranvir Sena is explored in the last chapter of the book. The author argues that the Ranvir Sena survived in part because unlike the other caste senas it had a defined ideology woven around the Bhumihar identity. Tracing the historical roots of the formation of the Bhumihar identity, he argues that it took shape in the context of the rising assertion of the backward castes and the Maoist upsurge in Central Bihar. This part of the book presents a detailed analysis of the ideology and practices of Ranvir Sena. The author has managed to cover the transition of the Ranvir Sena as a political force through the deft use of interviews, fact finding reports, newspaper reports and other documents. The final section of the book on Jehanabad jailbreak provides a rich and vivid account of the incident and points to the inefficacy and unwillingness of the state to address the root of the matter.

The book deserves appreciation for its balanced approach in dealing with a politically charged and contested issue of political rivalry and dominance over the issue of land control. Far too often such narratives commit the error of either being no different from police records or accounts which are overawed by the dream of a fair and an egalitarian society. Nevertheless, some aspects of the book could have been further elaborated, viz. the poor performance of the Ranvir Sena in the 1999 parliamentary elections. Besides the obvious poor political calculation, it is worth investigating as to why a caste army known for being a game changer for the political parties failed to secure enough votes for itself. Such details could have been explored had the author not over-stressed the political calculations of the leaders. An emphasis on ‘pressures from below’ could have complicated the narrative beyond the crude political calculations of the leaders. The use of diaries, songs, poems of the villagers could possibly have helped fill this lapse.

Ufaque Paiker

PhD Scholar, JNU, Delhi

 

CRIMINALISATION OF POLITICS: Caste, Land and the State by Avinash Kumar. Rawat Publications, Delhi, 2015.

CRIME, corruption and communalism have long been the big three of Indian politics. The first two have traditionally been inadequately addressed in academic writings and are only beginning to attract some attention in recent scholarship. Criminalisation of Politics: Caste, Land and the State, an in-depth study of a single district of Bihar, Purnea, provides insights into the functioning of Indian democracy and governance.

According to Avinash Kumar, Bihar’s malnourished status is largely due to the ‘crisis of governability’, ‘subversion of the rule of law’ and ‘illegitimacy of the state’ which follows from a ‘criminalisation of politics’. Kumar fleshes out the nexus between politicians, criminals, contractors, bureaucracy (police to judges) in developing what he calls ‘privatisation of law and order’ in the state of Bihar. Clearly, he assails the stereotypical view of criminalization of politics as a phenomenon of the 1990s. On the contrary, Kumar shows how its roots can be traced to the beginning of the post-independence Indian state, and the relationship between state, land and caste.

The book begins by recognizing that caste has a deep relationship with the land. A major section of the population, both Dalits and Other Backward Classes, failed to achieve any degree of relative autonomy from the ruling elites. Pre-existing social identities caged the democratic egalitarian ethos and promoted a ‘lumpenised political culture’ (p. 69). In order to liberate itself from the idea of a ‘hybrid state’, caught between an empire state of the older type and a sovereign state on the European pattern, the Indian state initiated several land reform measures to diversify the pattern of accumulation. Bihar, traditionally a feudal caste-ridden society, saw the introduction of Abolition of Zamindari Bill in the state assembly in 1947 itself. Later, the Bihar land reform bill 1949 which after receiving the Governor’s assent became the Bihar Abolition of Zamindari Repealing (Land Reforms) Act, 1950, attempted to abolish the interests of zamindars and bataidars legally and bring land under the direct control of the state. In 1955, and again in 1961, attempts were made to initiate land distribution. However, these ambitious projects were stymied as the state machinery was run by the same traditional upper caste political elites.

Kumar talks about the promise of the Bhoodan movement – but this too ultimately failed as only 25% of the land received as gift was actually allotted. The landholding pattern, as revealed by the data of 1970-71, 1976-77, 1980-81 and 1995-96, further fuelled the processes of criminalization, as 80% of the population were marginal landholders. As a consequence, the zamindari system got further institutionalized and the dominant castes got firmer control of the state machinery. Although from a non-dominant caste, even Karpoori Thakur on becoming the chief minister, could not initiate meaningful land reforms (and therefore expanded reservation for backward castes).

With no respite from the state, the victims of violations of rights – the poor and landless – turned to violent non-state intervention, organizing themselves under the banner of Naxalism. In response, upper caste militias were formed to redeem land and push back the political assertion of the poor. The use of violence, killings of Dalits, and the growing ‘illegitimacy of state’ was a common refrain of the 1970s and ’80s. According to Kumar, this criminalization of politics left no option for the OBCs but to adopt the same style of politics in the state. The post-1990s emergence of ‘Lalu Raj’ saw the crumbling of the feudal system and an increasing assertiveness of new economic and social forces, thereby adding a new dimension to the law and order situation. The state continued to grow more and more illegitimate in all spheres.

The intimate link between caste and crime can be seen in the parallel sphere of politics as well. The politics of caste and criminalization in the period 1947-66, was one of relatively unchallenged upper caste hegemony. The next phase, 1967-80, saw a transformation of political power relations at the rural level, as the backward castes began to challenge the capture of electoral democracy by traditional political elites. These years saw a decline of Brahmins from 18.3% of the general seats in 1975 to only 7.6% in 1977. The decline in the strength of the ‘forward’ and increase in the strength of the ‘backwards’ was equally the loss and victory of one caste over another. (p. 89) The deep interest of the central government in the affairs of the state resulted in the political anointment of Jagannath Mishra. The Mishra regime took corruption, favouritism, nepotism and criminalization of politics to an altogether new level. The use of goondas for booth capturing (p. 90) during state and general elections became common. Bihar witnessed spiralling incidents of law and order breakdown between 1980 and 1990, with the state remaining a mute spectator as the Congress party appointed four upper caste chief ministers, viz. Bindeshwari Dubey, Bhagwat Jha Azad, S.N. Sinha and Jagannath Mishra in the five years following the 1985 assembly elections.

The early 1990s infused hope among the non-dominant castes with Lalu’s ascension to power. Initially, both communalism and corruption were tackled, but soon, in order to stay in power, the very ‘victims’ of upper caste dominant politics began to distribute tickets to candidates with criminal records. The gradual shift to jungle raj explains the growing incidents of kidnapping, arson, dacoity and violence.

According to Kumar, the primary reasons behind the growing incidence of crime are first, the wedlock between crime and non-punishment where politics has played both as a spoiler and a mediator between the two, and second, the absence of a disinterested arbiter, equivalent to the state. An inadequate nurturing of democratic values in society prevents the state from being democratic in nature.

The case study of criminalization of politics at a micro level in Purnea district of Bihar explicates the struggle between the interests of upper castes to secure land and hegemony and backward castes to wrest dignity and land. Kumar’s district level study exposes the networks of corrupt officers, politicians and local judges and their role in legitimizing the dominance of powerful landlords. For the first three decades after independence, political power was in the hands of maliks (as the landlords were known in Purnea), with no resistance. Violence, almost always one-sided, appeared as a normal and mundane affair. Under the command of the nephew of a senior Congress leader and former speaker of the state assembly, on 22 November 1971, an armed mob attacked Chandwa-Rupaspur village and killed fourteen people. A month later a similar incident took place in Sabdalpur village where the prime suspect was the former law minister in the S.N. Sinha cabinet. Incidents such as these are committed with the support of political and state administration. Towards the 1980s and thereafter, Purnea saw a shift from ‘landlords to ganglords’. With greater OBC assertion in this period, the district witnessed an open struggle between Rajputs and Yadavs. The author recounts a number of incidents involving musclemen, criminals and politicians between 1980 to 2005, and the menace of criminals turned politicians such as Anand Mohan Singh, Buttan Singh, Pappu Yadav and others.

How has Bihar changed since Nitish Kumar came to power in 2005? Does his policy hinder the onward progress of criminalization in the state? The final chapter explores the contribution of vikas purush Nitish Kumar in today’s Bihar. According to Kumar, Nitish focused on good governance, economic development, started holding janata darbars, passed the Bihar Police Act in 2007 and Bihar Special Courts Act, 2009, and set up the state vigilance unit under former CBI officials. In order to break the criminal-politician nexus, Nitish appointed new judges, increased judges’ salaries, computerized court proceedings, suspended the granting of liquor licences to convicted criminals and so on.

No doubt, these initiatives to a degree addressed the criminalization and law and order issues. However, the question of land was sidelined, despite the setting up of a land reforms commission. Its recommendations were never implemented, thus leaving the traditional political masters untouched. Nitish appeased both the landowning castes by non-implementation of the commission’s recommendations, and the poor by putting a brake on the spiralling kidnapping, arson and violence. Health and education received only marginal spending; a few districts gained from government schemes and saw a nominal growth rate in the last five years. Kumar sees the current economic growth in Bihar as a continuum since 1994-95, resulting from a diversification of trade and social empowerment among the backward castes. In conclusion, the book underlines that without a rectification of ‘wrongs’ of political economy of the state, the issue of ‘state illegitimacy’ cannot be addressed. Inclusive economic development along with the rule of law is the only way to achieve social justice which is the mandate of recent state assembly elections too.

L. David Lal

Research Scholar, Centre for the Study

of Discrimination and Exclusion, JNU, Delhi

top