ALL ASSAM TRIBAL SANGHA AT ITS WITS’ END

                                                                                                      Hira Charan Narjinari

The General Secretary of All Assam Tribal Sangha appears to be at his wits’ end as to the statements he made in his Affidavit-in-Opposition submitted before the Hon’ble High Court of Gauhati on 18^th July 2014 in connection with Writ Petition(C) 2580/2014. Therefore, he had hurriedly withdrawn the said Affidavit-in-Opposition and submitted a fresh Affidavit-in-Opposition before the Hon’ble High Court of Gauhati on 30^th July 2014. In his new Affidavit-in-Opposition, he removed the following words from paragraph 3 “then in the same breath the petitioners nos. 1 and 2, being “Basumatary” and “Brahma”, also not being enlisted tribes/castes under the scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders, 1950, cannot also claim to be members of Boro-Kachari community of Assam.” He must have perceived that his above statement was illogical and would invite severe criticism against him. In fact, his irresponsible statement has already aroused resentment among the Borokachari community.

    In his fresh Affidavit-in-Oppostion, Mr. Khakhlari has however, reiterated that “Basumatary”, “Brahma”, “Saikia”, “Majumdar”, “Das”, and “Deka” etc. who belong to Boro-Kachari community on account of their origin and place of residence without such surnames being indicated in the Constitution Order, 1950, the same is the case in respect of certain individuals having surnames like “Sarania”, as in the case of Respondent No. 7” (Naba Kumar Sarania). In order to prove that those persons bearing the surname Saikia, Sarania, Das, Deka belong to Boro-Kachari community, he annexed 6 (six) Tribe Certificates. It is interesting to note that All Assam Tribal Sangha’s Bajali District Unit had issued a Tribal Certificate to one Dharanidhar Sarania stating that he belongs to “Bodo-Kachary” caste, vide Certificate No. BDTS/STC/1105/92 dated 9/11/1992. It is beyond our comprehension as to what prompted AATS to use the term “Bodo-Kachary” while issuing a social status certificate to above-named person. Any individual could check the list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Assam in order to ascertain the fact. The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, C.O. 19, Part II Assam does not contain the name “Bodo-Kachary” as a Caste. Neither has the community “Bodo-Kachary” been listed as Scheduled Tribe in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, C.O. 22 “Part II Assam II”. It is not comprehensible as to where AATS has imported the above unscheduled tribe name from.  

    The Mangaldai District unit of AATS has issued a certificate to one Kamala Sarania, Certificate No. 308 dated 3 April 1990. In the Certificate Kamala Sarania’s caste has been written thus: “Sub-Caste Kachari under The Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950”. Rangia Unit of AATS issued certificates to Miss Surabhi Baruah stating that she belongs to Kachari community (Certificate No. 916 dated 22 December 1984), to Debajit Saikia as Boro-Kachari (Certificate No. 8727 dated 3 August 1994; to Rabi Ram Deka as Boro-Kachari (Certificate No. 4599 dated 25 June 1992); and Nalbari Unit to Bhabendra Das as Boro-Kachari (Certificate No. 673 dated 26 June 1999). Usually, members belonging to Borokachari community use Narzary Basumatary, Boro, Brahma, etc. as their surnames while members of the Sarania Kacharis generally use Das, Deka, Mahalia, Saikia, Sarania, Deka Sarania, etc., as their surnames (According to Sarania Kachari Development Council). Therefore certifying members of Sarania Kachari with surnames like Sarania, Saikia, Deka, Das, etc., either as Kachari or Boro Kachari appears to be unjustified and unlawful.

In his Affidavit-in-Opposition dated 30 July 2014 at paragraph 6 Mr. Khakhlari states that “they (i.e. Sarania) squarely belong to Kachari/Boro Kachari tribe”. However, the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, C.O. 22, and subsequent amendments and modifications do not list “Kachari/Boro Kachari” as Scheduled Tribe as stated by Mr. Khakhlari. The Order under reference does list “Boro, Borokachari” at Serial Number 2, and “Kachari, Sonowal” at Serial Number 5 as Scheduled Tribes, but not “Kachari/Boro Kachari” as stated by Mr. Khakhlari.    

    It is equally mysterious as to why the Government of Assam, WPT & BC Department, Dispur, authorised AATS by a Notification No. TAD/BC/265/2009/07 dated 22^nd June 2009 to identify the status of Scheduled Tribes Communities and issue Caste Certificate to the Scheduled Tribes (P) and Scheduled Tribes (H) when Government of India had issued a number of circulars from time to time indicating the authorities who would issue Caste Status Certificates. As far back as 22 March 1977 Government of India issued a letter to all State Governments and Union Territory Administrations clarifying the position. A relevant part of the letter reads as under:

    “It is understood that some State Governments/ U.T. Administrations have empowered all their Gazetted Officers to issue such certificates and Revenue Authority issue certificates on the basis of the certificates issued by Gazetted Officer, MPs and MLA etc. If such a practice is followed there is a clear danger of wrong certificates being issued, because in the absence of proper means of verification such authorities can hardly ensure the intrinsic correctness of the facts stated in such certificates. In order to check the issuance of false certificates, the question of verification assumes all the more importance.”

    The Ministry of Home Affairs, which was earlier looking after the work relating to SCs/STs had issued a checklist for issue and verification of SC/ST certificate vide their letter No. 35/1/72-RU (SCT.V) dated 2 May 1975. According to the checklist, before issuing SC/ST certificate it should be verified that the persons and his/her parents actually belong to the SC/ST community as claimed by him; the caste/community is included in the official SC/ST list of the concerned State/UT; the person actually belongs to the State in respect of which the community has been scheduled; the person claiming to be SC should profess Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist religion whereas a person claiming to be member of ST  may profess any religion; the person or his/her parents should have been permanent residents of the place mentioned in the certificate on the date of notification of Presidential order applicable in his/her State. AATS has not followed this procedure or guideline which induces us to state that  it has shown its vindictive nature. 

    The Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 5854 Kumari Madhuri Patil vs. Government of Maharashtra, 1994, relating to a false certificate, had laid down the procedure and guidelines, which should be followed in issuing the caste/tribe certificates. Some of the important procedure and guidelines are being summarised below:

1. The application for grant of social status certificate shall be made to the Revenue Sub-Divisional Officer and Deputy Collector or Deputy Commissioner and the certificate shall be issued by such officer rather than the Officer at the Taluk or Mandal level.
2. The parent, guardian or the candidate, as the case may be, shall file an affidavit duly sworn and attested by a competent gazetted officer or non-gazetted officer with particulars of castes and sub-castes, tribe, tribal community, parts or groups of tribes or tribal communities, the place from which he originally hails from and other particulars as may be prescribed by the Directorate concerned.
3. All the State Governments shall constitute a Committee of three officers, namely, (i) an Additional or Joint Secretary or any officer higher in rank of the Director of the department concerned, (ii) the Director, Social Welfare/Tribal Welfare/Backward Class Welfare, as the case may be, and in the case of Scheduled Caste another officer who has intimate knowledge in the verification and issuance of the social status certificate. In the case of Scheduled Tribes, the Research Officer who has intimate knowledge in identifying the tribes, tribal communities, part of or groups of tribes or tribal communities.
4. Each Directorate should constitute a vigilance cell consisting of Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police in over-all charge and such number of Police Inspectors to investigate into the social status claims.
5. The High Court would dispose of these cases as expeditiously as possible within a period of three months.
6. In case, the certificate obtained or social status claimed is found to be false the parent/guardian/the candidate should be prosecuted for making false claim. If the prosecution ends in a conviction and sentence of the accused, it could be regarded as an offence involving moral turpitude, disqualification for elective posts or offices under the State or the Union or elections to any local body, legislature or Parliament.

    The Seventh Report (2001-2002) of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, submitted to the then President of India Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam by Dr. Bizay Sonkar Shastri remarked that the false social status certificate is “serious problem which not only deprives but robs the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of their rights and safeguards provided under the Constitution and various laws as well as the opportunities made available by the Government for their welfare.” The Commission, vide its D.O. No. 1/3/2003-ESDW/C. Cell dated 19 February 2004, recommended to the President of India stating, “In the case of elective offices such as Parliament/Legislative Assembly/Municipal Corporation/Panchayet the false Caste Certificate holder should be immediately sacked from the post/chair and must be debarred from contesting election for at least 6 years besides the punishment provided under law.”

    According to IPC 197 whoever issues or signs any certificate required by law to be given or signed, or relating to any fact of which such certificate is by law admissible in evidence, knowing or believing that such certificate is false in any material point, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence. What is the punishment for false evidence? IPC 193 states: “Whoever intentionally gives false evidence in any stage of a judicial proceedings, or fabricates false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine, and whoever intentionally gives or fabricates false evidence in any other case, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.”  

    It is known to all that Sarania Kachari is a separate community, independent of Borokachari community. Had it not been so the Government of Assam would not have sanctioned them a Development Council and named it Sarania Kachari Development Council which was formed on 12 October 2010 by a notification, vide, Notification No. TAD/BC/491/07/117 dated 4 May 2010 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, WPT&BC Department. Furthermore, the Sarania Kachari community considers Naba Kumar Sarania, Kokrajhar MP as one of the famous personalities among the Sarania Kachari community.

    According to the Representation of the People Act, 1951 Part II, 4(c) the required qualification for membership of the House of the People is that a person shall not be qualified to be chosen to fill a seat in the House of the People unless “in the case of a seat reserved for the Scheduled Tribes in the autonomous districts of Assam, he is a member of any of those Scheduled Tribes and is an elector for the Parliamentary constituency in which such seat is reserved or for any other Parliamentary constituency comprising any such autonomous district.” The Election Commission of India in its Handbook For Candidates, 2009, has also spelt out the same qualification for election to the Lok Sabha from a reserved seat for Scheduled Tribes.  In other words, only Scheduled Tribes are eligible for contesting election from a reserved seat.

    However, as Sarania Kachari is not recognised as Scheduled Tribe in the Bodoland Territorial Areas District, Naba Kumar Sarania was not qualified to contest election to the Lok Sabha from No. 5 Kokrajhar Parliamentary Constituency which is reserved for Scheduled Tribes. Hence, he managed to obtain an ST status impersonating himself as Borokachari which is recognised as Scheduled Tribe in Assam including BTAD, vide, his Caste Certificate No. 316097 dated 12^th October 2011, issued by All Assam Tribal Sangha, Tamulpur District Unit and countersigned by Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Tamulpur on 17 October 2011). Can a person claim to be a Sarania Kachari and a Borokachari simultaneously?  In his Affidavit dated 4 April 2014 filed before the returning officer to the House of People from No. 5 Kokrajhar Constituency, Naba Kumar Sarania declared that he was approximately 45 years old. In other words, he obtained his caste status certificate when he was about 42 years old in 2011. It appears that Naba Kumar Sarania never disclosed his tribe to be “Borokachari” for at least more than 42 long years and suddenly in 2011 he obtained a tribe certificate claiming himself as Borokachari.

    Since Naba Kumar Sarania contested election against a reserved seat on a fake Tribe Certificate and won the election, his membership from Lok Sabha is liable to be void as per the Representation of the People Act, 1951, Part II, 4(c) and the Election Commission of India’s Handbook for Candidates, vide Ch. II, 2.(4)(c). As he obtained benefit of reservation based on false tribe certificate, his tribe certificate should be cancelled immediately and necessary action be taken against him as per the relevant law of the land.

Caught in the Crossfire of Blame: The Bodos and the BTC Issue

                                                              Hira Charan Narjinari

The conflict between the Bodos and immigrant Muslims during July-August 2012 has completed almost one year now. Those were the days when common people from both communities had suffered greatly.  Since the immigrant Muslims failed in their desire to possess a plot of land illegally for an Idgah due to strong resistance by the BTC administration, there was a simmering grudge among the immigrant Muslims against the Bodos. That they wanted to teach the Bodos a great lesson is clear from the disclosure by one of the accused persons in his deposition. The final touch of hate-Bodo programme was activated on 20 July 2012 when four innocent Bodo youths were brutally assaulted that resulted in their death on the spot. In this regard Gauri Singh, TSI of Kokrajhar Police Station filed a complaint (ijhar) and a case FIR 212/2012 was registered under 341, 147, 149, 302 and 435 IPC on 20^th July 2012.

Right from the formation of Bodoland Autonomous Council in 1993, non-Bodos living within the boundaries of the Council have been vehemently opposing conferment of any geo-political power on the Bodos. Subsequently, the Bodoland Accord of 2003 gave the Bodos more power as Territorial Council created under the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India. The non-Bodos within the BTC area were unhappy with the creation of Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) and were envious of the geo-political hegemony of the Bodos which naturally drove them to be intolerant towards the Bodos Therefore, they have been constantly waiting for an opportunity to destabilise the BTC administration. Hindrance to build Idgah gave the Muslims an opportunity to rise against the Bodos and hatched a plot to take revenge against the Bodos and the 20^th July 2012 incident was the culmination of Muslim intolerance towards the Bodos.    

From day one of the conflicts, Muslims started alleging against the Bodos for ethnic cleansing. Not only the Muslims but also the Hindus became vocal against the Bodos. The tenor of some of the pundits belonging to non-Bodo communities in evaluating, analyzing, and criticizing the Bodo Accord of 2003 clearly point to a direction that empowering of the “uncouth, low-profile” Bodo people with political hegemony was a blunder on the part of the NDA Government. They perhaps never dreamt of that the Kirat-Mongloid Bodos will one day exercise their political power on the Indo-Aryan people living in the predominantly Mongoloid country of Assam. They were not even happy to see that Assam should be dissected and states like Meghalaya, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh should have been created. They considered Assam as their paternal Jagir over which they think they had absolute authority and Mongoloid people do not deserve capabilities to rule or exercise supreme power over them. But the irony is that the modern descendants of those Jagirdars fail to remember that all the Jagirlands enjoyed by their forefathers were free gifts from the Bodo kings only. Bodo king Bhaskarvarman granted large amount of land to as many as 119 Brahmanas of different gotras during his reign in the first half of the 7^th century A.D.[1] Ancient political history of Assam is stuffed with scores of such testimonies on this verity.

The most vocal person to demand scrapping of Bodoland Territorial Council was a Bengali-speaking Dhubri M.P. Maulana Badruddin Ajmal who is also the Chief of the All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF). He directly accused the Bodo MLAs and Chief of Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) Hagrama Mahilary, for inciting the Bodos against the Muslim inhabitants in BTC area. He demanded arrest of the Chief of BTC and scrapping of the Memorandum of Settlement of the Bodo Accord as he thinks that the MOS was meant only for the interest of the Bodos and not for others. He also urged Sri Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister, to dissolve the Bodoland Territorial Council and place it under Governor’s rule.

Yet another MP from Hyderabad Asaduddin Owaisi during the Lok Sabha Debate on 8^th August 2012 emphatically warned the Central government and members of Parliament that if Muslims (Bangladeshi illegal migrants) are not rehabilitated, India will face third wave of radicalization amongst Muslim youths. Let Mr. Owaisi speak here: “Lastly, I warn the Central Government; I warn the hon. Members over here….if proper rehabilitation does not take place, you be ready for a third wave of radicalization of Muslim youth…” The tenor of warning here clearly absolutely and conclusively indicates to his utter disregard towards the very strong pillar of democracy and it concerns a grave threat to the security of the whole of India. He also demanded dissolution of BTC as it failed according to him to protect people living there and scrapping of Bodoland Agreement and failure to do so separation of those areas where 50% is non-Bodos. By demanding separation of those areas where 50% is non-Bodos (Muslim dominated?) Shri Owaisi has sent message to the Indian Parliament that Muslims in Assam should be given a geo-political power (a Muslim State?).

Interestingly, neither BJP nor Congress nor other regional political parties had uttered a single word of reprimand for Mr. Owaisi’s communal overtone.  They all yielded to the Hindu virtue of tolerance. R.K. Ohri, IPS (Retd.) has rightly estimated the moral fibre of the post-independence political leadership for their too reliance on the Hindu virtue of tolerance. He says, “The post-independence political leadership of India has for the most part remained a prisoner of the creed of meek submission to senseless aggression and violence by wearing the great Hindu virtue of tolerance on its sleeves. No one can dispute that tolerance is a great quality, a good civilizational value system but only up to a point and within responsible limits. Beyond that limit, any tolerance of tyranny and aggression becomes a liability, a curse.”[2]  

Asghar Ali Engineer, another columnist, has analyzed that the cause of clashes lies in “creating of BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL in an area where Bodos are only 29 per cent and rest are non-Bodos including Bengali speaking Muslims settled there since the British period and the British had brought them for cultivation of jute more than 100 years ago.” He asks, “How can one create Bodo Territorial Council and give them powers for development and other matters when they are just 29 per cent. All non-Bodo people feel aggrieved and want the Council to be repealed. They feel they are not getting due share in development. The Bodos, on the other hand, want to increase their number in that area so that they become the majority and creation of Bodo Territorial Council could be justified.”[3]

In a Press Conference on 4^th August 2012 All Bodoland Minority Students’ Union Vice-President Sahabuddin Ali Ahmed said, “The BTAD administration is behind the recent flare-up of violence in the BTAD.” He further said, “Clearly the people who are in a hurry to form a separate Bodoland State are behind these clashes.”[4]

Some members of Indian religionists also did not lag behind in joining chorus with the so-called religious minority. Everywhere they made fuss over the creation of BTC for the Bodos. What makes them envy of the Bodos while they have been conferred the geo-political power under the Constitution of India? Will scrapping of BTC bring peace in Lower Assam? Will the Bodos without any resistance make over their rights to be trampled over? I am afraid, the more the Bodos will be harassed the more there will be tensions in the area.

Spiteful utterances on the Bodos by Dr. Devabrata Sharma, a lecturer of Jorhat College make one believe that his philosophy of love for dalit and opposition to caste oppression on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is nothing but a political gimmick only. He is the chief advisor of a leftist organization called United Revolutionary Movement Council of Assam (URMCA). He terms the creation of BTAD as undemocratic and discriminatory. An intellectual person like Dr Sharma should have been more cautious to bridle his tongue when he said: “Nothing could be more undemocratic and discriminatory than the creation of the BTAD-BTC. Democracy is all about majority rule. BTAD-BTC is just the reverse of that principle. How can 20 per cent rule over 80 per cent? Because the Bodos do not enjoy numerical majority, they are resorting to ethnic cleansing, targeting Muslims, Adivasis, Rajbanshis and even Assamese caste Hindus. The Bodos have become a law unto themselves. We stand for the dissolution of BTAD and BTC to stop the rape of democracy. Bodos comprise a little over six per cent of the state’s population but are demanding 50 per cent of Assam for the Bodoland of their dreams. Muslims comprise over 30 per cent of Assam’s population. Yet they have so far displayed exemplary patience despite grave provocations. What will happen if Muslims and other victimized communities unite and retaliate?”[5]

Isn’t this statement provocative and full of venom against the oldest inhabitants of Assam? Dr. Sharma is probably well aware of the fact that his forefathers were migrants from the west. The statement that the Bodos have become a law unto themselves makes no sense if we consider the way the immigrant Bengali Muslims encroached government lands. Why is he silent on illegal encroachment by the Muslims? It seems that he does not consider illegal encroachment as illegal but to him the immigrant Muslims have every right to encroach government lands, forest lands, or any vacant space falling under tribal belts and blocks; and the Assam Land Revenue Act or any law of the land does not apply to them. His comment will encourage the Muslims to be bolder to defy not only the administration of BTC but also the government of Assam.

An experienced CPI (M) M.P. Basudev Acharia appears to conceive that there is not a single illegal Bengali Muslims in the State of Assam. According to him all the sufferers owing to the clash are all Indian and not illegal Bangladeshi migrants. To this effect he has given good character certificates in favour of the Muslims in the Lok Sabha Debate on 8^th August 2012 which has been recorded thus: “I visited the areas inhabited by the Muslim minorities in Kokrajhar District and its neighbouring areas like Bongaigaon, Chirang, Dhubri and Bilasipara. Should we call them Bangladeshi immigrants? They are the people who are staying there since 1940-41. In 1953 Brahmaputra got eroded. Villages after villages had got eroded. The Muslim population migrated from that area to Kokrajhar. Should we call them Bangladeshi immigrants and try to drive them away? They are the citizens of our country. They are there for years together.”[6]  He puts the blame on the Bodos for engineering the conflict between the Bodos and Bengali Muslims. He commented saying, “the intention behind creating this problem is to increase the percentage of Bodo population from 27 per cent to 50 per cent so that the demand for separate state can be strengthened.”[7]

Behind such clean-chit there is a smell of garnering of votes for political ends at the expense of the national security. T.V. Rajeswar, former Governor of West Bengal and Sikkim commented that vote-bank politics turned a blind eye to the Bangladeshi migrants both in Assam and West Bengal “because of the support it was getting from the minority-migrant population.”[8]  He further commented that when the Congress was in power in Assam and when the AGP replaced it the ministry’s survival depended upon the support of a group of MLAs who were against any serious action against the Bangladeshi migrants.  

Praful Bidwai, a former newspaper editor and now a researcher and Peace and Human-Rights Activist based in Delhi, writes that the Bodos drove the Muslims out forcibly in 1992, 1996 and 2010 but they failed in 2012. This is obviously an inflammatory comment and a derogatory statement pointing his finger towards the Bodos exclusively. He thinks that when the Bodos form only 20% and do not enjoy social-economic hegemony, creation of BTAD as homelands for tribals in western Assam was the Indian government’s misguided policy.[9]

Columnists Ratnadip Choudhury and Avalok Langer said that “the seeds of the current conflagration were sown in the 2003 BTC Accord.”[10] These columnists also appear to have allergy to see the Bodos prosper in their own ways.

A former Naxalite leader, Santosh Rana has called the BTC area as a “killing field” and urged both the Central Government and State of Assam to “dissolve the BTC and evolve a solution on the basis of equality of all identities.”[11] Naxal movement was an armed uprising to snatch lands from the jotedars and redistribute land to the landless farmers. It is well known that their history is replete with bloodshed. He might have eschewed the path of violence now, but his rhetoric is an anti-tribal and condemnable.  

Dr. Nani Gopal Mahanta an associate professor of political science at Gauhati University has discovered that “the very creation of Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) under the 6^th Schedule” is the origin of the July-August 2012 violence. He further stated that “BTC was born out of merciless killing and violence at the behest of the Bodo Liberation Tigers (BLT).”[12] In another article he,[13] having analyzed the recent violence in BTC area, states that as it is absolutely necessary for making the Bodos majority in their area so they are evicting people of other communities from Bodo areas in order to make  a ‘homogenous Bodoland’.  

Theses by non-Bodo intellectuals as referred to above have been proved baseless. The investigation by the CBI on the incident of 20^th July 2012 which had sparked violence in the BTC area has unearthed a different story totally contrary to their views. The CBI has found “larger conspiracy” behind the killing of four Bodo youths.

The Assam Government had ordered CBI enquiry into the incident that took place on 20^th July 2012 in which four Bodo youths were brutally hackled to death. By a notification No.PLA 432/2012/Pt./20 dated 9^th August 2012, the Government of Assam extended the powers and jurisdiction of members of Special Police Establishment (CBI) to whole of Assam. The Government of India, Ministry of Personnel by a notification No.228/45/2012/AVD-II dated 10^th August 2012 transferred the investigation of FIR No.212/2012 dated 20^th July 2012 of Kokrajhar PS under section 341, 147, 148, 149, 302 and 435 IPC to CBI for investigation. Accordingly the CBI re-registered the Case RC 10(S)2012/CBI/SC-1/New Delhi on 10^th August 2012 and began investigating into the incident of 20^th July 2012.  

Investigation by CBI discloses that on 20 July 2012 at about 8 pm Adam Ali Sheik who has been named as accused No. 2 in the Charge Sheet, and other villagers of Joypur were present in the Joypur Bazaar and they heard the sound of firing. He along with other unknown persons started raising the slogan of Allah Ho Akbar continuously for about five to seven minutes and the same was followed by the other villagers and persons present in the bazaar. Thereafter people from the Joypur, Namapara and Dangipara gathered in the Joypur bazaar. About 300 people gathered as it was first day of Roza and most of the people were already present in the nearby two mosques for prayers.

CBI investigation discloses that at about 8.50 pm four Bodo youths namely Pradip Boro, Zwngsar Boro, Jatin Goyary and Nipon Goyary reached Joypur bazaar from Bhatipara side. Adam Ali Sheik pointed his finger towards them saying that they were the same persons who had fired in the area earlier at about 8 pm. The crowd intercepted all the four Bodo youths and started thrashing them in presence of Assam Police officials. How come Adam Ali Sheikh was so certain that those four Bodo youths were the same persons who had fired in the air? It is obvious that the ABMSU had already taken decision that they would attack any Bodo passing Joypur area. The story of firing also appears to be a design to put their decision into action. It is not believable that those four Bodo youths would pass through Joypur if they had earlier at 8 pm fired in the area. As a rule they were supposed to take different route to reach Kokrajhar town instead they returned via Joupur. This leads us to presume that those four Bodo youths were not involved in firing in the air in that area and they had fallen victims of circumstances.

CBI has distinctly recorded that “they heard the sound of firing” only. Can this be taken to mean that Adam Ali Sheikh personally saw those four Bodo youths firing in the air? Hearing does not connote seeing, they mean differently. From this it is clear that the fanatic Muslims had already decided to start a communal riot in the BTC area. And the CBI had rightly sensed a “larger conspiracy” behind the killings of four Bodo youths.

CBI investigation reveals that after the incident when the dead bodies were lying on the ground, Kurban Ali, accused number 1 in the Charge-Sheet had removed the cellphone of the deceased Nipon Goyary. He had admitted the same in his disclosure statement and stated that he had used the hand-set from 29^th to 31^st July 2012 with his own SIM card of his personal connection No. 9954986373. The CDR analysis has confirmed that SIM card of the said mobile number was used in the hand-set of deceased Nipon Goyary. It is also revealed that Hashim Ali Rahman accused number 3 in the Charge-Sheet had used the stolen mobile phone number 9859941471 of the deceased Pradip Boro from 21^st to 29^th July 2012 to contact his close family members.

The accused persons namely Adam Ali Sheikh, Accused No. 2, Hashim Ali Rahman, Accused No. 3, Imran Hussain, Accused No. 4, Hashem Ali Sheikh, Accused No. 5, Ali Azam Sheikh, Accused No. 6 and Moinul Sheikh, Accused No. 8 had been properly and correctly identified by the witnesses during the investigation Test Identification Parade (TIP) conducted by the Court of Special Magistrate CBI Guwahati at Central Jail Guwahati on 29^th September 2012.

“During the investigation sufficient evidence, oral as well as documentary evidence has come on record against accused persons namely Md. Kurban Ali Sheikh(A1), Adom Ali Sheikh (A2), Hashim Ali Rahman (A3), Imran Hussain (A4), Hashem Ali Sheikh (A5), Ali Azam Sheikh (A6) and Moinul Sheikh (A8) to prove that they alongwith other members of the unlawful assembly committed the offences punishable under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 341, 379, 435 & 201 IPC. Besides the accused Kurban Ali Sheikh (A1) and Hashim Ali Rahman (A3) are also liable to be prosecuted for the substantive offences u/s 379 and 201 IPC.” 

Paradoxically, the All Bodoland Minority Students’ Union (ABMSU) is however not happy with the probe conducted by the CBI. ABMSU President Sahabuddin Ali Ahmed said, “We have serious doubts in the credibility of CBI as it has been proved that they work in the favour of the ruling government in the recent past.” He demanded a high level probe into the 2012 riots in BTC area. Supposing high level probe is ordered by the government and the high level probe committee also goes against the ABMSU activists will they still insist upon further probe?

It may be pertinent here to refer to the sentiments of the Assamese members of the Constituent Assembly about the tribal people of the then Assam. They openly expressed in the Constituent Assembly that the tribal people should not be given much autonomy through the Sixth Schedule. During the debate on 6 September 1949, Kuladhar Chaliha, member of Constituent Assembly, had strongly opposed to giving too much autonomy to the Hills Tribes. He went so far as to state that allowing tribal people to rule or run administration will be an injustice to non-tribals (Assamese). The same view was expressed by Rohini Kumar Chaudhuri. These civilised persons from Assam never wanted Tribal people to rule over them rather they wanted to dominate the tribal people perpetually. The same sentiment still prevails among many caste Assamese for whom rule by the Bodos is something unthinkable. They, however, forget the fact that their forefathers were the subjects of Bodo kings for centuries.

Interestingly, people today question the very creation of BTC in the strongest terms and allege as to how a minority community in the BTC area should enjoy such geo-political power depriving majority non-Bodos. However, they do not question how they became minority; they do not question how tribal lands were alienated; they do not question why despite protective measures envisaged in the Assam Land Revenue Act 1886 amended from time to time was not implemented in letter and spirit; they do not question why infiltration is still allowed to take place; they do not question why land within tribal belts and blocks should be settled with non-tribal people; they do not question why lands belonging to government are forcibly occupied by non-tribal people, mostly immigrant Bengali Muslims. Why these questions have not been put before the central and state governments by those who strongly spoke against the Bodo Accord of 2003?

Have they ever asked or studied how the Bodos have become minority in their own land? Occupying the land of the Bodos by stratagem the outsiders or foreigners drove them to the environs of the woods where they languished for generations. Today, the original inhabitants i.e., the Bodos have been outnumbered by outsiders be they Bengali Muslims (legal or illegal) or be they Indo-Aryan speakers. In their own homeland the Bodos are today uprooted. Modern civilization has opened up the eyes of the Bodos and their constant search for their antecedents made them re-assertive in claiming back their certain tracts for developing and safeguarding their own culture and language. This aspiration is guaranteed by the Constitution of India. What is wrong then if the Bodos are given a geo-political power within the framework of the Indian Constitution?

The Charge Sheet relating to the 20 July 2012 incident has now come to light and it has been established that behind the violent riots that had spread in the BTC area and Dhubri after killing of four Bodo youths, the ABMSU was solely responsible. Now where are those persons who were vocal in blaming the Bodos for starting the violence? Why are they now silent on the involvement of ABMSU in starting the violence? Let them now come forward demanding banning of ABMSU and write scores of articles condemning the sinister designs of immigrant Muslims. Will they do that?

Many intellectuals have alleged that the Bodos are out to make BTC area exclusively for themselves and that is why they are resorting to cleansing of other ethnic groups. Can this happen in a democratic set-up? They very often cite the carnage of 2008 at Udalguri without ascertaining as to how the incident had started. Incidents that took place at Rowta-Bhalukmari-Hatkhola in Udalguri district on 14.8. 2008 during the bandh called by the Muslim Students Union of Assam (MUSA) and subsequent clashes between the Bodos and Muslims have been termed by many as ethnic cleansing by the Bodos. That their allegation is utterly groundless can be testified by what Justice P.C.Phukan former Judge, Gauhati High Court submitted his findings on 15^th February 2010 concerning the incidents. Let Justice Phukan speak here: “MUSA officer-bearers and MUSA activists are squarely responsible for starting the violence by forcing the shop-keepers to close their shops and beating up those who refused to oblige and forcing the scooter/motor-cycle riders, cyclist etc to stay off the road and beating up those who resisted such use of force. If such shop-keepers, motor-cycle riders, Cyclists etc, while resisting use of force by the MUSA activists, struck them back in exercise of their right to private defence of persons and property, they cannot be said to be on the wrong side of the law.”  

Demanding scrapping of constitutionally created BTC certainly culminates into dishonouring the very sanctity of the Constitution of India and at the same time an intolerance shown towards the original inhabitants or the sons of the soil. Critics of the creation of BTC are perhaps not alive to the fact that the Bodos had ruled Kamrup (ancient Assam) for more than twelve hundred years while the Ahoms ruled only for six hundred years. They have not perhaps realized that any adverse criticism against the Bodos may one day become a boomerang for them. In this regard Dr. Prafulla Mahanta has rightly said that demanding dissolution of BTC means a bad omen for the entire people of Assam.[14] Now if the Bodos are universally blamed for acts they did not commit then should others expect them to remain patriotic?

---

[1] Epigraphia Indica, Vol. XIX, pp. 115-125.

[2] R.K. Ohri, IPS (Retd.), Long March of Islam the Future Imperfect, 2004, p.327.

[3] http://twocircles.nt/2012jul30/bodomuslim_clashes_reasons_and_analysis.html.

[4] The Sentinel, 5 August 2012.

[5] Cited in S.N.M. Abdi’s ‘The 50-50 Shot’, http://www.outlookinida.com/article.aspx?282078.

[6] Lok Sabha Debate on 8^th August 2012.

[7] Lok Sabha Debate on 8^th August 2012

[8] T.V. Rajeswar, Problem of Bangladeshi migrants Politico-economic study in historical context, The Tribune, Online Edition, February 17, 2003 available at http://www.tribuneindia.com/2003/20030217/edit.htm#3

[9] Praful Bidwai, Ethnic Conflict in India, http://www.thenews.com.pk/todays-news-9-128487-ethnic-conflict-in-india.

[10] Tehelka, Vol. 9, Issue 33, 18 August 2012

[11] Santosh Rana, ‘Bodoland: The Killing Field’, Frontier, Vol. 45, No. 13, October 7-13, 2012

[12] Nani G. Mahanta, A Kashmir in the Making, http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/nani-g.-mahanta-on-recent-ethnic-violience-in-assam-bodoland/1/221691.html

[13] Dr. Nani Gopal Mahanta, ‘Ashanta Borobhumi:Niti Jetia Hingsar Karak Hoy’ Amar Asom, 26&27 July 2012

[14] Dr. Prafulla Mahanta, ‘Sangharsa-jarjar Borobhumi Aru Boro Tatha Janajatir Surakshar Prasna’, in Bodoland, a monthly Bi-lingual Journal of Bodo Peoples’ Front, Vol. I, Issue – 6, December 2012, pp. 6-10 

EMERGENCE OF BODO AS A POWERFUL LANGUAGE

                                                               HIRA CHARAN NARJINARI

“Language is the blood of the soul into which thoughts run and out of which they grow.”

                                                      – Oliver Wendell Holmes (1809-1894) American Author and Poet.

Fifty years ago from now Bodo became the medium of instructions in the Lower Primary Schools in the predominantly Bodo inhabited areas in Assam. After journeying for forty years as unclassified language Bodo received constitutional recognition only in 2003 when it was incorporated in the Eighth Schedule of the Indian Constitution. It is gratifying and a matter of great pride that Bodo has become by dint of its great thrust to emerge as the living language towards the middle of the 20^th century. 

C.S. Mullan, Superintendent of Census, in his Census Report for 1931 has described Assam as a province of “a philologist’s paradise for it is a veritable Babel.” In the statistics of language in Imperial Table XV languages of Assam we find (1) Vernaculars of Assam, (2) Vernaculars of India outside Assam, (3) Vernaculars of Asiatic Countries outside India, and (4) European Languages. This was not the case with early Assam as many of the languages for example Bengali and Assamese were not even born when a class of people speaking Bodo language was already in occupation of the Brahmaputra valley. The Assamese speaking people were the late intruders into Assam and before they came to Assam, the Bodos had already in occupation of the Brahmaputra and Surma Valleys, and the languages of the Baric (Bodo) division of the Sino-Tibetan family such as Meches, Koches, Tipras and Dimasas, were spoken on both sides of the Brahmaputra and Surma Valleys and these two valleys were under the control of the Baric or Bodo people.[1]

The Bodos were the most powerful race of ancient Assam. They ruled over the whole of ancient Assam since or before the advent of the Vedic Aryans into the province. They ruled under various dynastic names like Danav, Asur, Kirat and Mlechha. During the historic times they ruled under the dynastic names of Varman, Stambha and Pal. Prior to the coming of the Ahoms in 1228 A.D. eastern Assam was ruled by four branches of the Bodo family named Kachari, Chutiya, Moran and Matak. In Western Assam the Bodos ruled over Koch Bihar, Bijni, Darrang and Beltola near Guwahati.

: 2 :

It is said that the ancestors of the modern Bodos came into contact first with the Mediterraneans, then with the Alpines and lastly with the Vedic Aryans and that the Vedic Aryans met the ancestors of the Bodos of the Brahmaputra Valley in about 1000 B.C.[2] When the Vedic Aryans immigrated into ancient Assam they found the forefathers of the modern Bodos completely different from them in features, customs, religion, culture, manners and language and they, out of abomination towards them, gave them the name of Asura, Kirata, Danav and Mlechha.

 Mlechhas of Pragjyotish are modern Bodos

The Mahabharata calls the ancient Assam then known as Pragjyotish as a Mlechha Kingdom i.e., a Mlechha Desh, and was ruled over by king Bhagadatta who is always spoken of in respectful and even eulogistic terms (e.g., Sabha Parva, xxxv. 1000-1; and 1.1834; Udyoga Parva, clxvi. 5804; and Karna Parva, v. 104-5) and in other passages it is called a Danava or Asura kingdom ruled over by the demons Naraka and Mura (Vana Parva, xii. 488; Udyog Parva., xlvii. 1887-92; Harivamsa., cxxi. 6791-9; cxxii. 6873 etc.)[3]  F.E. Pargiter states that the people of Pragjyotish were all Mlechhas.[4]  An Assamese scholar named Dr. Tarun Chandra Sharma also confirms this when he writes, “From the records in the Epics – the Ramayana and the Mahabharata (dated c. +1000 – 800 B.C.), it is known that the northeastern frontier Kingdom of India, a Mlechha territory ruled by the Bodo kings, referred to as Danabas and Asuras by the Aryans of the Ganga valley, was known as Pragjyotisha (the eastern land of Astrology) and later as Kamarupa with its central shrine of mother goddess Kamakhya on the Nilachal hill overlooking the mighty Brahmaputra within the present metropolitan complex of Gauhati.”[5]

The greatest testimony to the Bodos being descended from Narak and his son Bhagadatta is conclusively confirmed by Dr. Suniti Kumar Chatterji when he said, “The Great Bodo people of Assam (are) the Offspring of the Son of Vishnu and Mother Earth.”[6]  Who was this son of Vishnu and Mother Earth? He was none other than Narak Asur, the father of celebrated king of Pragjyotish named Bhagadatta who had been indiscriminately described as Kirat or Mlechha.

That Mlechhas of Pragjyotish were later called Mech has been widely accepted by distinguished scholars like B.C. Allen,[7] J.N. Farquhar, [8] Grierson, [9] Rev. Endle[10],  Vasu,[11] and many others who state that the word Mech is derived from the Sanskrit word Mlechha.  We may therefore presume that the population of Pragjyotish or Kamrup was chiefly consisted of Mlechha or Mech race.  Even today in many parts of Assam there are people who call themselves Mech. In Dimapur in the state of Nagaland they are still

: 3 :

known as Mech.  The British, however, knew them as Kacharis. In Western Darrang and North Kamrup, however, they spoke of themselves as Bodo. In Goalpara they were commonly known as Mech, but presently they are known as Bodo. At the foot of the Garo Hills they were known as Hojai or Hajong. In Nowgaon, Hojai Kacharis were found but they were locally known as Lalung. The Kacharis of North Kachar Hills spoke themselves as Dimasa.[12] In Jalpaiguri, Darjeeling and Cooch Behar they are known as Mech.  As late as 1881, the Bodo group of people constituted one-third of the population of the Brahmaputra valley.

We are then persuaded to say that the forefathers of the Bodo people were abhorrently given the name of Mlechha by the Vedic Aryans and their language was called Mlechha language. In the course of time these Mlechha people were again designated by their neighbours variously as Mech, Kachari, Koch, Tripuri, Dimasa, Garo, Rabha etc. It was B.H. Hodgson who for the first time used the name Bodo to describe the Mech or Kachari people. [13]  The Report of the Census of Assam 1881 has rightly remarked that Hodgson has “conferred the genuine name of Bodo, being the title given to themselves by the most numerous branch of the race, namely, the Kacharis.”[14] Subsequently in 1903, G.A. Grierson while compiling his famous Linguistic Survey of India, adopted this generic name Bodo to denote the Meches, Koches, Kacharis, Garos, Rabhas, Dimasas, Lalungs, Tripuris etc.

Language of the ancestors of the Bodos

If the people of Pragjyotish were all Mlechhas then their speech is supposed to be of Mlechha tongue. The Mahabharata distinctly mentions of a language called Mlechha which was the language of the Mlechhadesh otherwise also known as Kiratdesh. This country is identified with Pragjyotish which was known in the medieval period as Kamrup and finally it received the modern name of Assam.  

It is interesting to note that Krishna-Dvaipāyana Vyāsa distinctly states that Yudhishthira and Vidura spoke in Mleccha language so that others except Yudhishthira might not know what Vidura wanted to pass on to Yudhishthira. He also says that Vidura was conversant with the Mlechha language and Yudhishthira too was conversant with that language (Adi Parva, Section CXLVII). This reveals that during the time of the Mahabharata Mlechha language was used for clandestine communication or exchange of secret information in written form or verbally. There are several internal evidences in the Mahabharata and the Ramayana that people in those days spoke multiple languages. However, it cannot be ascertained for sure whether the Mlechha language spoken by Vidura and yudhishthira was akin to

: 4 :

the Mlechha language spoken by king Bhagadatta. It requires further investigation to be undertaken by linguistic scholars.

Recent linguistic researches made by Scott Delancey of University of Oregon, confirms the high antiquity of Bodo. He says that Proto-Bodo-Garo preceded Indo-Aryans and during the time of Kamrup kingdom and probably several centuries before, Proto-Bodo was a lingua franca throughout the Brahmaputra plains and up into the surrounding hills.[15]

According to Franҫois Jacquesson, archaeologically there is no evidence to show Indo-Aryan cultures east of the river Karatoya border before Christian era and Assamese and Bengali languages were latecomers in northeastern India.[16]

Bodo-speaking areas

The languages of the Bodo group were spoken by peoples living on both sides of the Brahmaputra and Surma rivers, and up the Brahmaputra Valley and into the northern Naga Hills. The Assamese who occupied the valleys of these two rivers were comparatively late intruders. From the distribution of the Bodo peoples and their linguistic ties with other branches of Bodo group across these two rivers clearly indicated that the Bodos occupied both valleys before the Aryans came.[17]

Robert Shafer postulates that the languages of the Baric (Bodo) division of the Sino-Tibetan family such as  Meches, Koches, Tipras and Dimasas, were spoken on both  sides of the Brahmaputra and Surma Valleys and before the Aryans came there these two valleys were under the control of the Baric or Bodo people.[18]  He also postulates that the ancient kingdoms of Anga, Vanga and Kalinga were ruled over by the Tibeto-Burmans and these names have been sanskritised from Tibeto-Burmic  Aṅ, Waṅ or Vaṅ and Ka-liṅ or Kliṅ.[19] He argues that the termination ṅg is not rare in Sanskrit, neither is it particularly common, but ṅ is particularly common as a final Sino-Tibetan languages. Therefore he concluded saying, “We may suspect that the non-Aryan names of the Ganges and of the three kingdoms at its mouth were originally Gaṅ, Aṅ, Waṅ or Vaṅ and K-liṅ or Kliṅ; that when the Aryan invaders took over the words they added the usual endings – ā for rivers and a for peoples, and, although Sanskrit could have final - ṅ, it could not have final ṅā or - ṅa and so a – g – had to be inserted.”[20] According to him “the Baric people are not only the closest Tibeto-Burmans to the old kingdoms of Vaṅga, Aṅga and Kaliṅga but these rivers

: 5 :

provided them easy descent to the mouth of the Ganges, from which they could spread down the coast and up the Ganges.”[21] 

Dr. Chatterji has also corroborated this view. He states, “At one time Bodo or Boro group of speeches were current throughout the entire valley of the Brahmaputra, in North Bengal up to northern Bihar, and in East and South-East Bengal. This very extensive Bodo block is, however, broken up due to the intrusion of the Aryan Assamese and Bengali.”[22]

The population of North-Eastern Bengal and Lower Assam as well as of all the lower eastern hills was chiefly Bodos. In this regard in 1874, G. Campbell furnished a clear picture of Bodo-speaking areas which is as under:

“In the border plains of Eastern Bengal, Assam, and Cachar, and the lower hills bounding these countries, we come on a group of tongues evidently very nearly allied to one another, and which show that a large number of tribes, extending, under very different conditions, over a wide extent of country, and known by different names, are in fact closely cognate. This fact is the more important, because a large part of the population of Eastern Bengal is universally recognized to be cognate to the tribes speaking these languages. This group comprises the Cooches and Meches of Cooch Behar the sub-Himalayan Dooars and Goalpara, the Cacharees and Mekirs of Assam and Cachar, the Garos of the Garo Hills, and the Tipperahs of Hill Tipperah. Most of the civilized Cooches have lost their language, but all their traditions acknowledge their relationship to the Meches, who speak a language regarding which there can be no doubt under the name of Rajbunsees, Pullees, &c., people nearly allied to these form a large proportion of the population of the great districts of Rungpore and Dinagepore, as well as of Julpigoree, Goalpara, and parts of Assam. They are also found in the Dacca and Mymensingh districts. Probably then these people form the main stock of the population of North-East Bengal and Lower Assam as well as of all the lower eastern hills.”[23]   

About twenty-five years later, H.H. Risley stated that the linguistic evidence shows that at one time they extended over the whole of Assam. He writes:

“Linguistics evidence shows that at one time they extended over the whole of the present province west of Manipur and the Naga Hills, excepting only the Khasi and Jaintia Hills, which are inhabited by people speaking another language akin to the Mon-Khmer dialects of Indo-China. To the north of the Khasi Hills

: 6 :

they occupied the whole or nearly the whole of the Brahmaputra valley. To the west they made the Garo Hills their own. To the south they extended over the plains of Cachar, and further, over the present state of Hill Tippera.”[24]

Dr. Suniti Kumar Chatterji has identified certain tracts where, he conjectures, Bodo was spoken about 1000 years ago. He delivered a series of lectures on 21^st, 22^nd and 23^rd November 1947 at Jorhat, Assam, which became the nucleus of his work called Kirata-jana-Kriti. Now if we deduct 1000 years from the year 1947 A.D. we get approximately 947 A.D.  So during 947 A.D. Bodo was spoken not only in Brahmaputra valley but in almost all the districts of Eastern Bengal-Pakistan-Bangladesh. Regarding the wide extension of Bodo language Dr. Chatterji writes thus:

“Judging from the wide range of extension of their language, the Boḍos appear first to have settled over the entire Brahmaputra valley, and extended west into North Bengal (in Koch Bihar, Rangpur and Dinajpur districts); they may have pushed into North Bihar also, and the Indo-Mongoloids who penetrated into North Bihar might equally have been either Bodos or ‘Himalayan’ tribes allied to the Newars. They skirted the southern bend of the Brahmaputra and occupied the Garo Hills, where, as Garos, they form a bloc of Boḍo speech. South of the Garo Hills they spread in northern Mymensing, where the semi-Bengalised Haijong tribe is of Boḍo origin. From Nowgong district in Assam their area of occupation extended to Cachar district (particularly in the North Cachar Hills) and into Sylhet, and from Cachar and Sylhet they moved further to the south, to Tripurā State, where there is still a Boḍo-speeking bloc in the shape of the Tipra tribe which founded the State; and from Tripurā they spread into Comilla and possibly Noakhali districts: and thus they occupied the mouths of the Ganges by the eastern sea.”[25]

Bodo Influence

There is a great reason to believe that Bodo was at one time widely spoken over a great portion of the Brahmaputra Valley, as well as in the adjoining districts of north-east Bengal.[26]  Thus said Endle about the influence of Bodo …“ the names of many of the principal rivers of Assam begin with the syllable, “Di,” which is perhaps the Kachári (Bodo) word (“dŭі,” “dі”) for “water,” e.g., Dі-hong, Dі-bong, Dі-bru, Dі-hing, Dі-sáng, Dі-khu, Dі-soi, Dі-ju, Dі-mu, Dі-mangal, Dі-krang, Dі-kurai, Dі-puta, Dі-má gasum (“black water”), Dі-ang, &c., (cf. Dimápur – Dŭіmápúr, e.g., River-town, the old Kachári capital on the Dhansiri River).”[27] This has also been corroborated by the famous historian of Assam named Sir Edward Albert Gait who wrote thus: “The wide extent and long duration of Bodo domination is shown by the frequent

: 7 :

occurrence of the prefix di or ti, the Bodo word for water, in the river names of the Brahmaputra valley and the adjoining country to the west, e.g., Dibru, Dikhu, Dihing, Dibong, Disang, Diphang, Dimla, etc. In some cases the old name is disappearing – the Dichu river, for instance, is now better known as the Jaldhāka – while in others it has already gone, as in the case of Brahmaputra, which in the early days of Ahom rule was known as the Ti-lao.”[28]

Dr. Praphulladatta Goswami has also acknowledged the influence of Bodo on Assamese. He found Kachari or Bodo substratum in Assamese language and states that a number of words of a domestic type and even verb roots have come from Kachari or Bodo. He opines that the Kacharis or Bodos have even indirectly contributed to Assamese culture. The first important work of early Assamese literature is the translation of the Ramayana and the translator Madhava Kandali records: I have made – that everyone might understand – the sweet verses of the Ramayana at the request of King Mahamanikya.”[29] Mahamanikya was a Bodo king belonging to the second half of the 14^th century. This is one of the instances to state that Bodo kings took keen interest to develop Assamese language. Had King Mahamanikhya not patronized translation of the Ramayana then today’s Assamese scholars could not have possessed such early Assamese literature.

 Modern Assamese people brag of their rich literature and refer to the 13^th century A.D. as the beginning of Assamese literature. They however forget the hands of Bodo rulers behind the development of Assamese language. It was the Bodo ruler of Kamatapur in West Assam under whose instance Hema Saraswati composed “his Bhāgavata Purāṇa story of Prahlāda in Assamese verse.”[30]

Plight of Bodo till 1952

The Bodos suffered much from external pressure like the Ahoms who came from the east and occupied the Brahmaputra valley and ruled it for centuries till the British annexed it. Risley says:

“The Bodo country was also invaded from the south, and this within the last two centuries…But the most important invasion was that of Aryan culture from the west. With its language it has occupied the plains of Dacca, Sylhet, and Cachar, so that the Bodos of the Garo Hills are now separated from their kinsmen of Hill Tippera by a wide tract filled with a population speaking an Aryan language. So, too, with the valley of the Brahmaputra. It is almost completely Aryanised, and the old Bodo languages are gradually dying out.”[31]

: 8 :

The Bodos confronted Aryan invasion, colonization, and above all, movement for assimilation in Assamese culture by Sankardev, the greatest religious reformer of Assam. In course of time a great many Bodos became ashamed of their own language, and used it less and finally stopped passing their language to their children which caused a great decline in number of Bodo speakers.

The impact of the Aryan culture had been so much so that the Bodos completely abandoned their original tongue in some tracts of the Bodo country. As for example, the Bodo-Kachari kings of Cachar like Ramchandradhwaj Narayan, Surdarpa Narayan, Krishnachandra Narayan and Govindachandra Narayan became experts in Bengali language that they began composing verses in Bengali language.[32]  The ancient Bodo Kingdom of Cooch Behar claimed Bengali as its language abandoning its proper tongue. “In Kamrup and Goalpara, the former head-quarters of the Kingdom of Kamrup, the speakers of the Aryan Assamese and Bengali are counted by hundreds, while those of Bodo are counted by tens.”[33] 

Disappearance of Bodo language was becoming imminent. Having acutely observed this trend among the Bodo speakers, the famous Assam historian Sir Edward Albert Gait in 1906 had prophesied: “The Bodo dialects, though still spoken in Assam by more than half a million persons, are in their turn giving way to Aryan languages (Assamese and Bengali), and their complete disappearance is only a matter of time.”[34]

Emergence of Bodo as a distinct Language

From such a deplorable state and despite having lack of script, written language and literature, transmission of Bodo language continued from children to grandchildren in a number of domains.  Bodo language emerged as a distinct language from the middle of the 20^th century when a pioneering effort in preserving Bodo and popularizing the Bodo literature was stamped by forming Bodo Sahitya Sabha on 16 November 1952, the biggest literary body of the Bodos in Eastern India. In fact, this organization has been playing a crucial role in coordinating effort of the Bodo poets, scholars and authors. They hold an Annual Conference every year, with pomp which is attended by numerous big and small Bodo literary organizations, from both far and near.  A highpoint in the history of the Bodo language is the socio-political movement that was launched by Bodo organizations since the second half of the last century onwards. It was due to their relentless effort that this language was finally introduced as the medium of instruction in the primary schools in Bodo dominated areas in 1963.

: 9 :

Bodo is now one of the famous languages of Northeast India. It has become one of the official languages of the Indian state of Assam.  Bodo is a Tibeto-Burman language spoken by the Bodo people of West Bengal, Tripura, Nepal and Bangladesh, apart from Indian state of Assam. It is one of the 22 languages recognized by the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution of India. Bodo language is enriched inherently. It is regarded a substantial language of the Bodo group under the Assam-Burmese group of languages. There are no records indicating the origin of Bodo language. However, it is known to be a branch of the Sino-Tibetan family of languages. The language also bears a close links with the Dimasa language of Assam and the Garo language of Meghalaya. Bodo is further regarded as a closely related language of Kokborok language spoken in Tripura. Bodo language is officially scripted employing Devanagari script, although it also has a prolonged history of utilizing the Roman Script. Some researchers also are of the view that the language originally made use of a now-lost Script called Deodhai.     

Today Bodo is at par with Assamese in terms of constitutional status. Once the Bodo children were taught through Assamese medium why not then Assamese children are taught now through Bodo medium? While studying in Assamese medium schools Bodo children retained their own tongue, with certain exception, similarly, Assamese children can study in Bodo medium schools and at the same time retain their tongue. After all Bodo is now a language of the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution of India. Long before the present status of Bodo, Upendra Nath Brahma (now fondly and popularly called Bodofa) foresaw importance of Bodo. That is why in 1987 he urged the Assamese people to read, speak Bodo and accept it as link language. Thus he said:

 “…the Bodos the Kacharis – the original master ruler of Assam whose language is the most aboriginal and widespread in Assam can also ask – why not the Assamese people read, speak and accept Bodo as a whole for a link language and for the integrity of Assam? Will the Assamese agree?”[35]     

I wonder in awe and amazement that despite the onslaught of the Aryan language and Indo-Aryan languages in the past, our Bodo language has managed to stay alive. Though the Bodo language was unwritten, without a script and without recorded literature, it has survived the ravages of time. Imagine how great and wonderful it is to know that Bodo language still exists in the world to this day and age. Today Bodo is a language of literature and a language of Bodoland.

: 10 :

REFERENCES

---

[1] Robert Shafer, “Classification of the Northernmost Naga Languages”, Journal of the Bihar Research Society, Vol. XXXIX, September 1953, Part III, pp. 225-226.

[2] K.L. Barua, ‘Prehistoric Culture in Assam’, in The Journal of the Assam Research Society, Vol. VII, July 1939, No. 2, p.38.

[3] F.E. Pargiter, The Markandeya Purana. Translated with Notes, 1904, p.328.

[4] F.E. Pargiter, The Markandeya Purana, Translated with Notes, 1904, p.328

[5] Dr. T.C. Sharma, “The Culture and Civilization of Assam” in Nagen Saikia, ed. Assam and the Assamese Mind, 1980, pp. 15-16.

[6] Dr. Suniti Kumar Chatterji, The Place of Assam in the History and Civilization of India, 1955, p.18

[7] B.C. Allen, Assam District Gazetteer, Vol. III, 1905, p. 46

[8] J.N. Farquhar, Modern Religious Movement in India, 1915, p. 134

[9] J.N. Farquhar, Modern Religious Movement in India, 1915, p. 134

[10] Rev. S. Endle, The Kacharis, 1911, Appendix-I p. 81.

[11] N.N. Vasu, The Social History of Kamarupa, Vol. II, Reprint 1983, p.157

[12] Rev. S. Endle, Outline Grammar of the Kachari (Bara) Language, 1884, p. vi.

[13] B.H. Hodgson, ‘On the Origin, Location, Numbers, Creed, Customs, Character and Condition of the Koch, Bodo and Dhimal People with a general description of the Climate they dwell in,’ Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1849, Vol. XVIII, pp. 702-747.

[14] Report on the Census of Assam, 1881, p.63.

[15] Scott Delancy, On the Origins of Bodo-Garo. Available at http://www.academia.edu/226363/On_the_Origins_of_Bodo-Garo

[16] www.ohll.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/pages/documents.../francois-jacquesson-2.ppt

[17] Robert Shafer, ‘Classification of the Northernmost Naga Languages’, in the Journal of the Bihar Research Socieyt, Vol. XXXIX, September 1953, Part III, p. 225.

[18] Robert Shafer, JBRS, Vol. 39,  1953, Part III, p.226

[19] Ibid.

[20] Robert Shafer, Ethnography of Ancient India, 1954, p.14.

[21] Robert Shafer, JBRS, Vol. 39,  1953, Part III, p.226

[22] Suniti Kumar Chatterji, ‘Adivasi Languages and Literatures of India’, in The Cultural Heritage of India, Vol. V, 2^nd  Edition, 1978, p.667.

[23] G. Campbell, Specimens of Languages of India, 1874, p.3.

[24] H.H. Risley, Census of India 1901, Vol. I, India, Part-I – Report, p.263

[25] Dr. Suniti Kumar Chatterji, Kirāta-Jana-Kŗti, The Indo-Mongoloids their contribution to the history and culture of India, Reprinted in April 1998, p. 46

[26] Rev. S. Endle, Outline Grammar of the Kachári (Båṛå) Language as spoken in District Darrang, Assam, 1884, p.iii.

[27] Rev. S. Endle, Outline Grammar of the Kachári (Båṛå) Language, 1884, Preface, iv.

[28] E.A. Gait, A History of Assam, 1906, p.5

[29] Dr. Praphulladatta Goswami in his Introduction to the book Boro Kacharis Janashitya written by Bhavendra Narzy, 1957, pp.2-4.

[30] Suniti Kumar Chatterji, The Place of Assam in the History and Civilisation of India, 1955, p.65.

[31] H.H. Risley, Census of India 1901, Vol. I, India, Part-I – Report, p.264

[32] Manicharan Barman, Hoirimba Bhasa Prabesh, 1320 B.S. pp. ১৷৷৵-১৸৴৹

[33] H.H. Risley, Census of India 1901, Vol. I, India, Part-I – Report, p.264

[34] E.A. Gait, A History of Assam, 1906, p.6

[35] U.N. Brahma, Why Separate State, 1987, pp.31-32