For years, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) electoral strategy in Jharkhand has centred on pitting the tribals who follow Sarna (an indigenous religion that worships nature) against the Christian tribals. But since the last few months, the battle for Jharkhand’s vote has taken on a different tone. The ‘enemy’ is no longer the Christian tribals, but Muslims – many of whom have lived in the state for generations – over whom now hangs the suspicion of being ‘Bangladeshi infiltrators’.
As the Assembly Elections inch closer, the narrative of ‘Bangladeshi infiltration’ has begun to ripple through Jharkhand, pushed to the fore by the BJP, the largest opposition party in the state.
The narrative is neither new nor original—the BJP has used similar communal tactics in states like Assam and West Bengal to make electoral gains. The refrain of ‘illegal migration’ that gained currency in 2019 during discussions on the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) was heard in Jharkhand too, especially in the northeastern Santhal Pargana division. Yet, its percolation among the masses in other parts of the state is fairly recent, with many having heard of it only a month or two ago.
TNM spoke to several residents in Ranchi and Lohardaga districts, most of whom confirmed that they started hearing about ‘illegal Bangladeshis’ only recently. This was the result of the BJP’s aggressive campaign raising the slogan "Roti, Beti, aur Mati" (food, daughters, and land). The party succeeded to some extent in painting Muslims as those taking away resources, marrying non-Muslim women for property, and grabbing land from the rightful owners. The narrative has sparked unease and reshaped community dynamics ahead of the polls, which will be held in two phases on November 13 and 20.
In the 2019 Jharkhand Assembly elections, the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) formed an alliance with the Congress and the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), winning 47 of the 81 seats (30, 16, and 1 respectively). The BJP, which had won the elections in the previous term, secured 25 seats in 2019. The JMM formed the government led by Chief Minister Hemant Soren.
However, JMM secured only three seats in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, while the BJP won eight. It is interesting to note that despite its high-profile campaigns, the BJP lost all five constituencies in Jharkhand that have significant tribal populations.
‘Sarna is not part of Hinduism’
The disillusionment of the tribal voters with the BJP's brand of politics is owed to a number of reasons that are not exclusive to each other.
In December 2023, the Janjati Suraksha Manch (JSM), affiliated to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)-backed Vanvasi Kalyan Kendra, held a massive ‘Delisting Rally’ at Morabadi Ground in Ranchi, calling for the delisting of tribals who had converted to Christianity or Islam from the Scheduled Tribes (ST) list.
In response, an Adivasi Ekta Maha Rally was organised at the same venue two months later, in February 2024, with the participation of representatives from various tribal organisations across the state. The rallygoers demanded a Sarna religious code and raised slogans emphasising Adivasi unity against religious division. This unity was evident in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections in Jharkhand's tribal belt.
The five constituencies with a significant tribal population where the BJP faced defeat in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections include Khunti, Lohardaga, Chaibasa, Rajmahal, and Dumka. This is despite the fact that Jharkhand witnessed extensive campaigning by BJP’s top brass, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Union Home Minister Amit Shah, and Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma.
“Each time the BJP has gained traction in Jharkhand, it was by creating divisions between Sarna practitioners and Christian tribals. The party told voters that those who converted to Christianity were enjoying undue benefits owing to their educational advantage,” says Habil Hemarom, a retired CBI officer-turned-Congress-worker from Ranchi.
The BJP’s strategy of exploiting the Sarna-Christian divide worked in some areas for several years, but it ultimately lost traction.
“Sarnas were told that they are part of Hindu traditions and Sanatana Dharma. There were even attempts to replace the red and white striped Sarna flags with saffron Hanuman flags in villages. The move was resisted by the residents in several places, and they reinstated their Sarna flags. The demand for a Sarna religious code was also opposed by the BJP,” explains Tom Kavala, a social worker who leads the civil society movement Loktantra Bachao Abhiyan.
Birthing a new, common ‘enemy’
In a bid to regain its hold on Sarna voters, the BJP introduced the slogan “Roti, Beti, aur Mati” (food, daughters, and land) for the upcoming Assembly elections in Jharkhand, countering the “Jal, Jamin, Jangal” (water, land, forest) of JMM-Congress. On November 4, addressing a rally in Chaibasa town in West Singhbhum district, PM Modi echoed this slogan, declaring, “The call for roti, beti, aur mati will resonate across Jharkhand under the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government.” He alleged, “Infiltrators are a major vote bank for the JMM-Congress-RJD coalition.”
With the BJP characterising Muslims as ‘infiltrators’, a previously absent unity has formed between Sarnas and Christians, social workers and political analysts tell TNM.
It was while campaigning for the general elections in Bokaro district in May this year that Assam Chief Minister and BJP leader Himanta Biswa Sarma first painted the image of Muslim citizens as ‘infiltrators’. Even though his primary ammunition was “conversions to Christianity,” stating, “We need 400 seats to shut down the ‘marriage shops’,” he claimed that “illegal migration of Bangladeshi Muslims,” seen in Assam and West Bengal before, had now spread to Jharkhand.
It is Chief Minister Himanta who oversees the BJP’s campaign efforts in the state ahead of the Assembly elections.
On July 25, BJP MP from Jharkhand Nishikant Dubey stated in the Lok Sabha that the state's tribal population was declining due to "illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.” He went so far as to propose that parts of Jharkhand, along with West Bengal’s Murshidabad and Malda districts, and Bihar’s Kishanganj and Katihar, be declared a Union Territory to tackle ‘infiltration’.
“They say the Muslim population is growing, so illegal immigration must be happening,” is how Bidesh Kumar tries to rationalise the narrative. A shop owner from Ranchi, who is an avid supporter of Modi and the BJP, Bidesh asserts, “This time, the BJP will come to power for sure,” his confidence most likely stemming from the traction that the saffron party’s communal narrative has received.
However, he acknowledges that many of the Muslims he is acquainted with have lived in the state for generations. “I’ve known some of them since childhood. But now I hear that Muslims are causing problems. I’ve been hearing this for about three months now.”
Who are the Muslims of Jharkhand?
The region that forms modern-day Jharkhand has had Muslim inhabitants for several centuries, according to recorded history. Muslims in Chota Nagpur (spread over Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Odisha, West Bengal, and Bihar) have been integrated with tribal communities for over 800 years, writes former Bihar governor (1952-1957) RR Diwakar in his book Bihar Through the Ages (1959).
Journalist and author Abhik Bhattacharya references the book in a research paper, which states that Muslim Gowala families have resided in Gowalatoli, Doranda, a predominantly Muslim area in Ranchi, for over 200 years. The paper also notes that approximately seven lakh Moolvasi Muslims supported the Jharkhand Movement and the formation of the Adivasi Mahasabha in the early decades of the 20th century. Moolvasis are non-Adivasi communities who share cultural traits and indigenous roots with Adivasis but are not officially recognised as tribes.
Apart from that, members of communities such as Shershabadi and Pasmanda Muslims call Jharkhand their home. Many of the Pasmanda Muslims are from West Bengal, says Tom Kavala. The Shershabadis of Santhal Pargana division are among the worst affected by the ‘infiltration’ theory promoted by the BJP.
There is also the presence of Bengali Muslims whose internal migrations pre-Independence and immigrations in the post-Independence period due to economic and political reasons have brought them to states neighbouring West Bengal, including Jharkhand.
The Bengali migrations
Several of the current conflicts over the citizenship of Bengali Muslims in east and North-East India started from the Boundary Commission’s “top-down partition of India [which] was unmindful of the social histories of migration in eastern India,” writes advocate Malavika Prasad in her essay “Citizenship and the Eastern Partition” in Parichay.org.
Undivided Bengal saw several instances of localised migrations in the 19th and early 20th centuries for reasons including labour movement (largely Muslim) to the British tea plantations; changes in course and flooding along the banks of the Ganga and Brahmaputra rivers; and at later points, the economic depression and the Second World War.
With partition, however, “this internal migration with a five-decade history was suddenly transformed into an international one when the eastern border was drawn,” writes Malavika. With the heavy influx of refugees, in 1958, the Congress government in West Bengal “decided it would house no more refugees in the state and forcibly moved them … to camps in lands outside the state," including Jharkhand.
Article 6 of the Constitution of India lays out the conditions under which a person who migrated to India from Pakistan (including East Pakistan, i.e., present-day Bangladesh). As Malavika explains, “If they came to India before July 19, 1948, they had to have resided in India since their arrival to establish an intention to be an Indian citizen.” Those who came to India after July 19, 1948, but before January 26, 1950, could register as a citizen after a minimum of six months’ stay in India.
The threat looming over Santhal Pargana
On October 28, Assam CM Himanta stated that Santhal Pargana would “soon turn into a mini Bangladesh.” However, census data tells a different story. In 1951, Santhal Pargana had a 46.8% tribal population, 9.44% Muslims, and 43.5% Hindus. By 2011, the tribal population had declined to 28.11%, while Muslims rose to 22.73% and Hindus to 49%. From 1951 to 2011, the Hindu population grew by 24 lakh, the Muslim population by 13.6 lakh, and the tribal population by 8.7 lakh.
The large Muslim community in Santhal Pargana division, which consists of six districts including Pakur and Sahibganj, are Shershabadi Muslims, who have resided in the region for over a century. MP Nishikanth’s call for the formation of a Union Territory to tackle ‘illegal migration’ included both Pakur and Sahibganj.
Historically, Shershabadi Muslims are said to have been settled along the banks of the Ganges since the Mughal era, from where they moved to areas including Santhal Pargana. The division shares borders with West Bengal and was one of the regions that BJP leaders vehemently targeted both when the CAA was passed in 2019 and its Rules notified in 2024.
A March 2024 report in Outlook magazine quotes Mohammad Iqbal of the All Jharkhand Shershahbadia Association as saying that the Shershabadi Muslims of Pakur and Sahibganj live in fear, as they expect the implementation of CAA to be followed by the National Registry of Citizens (NRC). He says that their fear is “natural,” as “The district administration of Sahibganj and Pakur does not consider their documents as valid … BJP ministers and leaders have so extensively raised the issue of infiltration in Santhal Pargana that the administration has ceased issuing receipts for the homes and lands of Shershahbadia Muslims for the past three years. Furthermore, the issuance of caste certificates for Shershahbadia Muslims under the OBC category have also been halted since 2012.”
A fact-finding report by the civil society movements Jharkhand Janadhikar Mahasabha and Loktantra Bachao Abhiyan states that amid political pressure and cases in the Jharkhand High Court, several districts of Santhal Pargana have issued phone numbers for the public to report on any suspected ‘Bangladeshi infiltrators’.
“This is extremely dangerous, as it creates an atmosphere of suspicion where people can lodge complaints accusing others of being ‘Bangladeshi infiltrators’. Given that there is no ground evidence of infiltrators and the administration itself claims there are none in the region, issuing such numbers raises serious concerns about the possibility of harassing local Muslims,” Tom Kavala adds.
The oldest trick in the book: Oppose interfaith marriages
In what was likely a bid to regain its hold on Sarna voters, the BJP shifted its strategy away from the ‘Sarna-Christian’ divide to the ‘threat of infiltration’. To this end, the BJP turned to interfaith marriages in the state, specifically Muslim men married to tribal women, the betis in their slogan. At his election rally in Chaibasa, Prime Minister Modi made a rather pointed remark. "Infiltrators deceive and target tribal daughters. They marry them, seize their land, and rob you of your daughters, food, and land. Once the BJP government is in power, we will put an end to infiltration,” he said.
BJP leaders in Jharkhand came up with a more specific allegation, which too was later disproved by fact-finders.
In his speech in the Lok Sabha on July 25, BJP MP from Jharkhand Nishikant Dubey claimed that about 100 panchayat heads in Jharkhand were Adivasi women married to Muslim men, attributing a 10% decline in the tribal population to such marriages, and called for the implementation of NRC.
On July 28, BJP leader and National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) member Asha Lakra held a press conference in Ranchi, claiming that "Bangladeshi infiltrators and Rohingya Muslims” were marrying tribal women to acquire land. Lakra released a list of 10 elected Adivasi women representatives across nine panchayats in Sahibganj, who she alleged had married Muslim men. However, a report by The Scroll, which interviewed these women, found that only six of them were married to Muslims. All six reportedly said they married for love, with many having been married for several years.
The fact-finding team from Jharkhand Janadhikar Mahasabha and Loktantra Bachao Abhiyan also visited several families on the list, disproving BJP's claims.
Unsurprisingly, the reports did not deter the BJP leaders, who continued to stoke communal flames. Of the three electoral promises that Chief Minister Himanta made on October 28, two were on ‘tackling’ the issue of ‘immigrant’ Muslim men marrying tribal women. He said, “We will implement NRC to identify and remove infiltrators. Secondly, if an immigrant has married a tribal woman, their children will not be eligible for benefits granted to members of the ST community. Finally, we will prevent any immigrant married to a tribal woman from holding positions of power within the tribe, as this grants undue influence to the immigrant.”
Pakur-based social activist Priyasheela Besra points out that while interfaith marriages are common in the Santhal region, what is starkly evident is that the BJP and RSS have trained their guns only at Muslim men married to tribal and/or Hindu women.
The provocative claims made by Kripa Prasad Singh, an RSS leader and head of the Vanvasi Kalyan Kendra in Lohardaga, are proof. Speaking to TNM, he said, “In tribal villages, 50% of the population is now Muslim. Hindu widows are lured by Muslim men, while tribal men often struggle with alcohol addiction, making Hindu women more attracted to Muslim men. These men marry tribals, convert them, and buy land in their names.” Kripa Prasad appears to have used ‘Hindu’ and ‘tribal’ as meaning the same thing.
“Many tribals marry outside their community, including Hindus, Christians, and Muslims. Why are only those married to Muslims being targeted?” asks Priyasheela. She also explains why BJP's claim of Muslim men marrying tribal women to gain land is unfounded: “In Jharkhand, women do not inherit land from their fathers, so the claim of marriage for land is baseless.”
It was not only interfaith marriages, but other interactions between Muslim men and tribal and/or Hindu women too came to be viewed with suspicion.
Almost a week before MP Nishikanth’s parliament speech, on July 19, he and party state president Babulal Marandi alleged on social media that ‘Muslim Bangladeshi infiltrators’ from Ilami village in Taranagar panchayat, Pakur, had attacked Hindus, causing some to flee. They also alleged that a minor Muslim boy had blackmailed a minor Hindu girl and that when Hindus protested, they faced retaliatory violence.
The day before they aired the allegations, a 17-year-old Muslim boy from Ilami village was brutally assaulted by a group of Hindu men who accused him of threatening a minor Hindu girl. He had allegedly added his photo to a Facebook reel featuring a minor Hindu girl from Ullupada village and posted it publicly.
The boy was tied to an electric pole and beaten by the Hindu mob. His mother, who tried to intervene, was severely assaulted and had to be hospitalised. A rumour soon spread that the mother had died, sparking communal clashes in Taranagar panchayat, with Muslim youth from nearby areas attacking shops and destroying property owned by Hindu residents.
The fact-finding team reviewed the video that led to the violence and found that a seemingly insignificant event had been blown out of proportion.
Crying ‘land jihad’ over a local dispute
The BJP’s use of the ‘infiltration’ theory before the Assam Chief Minister’s communally charged speech in Bokaro wasn’t as organised as it is now.
The fire started by Chief Minister Himanta was further fed on July 19, when Jharkhand BJP president Babulal Marandi and other party leaders posted a video on X (formerly Twitter), alleging that ‘Bangladeshi infiltrators’ were engaged in ‘land jihad’ to take over tribal lands, their matis, in Gayabthaan village of Maheshpur block, Pakur district.
Fact-finding efforts by the civil society movements found that the BJP, eager to capitalise on religious differences, had given a communal tint to what was a minor local land dispute. For better context, it is important to understand the laws governing the sale and/or transfer of tribal land.
The Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act (SPTA) states that tribal land is non-transferable and can only be inherited within families. Despite this, an informal system has allowed land transfers to non-tribals through unofficial deeds and financial exchanges for decades. Many from Bihar, West Bengal, and neighbouring districts in Jharkhand have acquired land in this manner. The official records, called khatiyan, would still list the original tribal landholders as the owners.
The incident in Gayabthaan village was a dispute between two residents, Parmeshwar Hembram and Safaruddin Ansari. Safaruddin had purchased the land from Parmeshwar in 1997 through an informal agreement. Conflict arose when Parmeshwar’s heir’s contested the sale and demanded the land back. This led to a violent confrontation, with three Muslims arrested and some of Parmeshwar’s family members hospitalised.
The fact-finding report notes, "Several prominent state and central BJP leaders visited Gayabthaan and attempted to communalise the issue, even providing financial assistance to the affected [tribal] family."
Following this, the Tribal Students' Union planned a rally on July 27 in Pakur against the assault on a tribal family and the related land dispute. However, a day before the rally was to be held, the police clashed with students at KKM College in Pakur, claiming that a missing minor girl’s mobile phone location had been traced near the college hostel. The altercation escalated, and riot police entered the hostels, injuring several students.
The police’s clash with the students was later projected by the BJP as an attempt to suppress student protests against ‘Bangladeshi infiltrators’.
The students filed a complaint against the police, alleging that the police threatened them, saying, “How dare you oppose Bangladeshi Muslim infiltrators?” However, the fact-finding team states, "When questioned, no student confirmed hearing this [threat] personally." The mention of ‘Bangladeshi Muslim infiltrators’ in the complaint remains unexplained.
Priyasheela Besra tells TNM, “Local disputes have been woven together into a larger narrative now. But if you ask those directly involved, they would have no understanding of ‘Bangladeshi infiltrators’. They only know that the Muslim community has been here for generations.”
Despite this, Muslims in Ranchi now experience a sense of insecurity. Salim Ansari, who runs a small tea shop near Konka Road, tells TNM, “My family has lived here for generations. Now, suddenly, they call us infiltrators.” Voicing the concerns he shares with other Muslim traders in the area, he asks, “What if they come tomorrow and ask us to leave, saying we’re Bangladeshis? How do we prove it if they claim our documents are fake?”