The teaser of Razakar – Silent Genocide of Hyderabad, a movie purported to bring out the historic realities of Nizam rule in Telangana just before and after Indian independence, was released in September. The teaser claims that the Nizam’s aim was to make Hyderabad an independent Islamic state and a silent genocide was committed on the Hindu population of Hyderabad state.
The Nizam’s ruling structure, nearly static since inception, was headed by the Nizam. Below him were the Muslim nobility in the court. Below them were a huge retinue, mostly Hindus, helping the Nizam in administering the countryside.
Out of 53 million acres of land, 10% was the fiefdom of the Nizam, 30% was with nobles and landlords, and the rest was under government land revenue. In addition to back-breaking taxes, all methods were used to exploit the peasantry. Accentuating these problems are the religious and linguist differences between the ruled and the ruler – acutely felt by the urban elite.
Thus while the regime was patently pro-Muslim, the rural set up was bolstered by Hindu upper castes thus it was not an Islamic theocratic state. Within the feudal set up that the Nizam was presiding over, there is evidence to show that the Nizam was syncretic as he gave grants to temples and educational institutions, and for promoting works not limited to Islam. This was further strengthened as the Nizam banned cow slaughter in public places in 1923.
By 1946, with the imminent departure of the British, chaos set in and Hyderabad became a power keg. The Nizam wanted to cling to power, come what may. As the Nizam’s army was weak and police inadequate and corrupt, he encouraged a Muslim extremist organisation, Majlis-E-Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM). Under the militant presidentship of Kasim Razvi, its militia swelled to around 200,000 – propped by the inflow of Muslims from within and outside Hyderabad state. They were joined by militia of the rural gentry, who were mostly Hindu, and some lower caste Hindus badly impacted by caste and economic oppression. Thus while it was a predominantly Muslim force, it had some Hindus.
The Arya Samaj and Hindu Mahasabha were active in Hyderabad, and in Marathi- and Kannada-speaking areas. They trained cadre within the state and also outside, and focused narrowly on shuddi (religious reconversion) and Hindu rights. As per Padmaja Naidu, as quoted in Lucien D Benichou’s From Autocracy To Integration, communal tensions arose owing to the competitive conversions by the Arya Samaj and Muslim organisations. She further says that the Congress was a divided house, with most conservatives supporting communal elements. Sporadic satyagraha calls from the Congress also unnerved the Nizam.
In parallel, the Andhra Maha Sabha and Communist led resistance of common people in rural areas of Telangana, especially in the districts of Warangal, Nalgonda and Khammam. By September 1948, in about 3,000 villages landlords were driven out and self rule was set up by the poor and around 10 lakh acres of land distributed to people. However, no such resistance movements were noticed in the Karnataka and Marathwada areas.
K. M. Munshi, in his book The End of an Era, writes that between October 1947 and April 1948, Razakars (a paramilitary force) committed 260 events of brutality but does not elaborate further. A white paper published by the Government of India in 1948 describes 53 events of Razakar atrocities in four districts of Marathwada. As per author’s assessment, in the 53 events around 200 deaths occurred, probably 20 rapes were committed (may be an underestimate as rapes are not stated easily), and around 50 incidents of loot happened of which around 30 were against the rich like moneylenders, business people or village heads. If one extends the same proportion to the 260 events, probable deaths would be around 980. The Hindu cites one report to say Razakars were responsible for the murder of 880 people and the rape of about 1,125 women before August 1948.
The situation in areas under the control of communists was entirely different, as people resisted and replied to the Razakars in the same coin. It is estimated that 2,000 communist militants laid down their lives, but killed a similar number in retaliation.
A few events, originally written about by Munshi and reported in various other fora, need to be discussed to understand the nature of Razakar atrocities. The first is the brutal murder of Shoebullah Khan, a journalist. His only crime was he was advocating for the merger of Hyderabad into India. His murder showed that all opponents were killed, religious affiliation did not matter.
Another more brutal event was the murder of 200 people in Gorata B village in Basavakalyan in Karnataka. According to Munshi, this was the chain of events, “On January 29, the Minister Venkatarao, leader of the Ittehad Harijans, made a vicious attack in an open conference on the Brahmans, Banias and Lingayats …He declared that the Lingayats were the arch criminals …miseries of the depressed classes and he therefore exhorted his people to exterminate them.” Munshi indicates that Muslims did attack, but had some backing from others.
Another event was in Bairanpalli village in Telangana where more than half a dozen attacks of Razakars and police to reinstate the local landlords were rebuffed by the villagers. Finally, the Nizam’s military was deployed leading to the death of 88 people. Hindus were killed to bring back Hindu landlords – not a communal genocide.
From the above, it can be seen that in addition to religion there were other proximate causes for violence. Reinstatement of the local landlords is the most important reason in Telangana.
During and immediately after the police action, around 25,000-30,000 Muslims were killed, according to the Sundarlal committee. It also noted that at many places, army and police personnel took active part in perpetuating the violence. The report also states that violence was also perpetuated by men from a communal organisation from Solapur. Between 1948 and ’51, 2,000 communists were killed by the Indian Army with the help of local landlords – thus reinstating them in their villages.
The above narrative affirms there was violence and mayhem, but it was not a genocide of a particular religious community. Till 1947, Asaf Jahis (the ruling dynasty) not only did not show any streak of religious extremism, but even co-opted the Hindu rural gentry to exploit the poor and the meek. Events after 1947 also show how the Razakars, while using religious slogans to mobilise, were undertaking a secular activity of amassing wealth or reinstating the Hindu landlords to their lands. Thus a Hindu genocide was never the intention nor the purpose of the violence, but the rhetoric was communal.
Regarding the setting up of an Islamic republic, Asaf Jahis never showed this intent in their 225 years of rule. They always had fair-weather friends from all faiths. Even in 1947, the Nizam was more worried about his kingdom and not what happens to Islam or to other Muslims.
Thus the film title Razakar – Silent Genocide of Hyderabad and the assertions in the teaser are a distortion of history. But in these days of lies and half-truths, facts don’t matter. As a Telugu saying goes, it is an “attempt to collect money on dead bodies”.
M. Ravibabu is a retired civil servant and co-founder of Anekdhara – a public policy forum.
