कहानी संग्रह “ये टेढ़े मेढ़े रास्ते” की एक कहानी “जो घर जारे अपना…….” की कुछ पंक्तियाँ
हमारे हिंदी कोर्स में मध्य कालीन कवियों की रचनाएं भी थीं और हिंदी अध्यापक को कबीर दास से कुछ विशेष प्रेम था। उनका वश चलता तो सबको कबीर पंथी बना देते। एक दिन उन्होंने क्लास में एक दोहा पढ़ाः
‘कबिरा खड़ा बाजार में लिए लुकाठी हाथ,
जो घर जारे आपना, चले हमारे साथ।’
फिर सबको ललकारा, “कौन इस दोहे का अर्थ बतायेगा?” पढ़ने में तेज विनोद ने तुरंत हाथ उठाया। वे मेरे से आगे वाली सीट पर बैठे थे। मेरे लिए कबीर दास को समझना कम-से-कम इस जन्म में तो असंभव था। विनोद की पीठ के पीछे छिपते हुए सिर झुका कर इष्टदेव से प्रार्थना करने लगा कि सर विनोद से ही पूछ कर काम चला लें।
लेकिन इष्टदेव ने भला मेरी प्रार्थना कब सुनी है? पता नहीं, ‘सर’ को विनोद का उठा हुआ हाथ दिखा या नहीं, डेस्क में गड़ा मेरा सिर जरूर दिख गया। जोर से डाँटते हुए पूछा, “इस दोहे में ऐसा क्या है जो इस तरह सिर झुका रखा है?”
सिर झुकाना ही मेरी मुसीबत का कारण बन गया। वैसे अब तो लगता है कि सिर उठाने से और भी ज्यादा मुसीबत होती है। खैर, उस समय चुप रहना ही ठीक लगा। ‘सर’ ने फिर डपटा। कुछ उपाय नहीं देख कर मैंने मौलिकता का सहारा लिया, “सर, इस दोहे में कुछ छपाई की अशुद्धि लगती है। शायद दूसरी पंक्ति होगी ‘जो घर जारे आपना, कोई न दे उसका साथ।’ कबीर दास को सिपाही पकड़ने आया होगा क्योंकि वे लुकाठी से वे अपना घर जलाने वाले थे।”
बोलते-बोलते मुझमें कुछ आत्मविश्वास भी आ गया था। लेकिन क्लास में जोरों का ठहाका लगा। गुस्से से कांपते हुए ‘सर’ मेरे पास आये और कान पकड़ कर मुझे सबके सामने खड़ा कर दिया।
“मुर्गा बनो! मुर्गा बनो! छपाई की अशुद्धि है? कबीर दास को सिपाही पकड़ने आ रहा था? यही पढ़ाई करते हो? दिन भर मुर्गा बने रहो।”
****************
“याद है, एक बार कबीर दास के एक दोहे का ‘मौलिक’ अर्थ बताने के कारण हिंदी टीचर ने तुम्हें मुर्गा बनाया था?”
”वह दिन कैसे भूल सकता हूँ? आपकी दी हुई व्याख्या भी याद है। उसी के बाद तो आप मेरे गुरु बने।”
धीरे से हँसते हुए उन्होंने कहा, “वही व्याख्या तो जिंदगी मेरी सबसे बड़ी भूल थी। अब तो तुम्हारी दी हुई व्याख्या ही ठीक लगती है। जो अपना घर जलाना चाहता है उसका साथ कोई क्यों दे? उसे तो सचमुच पकड़ कर बंद कर देना चाहिए। मैं तो औरों का भी घर जला रहा था। समाज में क्रांति का संदेश! सर्वस्व त्याग करने का साहस! क्या बचपना था। केवल साहस रखने से क्या होगा?”
मुझसे कोई जवाब नहीं बन पड़ा।
नीचे उतरने पर सरिता भाभी को आवाज दी ताकि उनसे भी विदा लूँ। उनके आने पर धीरे से कहा, “ये काफी संभल चुके हैं और समझदार भी हो गये हैं। अब कोई चिंता नहीं है।”
यह कहानी अपने समय की प्रसिद्ध पाक्षिक पत्रिका (जो कभी साप्ताहिक पत्रिका होती थी) ‘धर्मयुग’ के दिसंबर (16-31), 1993 अंक में प्रकाशित हुई थी।
पूरी कहानी मेरी पुस्तक “ये टेढ़े मेढे रास्ते” में पढ़ सकते हैं। इसमें 10 कहानियों का संग्रह है। Kindle संस्करण अमेज़न पर उपलब्ध है।
(This article was originally published on July 09,, 2016, on Google Blogger. Former Congress leader Gulam Nabi Azad’s praise of Indira Gandhi as well as Rajiv Gandhi as Prime Minister in the “aap ki Adalat” programme on India TV on April 08, 2023, prompted me to update and republish it with a new title. I was in the Government of India when they were Prime Ministers and had the opportunity to appraise some of their favourite projects. The only good thing Rajiv did was the introduction of personal computers in government departments. Otherwise, he was a disaster.)
Rajiv Gandhi, described by the congressman as a ‘man of vision’, used to come up with all sorts of bizarre ideas, and his henchmen and weak officers would use those opportunities to please him and win his favour for their personal agenda. Soon after he became Prime Minister, he sent an order to the Planning Commission that Advisors should write papers on different sectors which they will present before the MPs to educate them! The senior officers got busy preparing themselves for giving lectures to the MPs. During an informal chat, when some of them asked me whether I had prepared my lecture, I replied that I had not and would not! They looked at me in disbelief. My explanation was that in official meetings, Hon’ble MPs derived pleasure from ridiculing government officers; they would never like to be lectured by bureaucrats. As expected, we were never told when and where we had to go to give lectures to the Hon’ble MPs!
After his return from a costly holiday in Lakshadweep islands, the “visionary” Prime Minister decided that the islands should be developed as centres of tourist attraction. There was no reply to the first question, “What about the availability of water on those islands?”. The idea died of drought!
Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s most favourite sector was civil aviation. When I jokingly remarked in an informal gathering of senior officers that had Rajiv Gandhi been a bus driver, instead of a pilot, his favourite sector would have been road transport, a Secretary remarked that the country would have been better off with an ex-bus driver as Prime Minister!
One such bizarre idea given by him in 1987 was to have only an air link between the mainland of India and Port Blair, the capital of Andaman & Nicobar Islands. Most people used and even now use ships for journeys between the two destinations. Those days, there was limited air service to Port Blair.
At that time there was an organisation, headed by a Member of the Planning Commission, to overview the development of Andaman & Nicobar Islands. The Member was an eminent scientist who had earlier served as Secretary to the Government of India. As a Member of the Planning Commission, he enjoyed the status of a Minister of State. P. Shiv Shankar was The Deputy Chairman. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was of course the Chairman.
Soon after Rajiv Gandhi conveyed his brainwave to the then Civil Aviation Minister, the Ministry prepared a brief project report to entirely replace the shipping service between the mainland and Port Blair with an air service. The proposal was circulated, among others, to the Planning Commission and the Ministry of Transport, for consideration and approval. The civil aviation Ministry believed that the proposal was so attractive that no one would be able to find any fault with it.
At that time I was heading the Project Appraisal Division of the Planning Commission. The organisation set up for the development of the islands being autonomous, the project was outside my purview.
One afternoon, at a meeting held in the Yojna Bhawan under the chairmanship of the scientist Member, Secretary of the Transport Ministry ort, raised objections on the ground that the common people who constituted the majority of passengers relied on the shipping service; they would be hit hard if the shipping service was replaced by air service because they would not be able to afford high airfare and the proposal would hit the shipping industry very badly. Neither the scientist Member nor the Civil Aviation Secretary would listen to him. To resolve the differences, the Advisor in charge of the Transport Division of the Planning Commission suggested my name for an independent techno-economic appraisal. He came personally to my room to take me to the meeting. After some discussion, the two ministries agreed to an independent appraisal. At my request, the secretaries of the two departments agreed to provide all the data I needed.
Within a few days, I received a copy of the proposal and data in support as well as against the proposal. During the course of appraisal, I discovered a deliberate mistake by the Civil Aviation Ministry to prove that the project was economically viable. The proposal prepared by the Ministry had assumed that a large plane flying between, say Delhi and Calcutta (at that time this is how the West Bengal capital was known) with a full load, could also fly between Calcutta and Port Blair with a full load. It was just impossible. A large plane with a full load required a longer runway to take off and land. I had seen the Port Blair airport and had a fairly good idea of its short length. A longer runway could not be constructed without removing a hillock. On enquiry, the Ministry of Civil Aviation informed that the cost of removal of the hill was estimated at around Rs. 250 million. When I added Rs. 250 million to the capital cost, the project became economically unviable. The project was economically unviable either way: a fully loaded plane that required higher capital and operating cost or flying with reduced load and low turnover. But the cost of removal of the hill was not the only issue. Anyone familiar with the Andaman & Nicobar Islands knows how fragile the ecology of the area is. The environmentalists did not agree to the removal of the hill. And as long as there was a physical limitation on the length, the air service could not replace the shipping service.
The Transport Ministry had of course furnished data regarding the number of passengers using the shipping service every year and the facilities used by them which the air service could not provide. For example, any resident of the islands who came to the mainland would carry a large quantity of provisions on the return journey.
Anxious to know what I was going to say in my appraisal note, the scientist Member of the Planning Commission would make frequent visits to my room. He became apprehensive when he could not get any clue. One day, when I was finalising the report – writing in my long hand instead of dictating – he walked into my room and stood behind my chair to read what I was writing. This was not only embarrassing but also very irritating. How could I write when somebody was breathing down my neck? I stopped writing and got up. I requested him to wait for a couple of hours and promised to personally hand over a typed copy to him before cyclostyled copies were to others.
About 15 minutes after I had handed over a copy to him, he walked into my room again. He was unable to suppress his disappointment and anger. He asked me to immediately accompany him to the Parliament House where the then Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission & Planning Minister, P. Shiv Shankar, was sitting. During the drive, which lasted for less than 10 minutes he bombarded me with all sorts of criticisms. His main worry was that I had torpedoed Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s pet project and the Prime Minister would very angry.
In the Minister’s room, the scientist Member explained how anxious the Prime Minister was to implement the project and wanted the Minister to pull me up for writing an adverse appraisal note. I must admire the Minister. He remained calm. Instead of obliging the Member, he asked me to give my side of the story. When I explained to him the proposal as received from the Ministry of Civil Aviation, the data and methodology I had used for appraisal, and the finding based on the data and methodology fully explained in the appraisal report, he turned to the Member and told him, ‘He has done his work as an advisor. We will consider the proposal in the inter-ministerial meeting I would call shortly.’
On the way back, the great scientist did not utter a word. He was quite tense, perhaps worried about his future in the government. (Perhaps, he was very much disappointed with the Planning Minister and was worried about the loss of power, position, and perks he was enjoying as Minister of State in case he got a marching order. Perhaps, he knew that he had no future outside the government.)
The inter-ministerial meeting held after two or three days under the chairmanship of the Planning Minister was attended, among others, by the Civil Aviation Minister (a Minister of State), the scientist Member of the Planning Commission, Secretaries of the Ministries of Civil Aviation and Transport and Planning Commission and Advisor (Transport) in the Commission. By that time, all of them had read my appraisal note. The most agitated man at the meeting was the Civil Aviation Minister. He was shouting that an appraiser dared to write against the Prime Minister’s pet project.
I was sitting next to the Planning Commission Secretary. When I saw the Minister literally jumping from his seat, shouting and looking menacingly at me, I moved to another chair behind the Secretary. When the Secretary wanted to know the reason, I whispered in his ears that I had done so to avoid any physical attack. Perhaps, this was an exaggeration. The Minister could not have stooped so low. Nevertheless, the Secretary whispered in my ears that I should not worry because he was there to protect me. (CBI Director is not the only one who needs protection.)
Surprisingly, the scientist Member spoke very little. The tension on his face was visible to everybody. The Civil Aviation Secretary was also tense but there was no need for him to speak when his Minister was doing the job. The Transport Secretary was satisfied that his stand had been vindicated and said so. (After the meeting, he came to my room to thank me, which was not needed.)
(Incidentally, that Minister had become notorious for his alleged role in the 1984 riots after Indira Gandhi’s assassination and was supposed to be very close to the family.)
After listening to both sides, the Planning Minister pulled up the Civil Aviation Minister. He told the junior minister that ‘There is no need for you to get worried. Your role is over. The matter would now be discussed in the Cabinet meeting under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister. There I would explain everything to the Prime Minister.”
The project was ultimately dropped, though it was decided that gradually the frequency of air service would be increased.
Before concluding, I must say that it was one of the rare occasions when I saw a Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission, a politician, taking a firm stand before the Prime Minister. In contrast, P. Shiv Shankar’s predecessor Dr. Manmohan Singh, the economist, was unable to take any stand (https://www.devendranarain.com/dr-manmohan-sing…on-by-an-insider/ ). I must also admire the then Transport Secretary who had shown the courage to oppose the Prime Minister.
The ‘political scientist’ Member must have taken a sigh of relief when he was not sacked by the Prime Minister for not saving Prime Minister’s pet project.
The most shocking part is that such a project was the brainchild of a person who had been a professional pilot!
Devendra Narain
April 9, 2023
(If you appreciate the article, please share it with your friends
Once again the annual budget has ignored this ground reality. The government’s reluctance to mention “black money” in the economic survey or the budget is natural but that does not prevent the government from taking corrective measures to stop generation of black money.
In the absence of reliable methodology, we do not have an agreed estimate of the size of black money in India. This problem exists in the United States too. Different organizations have made different estimates of the size of black money in India, ranging between les than 20% of GDP and 75% of GDP. A related and important question is, how much black money is in cash with public?
Estimates of Black Money and cash with public in India in 2022-23
For calculation, GDP in 2022- 23 has been taken ₹286.23 crore (estimate in the economic survey 2022-23, $3.5 trillion at budget day’s exchange rate) and, , it is assumed that 9% of black money is held by public in cash (as estimated by a committee appointed in 2011 by the Central Board of Direct Taxes). (91% kept invested in assets.)
Table 1
Such wild guesses are of little use to the policymakers. However, before coming to any conclusion, let us have a look at the total amount quantum of cash – sum total of white and black – available with public as per the RBI.
Table 2
If you consider the estimate of the NIPFP and cash available to the public in October 2022, it would appear that more than 50% of cash with public is black. This may or may not be true but even the lowest estimate of black money available with public is enough to play havoc with the economy, country’s security and society.
Table 2 also indicates that despite quantum jump in digital transactions since demonetisation, there is significant increase in cash with public.
Why is so much cash with public despite quantum jump in digital transactions?
The two main reasons are (a) ease of transaction in cash and (b) increase in black money. People have to keep cash for day-to-day expenses. Most of the agricultural commodities are sold in cash. Even in the urban areas, poor and middle-class people are not comfortable with digital transactions unless mandatory.
Cash is needed for transactions in criminal activities. In the open world, it is generated by corruption and tax evasion. I am not aware of any research to ascertain whether black money is generated more by bribery or by tax evasion. Corruption in our country is more widespread and deep rooted than generally believed. If it is paid at the higher levels for getting contracts and at the lower levels common people have to pay bribes for most of the services, from birth certificates to death certificates. The high rate of GST is also making even honest people dishonest.
We do not have reliable data to know the contribution of different factors to the sum total of black money. However, the biggest culprits are believed to be the real estate, film industry, education and mining, all in the private sector.
In the present write up, the main area of concern is the real estate sector which presently contributes more than 7% of the GDP at current prices.
In the real estate sector, the use of black money (in most of the cases) starts from the purchase of land. For example, in certain areas of Delhi, the market price of land used for residential purposes is three times more than the official circle rate. Every builder, big or small, and every common individual have to pay bribe for getting the building plan approved, water supply, electricity connection for construction, storage of building materials, and completion certificate. The “leeches” visit house builders at their sweet will. That is not all. A new policeman or a new employee of DMC or Delhi JAL board comes to demand his share on the ground that those who came earlier were from different offices! A quick cost-benefit analysis shows that paying bribe is the only cost-effective option The construction work would be hassle-free if there is a central pool to which every builder contributes and each “leech “collects” his share according to a mutual agreement! Unfortunately, it is a utopian thought.
Builders are no less guilty. They use low quality material and pocket the difference. We often hear the news of collapse of buildings under construction. The reputed builders too use low quality materials to earn part of profit in black. Several builders collect a part of sale price in cash. Small builders constructing flats on small plots almost invariably demand part of sale price in cash. In a sellers’ market, buyers have little choice.
The use of cash in purchase of house from a previous owner is very common. According to a survey conducted by Local Circles, a community platform, 70% of the persons interviewed said they paid a component (i.e. an unspecified part) of the purchase price in cash while about 16% said they paid over half of the amount in cash. Some went to the extent of admitting that property registration takes place at a fraction of the total value paid thereby evading taxes. I have heard of properties being registered in Delhi at 10% of the actual cost. From what I hear from the people, my assessment is that payment of 20%-25% in cash is quite common.
Since April 2015 Income Tax Act has provisions to prevent cash transactions. Section 269SS of the Act forbids seller from accepting ₹20,000 or more in cash. Section 269T prohibits refund of advance in cash (₹20,000 or more) if the deal is cancelled. According to section 271D, anyone found accepting ₹20,000 or more in cash will have to pay penalty equal to what has been received in cash. In other words, the cash portion of sale price is confiscated by the government. There were penal provisions earlier also but such stringent measures were introduced in 2015.
However, the ground reality is that the penal provisions have little impact. Several lakh residential and commercial properties are sold every year. Buyers and sellers know that the income tax department does not have resources to monitor all transactions taking place behind closed doors. Most of the income tax returns are accepted without scrutiny. The probability of being caught is very little unless the cash portion is quite large and the department has definite information about it.
The law does provide some incentives to sellers. There is no income tax if the long-term capital gains is utilised to buy a new residential property (changes proposed in the Finance Bill 2023 discussed later in the article).
After recovery from COVID-19 effect, the size of the real market is increasing at a fast rate and is expected to increase in the future at a faster rate. Considering the expected growth of the real estate market and assuming that 20% of the payment is made in cash, Table 3 summarises the future scenario compared to what it was in 2017.
Table 3
The future scenario – only one sector of the economy generating as much as ₹16.4 lakh crore black money in 2030 – is quite frightening. Even half of it is frightening because black money is generated in the other sectors too. If buyers and sellers fearlessly get the property registered at 10% of the actual cost, the penal provisions and incentives given in the Income Tax Act have limited impact.
Need to think of out of box policy measures to curb this monster
Remember, black money reproduces more black money. If left uncontrolled, it will continue to grow. Larger the share of black money in the market, greater the number of transactions in black money.
We need to think out of box to prepare an effective road map to rein the increasing threat to the economy.
The biggest culprit is high transaction cost. Seller has to pay 20% of the capital gains as tax if the property is held for 2 years or more and at the marginal rate of tax which may be as high as 30% + cess + surcharge if the property has been held for a lesser period. Buyer has to pay stamp duty plus registration fee of 5% or more of the sale price depending on the state in which the transaction text place and whether the purchaser is a man or a woman or it is jointly purchased by a man and a woman. In addition, there is registration fee of 1%.
Real estate market has become so dirty, so murky that more often than not at least one party wants a part of transaction to be paid or received in cash. I have made 3 calculations to ascertain cost and benefit to the government and buyers/sellers. The common assumptions are that a residential property is sold for ₹4 cr. and the long-term capital gain is ₹1cr. The calculations have been made assuming the existing costs of transaction and lower costs of transaction, with as well as without the cash component ( 20% of the sale price i.e. ₹80 lakh).
(A) Income tax on long term capital gains 20% +cess (the existing rate) and stamp duty plus cost of registration (total 6% of sale price). The result is as follows:
Table 4
(B) Income tax on long term capital gains @10% +cess and stamp duty plus cost of registration 3% of the sale price. The result is as follows:
Table 5
(C) Income tax on long term capital gains @ 5% +cess and stamp duty plus cost of registration @ 1% of the sale price. The result is as follows:
Table 6
At the lower tax rate, there will be very little incentive to receive cash for purchase of properties. The incentive will be much less for the buyer unless his main source of “income” is in black, say the bribe money collected by him.
The million dollar question is, will any government be ready to sacrifice, say ₹15 lakh how to stop generation of ₹80 lakh of black money (this is only by way of illustration)? The policy makers believe in “carrot and stick”, give incentives (like investment in a new property and penalty when caught, the chances of which are little. All the investigating agencies together have not touched even tip of the iceberg.
Demonetisation of high currency notes as done in November 2016 and on a limited scale earlier may be as cited a corrective measure. Let me make it clear. The main objective of the demonetization in November 2016 was not mopping of black money. The main objective was to destroy illegally printed high denomination currency notes. In any case, no government will have courage to resort it again in foreseeable future unless the situation goes completely out of control.
As far as I know, no study has been carried out to decide the optimum rate of income tax and the optimum stamp duty plus registration fee which will not give any attractive incentive for part of transaction in cash. However, it would not be unreasonable to expect that the reduction in taxes and duties will significantly reduce the use of cash. At least part of the loss of revenue will be compensated by more transactions in white money and saving the economy and society from the evil consequences of black money.
Unfortunately, as of now, there is no hope of any such policy decision. The proposed amendment of section 54 of the Income Tax Act limits exemption to ₹10 cr. The memorandum explaining the provisions in the Finance Bill 2023 has given the reason: “The primary objective of the sections 54 and section 54F of the Act was to mitigate the acute shortage of housing, and to give impetus to house building activity. However, it has been observed that claims of huge deductions by high-net-worth assessees are being made under these provisions, by purchasing very expensive residential houses. It is defeating the very purpose of these sections.”
The government may have its own justification for prescribing the exemption limit but the policy makers have ignored the ground reality. The new provision will encourage generation of black money. The capital gains of say, ₹12 cr. can easily be reduced by taking ₹2.95 cr. in cash. Moreover, the government’s policy is contradictory. On the one hand, luxury housing projects are being approved on a large scale and on the other, the government is discouraging purchase of such houses. I do not think the proposed amendment will make a large scale difference. On the contrary, it may encourage more use of black money.
No one can claim that tax evasion could be fully stopped by reducing income tax rates. However, serious measures have to be taken if we do not want several lakhs of crores of rupees in black floating around.
Two “social engineers” to help architects of “India Vision 2047”?
Two “social engineers” of Bihar to help architects of “India Vision 2047”?
Bihar Chief Minister (CM) Nitish Kumar (NK) has himself given reasons why he snapped ties with the BJP. Before analysing the reasons given by him, let us have a glance at his political journey. For a proper appreciation, Lalu Prasad’s political journey has also to be kept in view.
1974 to early 1994 – with bade bhaiya (elder brother) Lalu
Both started their political journey from Jai Prakash Narayan’s anti-Indra Gandhi movement after which they joined the newly formed Janata Party. Pushed by his caste members, Lalu raced far ahead; entered the Lok Sabha in 1977 and Bihar Assembly in 1980 and 1985 on the Janata party tickets, and became a powerful caste leader; in 1985 his vote share had increased by 45.56%. On the other hand, NK could enter the Assembly (as an independent) only in 1985, after losing two elections. NK called Lalu his bade bhaiya and supported him to become the leader of the opposition in the Assembly.
In 1989, both entered the Lok Sabha on the Janata Dal tickets. The party was formed in 1988 at the initiative of VP Singh by merging various splinter groups of the former Janata. Next year, Lalu returned to Bihar politics as CM. With the support of yadavas (about 14% of Bihar population), other backward castes, and Muslims, he had become the tallest leader of the Janata Dal. He had mastered the art of social engineering. A decade and a half of the Lalu-Rabari era, based on casteism, communalism, and corruption, had started.
1994 – breakup with bade bhaiya Lalu
The supremacy of Yadavas – often described as “New Brahmins” among the backward castes – in Lalu’s party and government frightened other backward castes. Most dissatisfied were the Kurmis and Koeris who claim to be descendants of Lord Rama’s twin sons, Lav and Kush, respectively. Together they constitute about 8% (or, maybe more) of the population in the state. Some prominent leaders of these castes organised a ChetanaRally in Patna’s Gandhi maidan on February 12, 1994.
NK MP, a kurmi by caste and still with Lalu, was invited. A reluctant NK was being pulled in two opposite directions. While Lalu had warned him that his participation in the rally would be interpreted as betrayal, his caste friends were persuading him to address the rally. So far NK had avoided being seen as a caste leader but on that decisive day, he was told that it was once in a lifetime opportunity; a big crowd of caste supporters had come to him and if he disappointed them, he would lose their support forever. The instinct of political survival prevailed. He thundered at the rally, “we want our share, not charity; a government that ignores our interests cannot remain in power.”
That marked the end of his 20-year-old friendship with Lalu. Two months later, George Fernandes and NK formed a new party, Samata Party, comprising mainly NK’s supporters in the Janata Dal. The party’s main agenda, unwritten though, was to check Lalu.
With Congress rapidly sinking, there are only three contenders for power in Bihar:
Janata Dal (succeeded by RJD), under Lalu with the support of yadavas and Muslims,
BJP, supported mainly by the upper castes, and
Samata Party (succeeded by JD U), led by NK with the strong support of kurmis and koeris.
But none are strong enough to form a government alone. Since there is no possibility of a coalition government of Lalu’s party and BJP, there are only two options: NK + Lalu OR NK +BJP.
NK’s constraint is that while kurmis are concentrated in and around Nalanda, koeris are thinly dispersed in different parts of the state. BJP’s disadvantage is that Bihar has failed to produce a powerful regional leader. Therefore, there are only two leaders, Lalu (succeeded by son Tejashwi Yadav when Lal was convicted in the fodder scam case) and NK.
As a social engineer, NK has built his caste-based vote bank, however small it may be. As a political engineer, he has been making his political journey by hitchhiking. Never mind if he goes with a partner he had condemned in the past. Everything is fair in love, war, and politics. Such a journey is realpolitik because of NK’s limited support base. Except in the 2010 election, his party never won a sufficient number of seats. The table set out below explains this.
Major political parties and number of seats in the Bihar Assembly
Year of election
RJD (Janata Dal before 1997)
BJP
JDU (since 2003)
Samata Party in 1995 and 2000
Congress
1990*
122 (JD)
71
39
1995*
(167) (JD)
41
7 (Samata)
29
2000*
124
67
21 (JD) +34 (Samata) Both contested. Merged in 2003.
23
Feb 2005 (followed by President’s rule)
75
37
55
10
Oct 2005**
54
55
88
9
2010***
22
91
115
4
2015****
80
53
71
27
2020
75
74
43
19
Position in June 2022 due to defections from other parties
80
77
45
19
*Undivided Bihar
**JDU & BJP coalition fought election and formed government’
*** JDU& BJP coalition fought election and formed government
**** JDU as part of the mahagathbandhan fought election and formed government.
In 1997, CBI started the investigation of the fodder scam. On June 21, 1997, CBI raided Lalu’s house as well as those of some relatives. His opponents including those within his party demanded his resignation. Anticipating more trouble ahead and to safeguard his political fiefdom, Lalu acted fast. On July 5, he walked out of Janata Dal with his supporters and formed his party, Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), and won a fresh vote of confidence a few days later. On July 25 he resigned as CM and made at wife Rabari Devi successor. CBI arrested him on July 30. He has not held CM’s post thereafter; he continues to lead his party though.
1996-June 2013, NK with BJP
During the Lalu-Rabri era, NK was in the Lok Sabha (winning in 1989, 1991, 1996, 1998, and 1999). He was Minister of State (April 1990-November 1990) in the short-lived VP Singh government. In the 1995 Assembly election, Samata Party fared miserably. To get a share in power, he aligned himself with BJP in 1996. He became a minister in the 13-day government of Atal Bihari Vajpayee. The social engineer proved to be political too.
When asked why he went with a party whose ideology was just the opposite of his socialist ideology, he told media persons that “political survival against Lalu Prasad was more important thansocialist ideology”.
Mark the term “political survival”. This is the ideology of all politicians including NK. Do not go by the face value of any other explanation they give when they change colour. At least, for once a politician had given an honest explanation. He served as a cabinet minister in the Vajpayee-led governments (1998-2004) for over 5 years and 9 months, in different spells though.
On July 3, 2003, he and George Fernandes formed a new party, Janata Dal (United), by merging three regional parties including Samata Party. The reason was that in the 1995Assembly election, the Samata Party had fared very miserably and after Lalu walked away with his supporters in 1997, in the 2000 Assembly election Janata Dal and Samata Party had fought against each other, cutting each other’s vote.
Chief Minister with BJP support (2005-June 2013)
The table set out below presents the spells of NK’s Chief Ministership at a glance.
Oath No.
From
To
Duration
Ally
1
March 03, 2000
March 10, 2000
7 days
Resigned before floor test (1)
2
November 24, 2005
November 26, 2010
Full term
JDU & BJP alliance
3
November 26, 2010
May 20, 2014
In 2013, first-time mid-term change of alliance partner (BJP out)
JDU & BJP alliance till mid-June 2013
4
February 22, 2015
November 20, 2015
Thereafter, with the support of Mahagathbandhan
5
November 20, 2015
July 26, 2017
Second-time mid-term change of alliance partner (BJP in)
RJD & Congress (Mahagathbandhan)
6
July 27, 2017
Nov 16, 2020
Then BJP w.e.f July 27
7
November 16, 2020
August 09, 2022
Third-time mid-term change of alliance partner(BJP out)
BJP and JDU fought the election together
8
August 10, 2022
continuing
RJD and Congress (Mahagathbandhan)
(1) At the behest of Prime Minister Vajpayee, he staked a claim and became CM of Bihar but failed to mobilise a sufficient number. Resigned before the floor test.
2013-July 2017, NK again with Lalu
Opposition to Modi more important than the corruption of RJD
On June 9, 2013, BJP appointed Narendra Modi as campaign manager for the 2014 general election. Soon thereafter, NK ended his 17-year-old alliance with BJP.
NK was among the self-proclaimed secularists along with Muslim leaders who were spreading the false narrative that Modi was responsible for the post-Godhra riots in 2002. Fearing the loss of Muslim votes, he had prevented Modi from campaigning for BJP in the 2010 Assembly election. NK’s ambition was stronger than his opposition to corruption. What he had said about Lalu after aligning with the BJP in 1996 became irrelevant in 2013 (and in August 2022).
NK passed the floor test with the support of RJD and Congress. Lalu’s son Tejashwi Yadav became Deputy CM. Incidentally, on October 13, more than 16 years after Lalu was first arrested by CBI, a special CBI court of Ranchi sentenced him to 5 years of jail and imposed a fine of Rs. 2.5 million. On October 22, he was disqualified from Lok Sabha.
In May 2014, NK resigned after the poor performance of JDU in the general election, citing moral responsibility. Jitan Ram Manjhi succeeded him. However, in Feb next year, he replaced Manjhi with the support of the mahagathbandhan. During the 2015 Assembly election campaign, Lalu declared NK CM’s face of the Mahagathbandhan.
July 2017 – August 9, 2022, NK again with BJP
On July 26, 2017, NK snapped four-year-old ties with the mahagathbandhan and resigned when Tejashwi Yadav, facing corruption charge in the “Patna Zoo soil scam” (gross irregularities in selling soil from the construction site of Tej Pratap’s mall basement) along with his father and brother, refused to resign. NK cited “irreconcilable differences” with RJD on the issue of corruption charges.
Within 17 hours of her resignation, he took the oath sixth time with BJP’s support. JDU and BJP contested the 2020 Assembly election as alliance partners. Despite JDU getting just 43 seats, NK took oath as CM for the seventh time.
Since August 9, 2022, NK again with Lalu
Corruption is again a non-issue even after CBI raided 25 places associated with Lalu, his children, and his associates. NK just quipped “wait and watch”.
On August 8, NK asked his party MPs and MLAs to meet him in the morning the next day at his residence. After the meeting, he announced the decision to snap ties with BJP. Within 24 hours he took a fresh oath (eighth time) to form the government with the support of RJD-led mahagathbandhan. That day and thereafter he has given a list of old and new grievances against the BJP as reasons. It would be interesting to compare the reasons given now with what he had stated in the past.
The party MPs and MLAs were very unhappy with the BJP. “Even during (the last Assembly) polls, winning candidates said nobody (from BJP) supported them and losing candidates said they were defeated by the BJP people.” “We have discussed the way BJP was trying to sabotage our party with our MPs, MLAs and MLCs and everyone suggested that I come out from the NDA. We have listened to their voices, and I resigned from the post of Chief Minister.” He claimed that he received feedback from them that it was “people’s wish” that JDU should join the mahagathbandhan. “I had to safeguard my party.”
The question is if NK had so many grievances against BJP, why did he wait for three years to snap ties? Was he waiting for some auspicious period? A related question is, why did Lalu not take advantage of the grievances JD (U) MLAs had been nursing since 2020? The meeting on August 9 seems to be a states-managed show you give an excuse, presented as a reality show though.
NK’s allegation that BJP was trying to “sabotage” JD U has been interpreted by some analysts that the BJP central leadership was trying to do in Bihar (splitting the JD U) what it had done in Maharashtra (splitting the Shiv Sena) but NK pre-empted the attempt. NK has also hinted that BJP’s hit man was his former confidant RCP Singh.
There may be truth in the allegation of “sabotage” but BJP was unlikely to succeed. In Maharashtra, a large number of MLAs are unhappy with Uddhav Thackeray and there is a strong dissident leader Eknath Shinde. In Bihar, JD(U) MPs and MLAs are solidly behind NK, and RCP Sing, a former IAS office made a politician by NK, is not another Eknath Shinde.
Modi did not accept his request to make Patna University a Central University.
True, the request was not accepted but perhaps it was made in 2018 and could not be even one of the grounds to break the alliance, may be included in the list of grievances though.
After the 2019 general election, Modi ignored NK’s demand of four ministerial berths for his party men in the Cabinet. Later, without consulting him, Modi appointed RCP Singh, a JDU member of Rajya Sabha, a Minister. (NK punished him by denying him a third term in the 2022 Rajya Sabha election.)
If NK was so serious about ministerial berths for his party, why did he not make it a condition of continuing alliance in Bihar? He did not because for him, his remaining in power was more important than his party getting a share in power, especially when there was danger of revolt.
After the 2020 Assembly election, NK wanted a JDU member to be Speaker but BJP denied that.
The allegation is true but why did he not take a firm stand then? He did not make an issue because his primary interest was in continuing as CM. For the same reason, I do not attach much importance to his disclosure now that since BJP had got more MLAs in the 2020 election, he wanted that a BJP leader should be CM but agreed when BJP leadership surprised him to continue.
“Today’s BJP has a different ideology than the BJP of Atal Ji and Advani Ji. Leaders like Vajpayee and Advani treated me with respect.” “In 2013, I had a snapped ties with the BJP in protest against them being side-lined.”
Yes, BJP under Modi is different from BJP under Advani and Vajpayee but, remember, in the 2004 general election, people rejected the old guards. Vajpayee retired from active politics. In the 2014 general election, people voted for a strong leader like Modi and gave him a second term in 2019. If NK snapped ties with the BJP in August 2022 in deference to “people’s wish”, he should respect the people’s preference for a dynamic and strong leader like Modi.
NK’s claim that in 2013 he had snapped ties with the BJP in protest against Advani and Vajpayee being “side-lined” is an afterthought. He has publicly stated in June 2013 that “JD (U) will never compromise on secularism… Can’t accept a divisive leader.”
NK should know that if he wants respect from someone, he should also respect that person. He has never shown any respect for Modi. Like other Modi baiters, he too has falsely blamed Modi responsible for the post-Godhra riots in 2002. NK cannot be unaware of the truth that the burning of a coach carrying pilgrims from Ayodhya by a Muslim crowd led to riots; Modi had taken firm action to control riots.
In 2013, as in 2022, NK was shedding crocodile tears. If he was so distressed, why did he not resign from the Union Cabinet in 2002? His explanation (at one stage given to Lalu) that he was a Railway Minister and law and order was a state subject, was nothing but a lame excuse to remain in power.
Fearing that Modi’s entry in Bihar might alienate Muslim voters, NK had not allowed came to campaign in the 2010 Assembly election. For NK, Modi was untouchable, to be kept at a safe distance. However, in the 2020 Assembly election, he used Modi’s popularity to win the 2020 Assembly election.
· NK’s another grievance against BJP is that it “does little except publicity (‘prachar prasar’)”.
During the 2020 Assembly election campaign, when he wanted to take advantage of Modi’s popularity, he was full of praise for Modi. On October 28, 2020, addressing a public rally with Modi, NK said that “people of Bihar can never forget what he has done for the state…. He has done so much for building roads and bridges in the state…. If you give the NDA one more chance…. then you take it for sure that he (Modi) will transform it into a developed state. Bihar will march ahead.”
NK has said that BJP is creating trouble in society in the name of religion. All opposition parties should unite to defeat BJP in 2024.
This charge made in the Assembly on Aug 24 is an assurance of cooperation with Islamists (discussed later in the article).
One more reason, given by others but not by NK directly, is that being part of the market will run will pave the way to his becoming a prime ministerial candidate in 2024.
I do not consider it that simple because there are stronger aspirants. This reason has a different significance that I will mention shortly.
My assessment
The timing of the exit of BJP and the entry of RJD is the most crucial part of the drama. I think, whatever has happened in is a result of a deeper conspiracy hatched by Lalu – a very cunning and selfish politician – after police action against the Popular Front of India (PFI), followed by investigations by ED and NIA. Lalu can go to any extent to earn money and power. He has tried to kill two birds with one stone.
One, If NK could be persuaded to become Prime Ministerial candidate in 2024, the deck will be clear for Tejaswi Yadav to become Bihar CM. BJP will not be able to stop it.
Two, with BJP out, PFI will get freehand and patronage of the State government, dominated by Lalu & Sons, to work on the plan to make India an Islamic country by 2047.
In July last, ahead of PM Modi’s visit to Patna, IB had informed Bihar Police that a possible terrorist module was operating near Patna. During raids there, police found incriminating documents, one of them running in 8 pages named “India Vision 2047” that PFI had circulated internally. The “vision” is to completely dominate the ‘coward Hindus’ and subjugate them, a goal achievable even with 10% of Muslims rallying behind PFI. it claims that in ‘the event of a full-fledged conflict with the state, help would be needed from friendly Islamic countries.’ The other document was “Popular Front of India, 20 February 2021”.
Police arrested two suspected terrorists including a member of PFI who was earlier in SIMI. NIA has already taken over the job of further investigation from Bihar police and ED is examining from a money laundering angle. According to a Bihar police officer, “In the last few years, PFI has developed friendly relations with Turkey, a flag-bearer of Islam.” PFI was imparting training to the local Muslim youth in the use of e of swords and knives in the name of martial art and spreading hatred against the majority community to achieve the goal.
After action by Bihar police and investigations by the central agencies, PFI had to act fast. The presence of BJP in Bihar government was against the interest of Islamists. A friendly “secular” government would not allow the state police to take any initiative. On the other hand, it would provide security to PFI, Social Democratic Party of India, and their sympathisers.
The change in government took place within a month of the police action.
A power-hungry NK fell into the trap laid by Lalu, Congress, and PFI. After all, his primary goal is to remain in power.