Though Hindu-Muslim violence is not new in India, the one that erupted in Nuh district and Gurgaon in Haryana recently has perhaps opened a new chapter in terms of its nature, character and consequences on Indian polity. Located in the Mewat region, Nuh is a poor district but its economic backwardness should not be seen as the main reason behind this violence. Based on reports, this violence — it could be argued — is a result of competitive assertion of identities in a highly polarised polity which offers varied forms of patronage to non-state actors. Given the state response, it looks like the Muslim minority may end up paying a disproportionately greater price, as has often been the case in riots even in the non-Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) days of India’s governance. Scholars might find it tempting to go back to Paul Brass’s formulation of an institutionalised riot system (IRS), based on his study of riots in Aligarh and Meerut, to make sense of the spontaneity, and scale of this violence.
In my view, there is more to it than Brass’s formulation. The political context of the sustained penetration of Hindu majoritarianism in various domains of state and society need to be factored in as well, particularly with regard to state indifference or complicity. The Haryana and Punjab Court’s observation on Monday, describing bulldozer justice as “an exercise of ethnic cleansing is being conducted by the State,” reveals a lot about the ideological intent of state response.
