Peasant Movements in India and its impact on British

administration

Introduction

Peasant movements have a long history which can be traced to the numerous peasant
uprisings and revolts that occurred in various regions of the world throughout human history.
Early peasant movements were usually the result of stresses in the feudal and semi feudal
relations which resulted in violent uprisings. The recent movements, which fit in the
definition of social movements, are generally much less violent, and their demands are
centred on better prices for agricultural produce, better wages and working conditions for the
agricultural labourers, and for increasing their agricultural production.

The Peasant movement in India are usually classified into three categories, namely:

i) Movements before arrival of colonialists

ii) Movements during Colonial rule
iii) Movements after Independence

In this present project, the focus would be on the Peasant movements during the Colonial rule
of the British. The people of India had suffered a lot under the British and Peasants are no
exception. The economic policies of British adversely affected the Indian peasants. The
British Government used to protect the landlords and money lenders. They collectively
exploited the peasants under the British. They had suffered more than people of other classes
and they were among the first people to raise against the British rule. They carried out various
movement across the country.

There are various factors contributing for the Peasant movements during the rule of the
British. Some of the factors leading to Peasant movements are economic policies of the
British, the new land revenue systems, administrative and judicial system and exploitation by
the landlords and moneylenders.

The peasants suffered from high rents, illegal levies, arbitrary evictions and unpaid labour
under Zamindari revenue system. Under Ryotwari system, the Government itself levied
heavy land revenue which was difficult for the peasants to pay.

The overburdened peasant, fearing loss of his only source of livelihood, often approached the
local moneylender who made full use of the farmers difficulties by imposing high rates of
interests on the money lent. Often, the farmer had to mortgage his hand and cattle.
Sometimes, the moneylender seized the mortgaged belongings. Gradually, over large areas,
the actual cultivators were reduced to the status of tenants-at-will, share croppers and landless
labourers.

Ultimately, the peasants started to resist this exploitation and took up desperate measures at
several places against it. These activities came to be known as peasant movements in India
during the freedom struggle. Sometimes, the distressed peasants took up crime for coming
out of these intolerable conditions. These crimes included robbery, dacoity, vandalism, assault
and murders.

Some of the Peasant movements discussed in this projects are, viz.:

i) Santhal revolt (1855)

ii) Indigo revolt (1859)
iii) Deccan riots (1875)
iv) Champaran Movement (1917)
v) Kheda Movement (1918)
vi) Moplah Riots (1921)
vii) Bardoli movement (1928)

These movements had heavy impact on the British administration who later had to change
their policies and make some new laws for the protection of the Peasants. These impacts on
the British administration would also be discussed alongside the respective peasant
movements.

Santhal revolt (1855)

The Santhals had begun to come into Bengal around the 1780s. Zamindars hired them to
reclaim land and expand cultivation, and British officials invited them to settle in the Jangal
Mahals to replace the Paharias tribe. Having failed to subdue the Paharias and transform
them into settled agriculturists, the British turned to the Santhals. The Paharias refused to cut
forests, resisted touching the plough, and continued to be turbulent. The Santhals, by contrast,
appeared to be ideal settlers, who cleared forests and ploughed the land with vigour.

The Santhals were given land and convinced to settle in the foothills of Rajmahal. By 1832, a
large area of land was demarcated as Damin-i-Koh, which was declared to be the land of the
Santhals. They had to live within it, practise plough agriculture and become settled peasants.
The land grant to the Santhals specified that at least one-tenth of the area was to be cleared
and cultivated within the first ten years. The territory was surveyed and mapped regularly.
Enclosed with boundary pillars, it was separated from both the world of the settled
agriculturists of the Ganga plains and the Paharias of the Rajmahal hills.

After the demarcation of Damin-i-Koh, Santhal settlements expanded quickly. The villages of
Santhals grew from 40 villages in the area in 1838 to 1,473 villages by 1851. Over the same
period, the Santhal population increased from a 3,000 to over 82,000 people. As cultivation
expanded, an increased volume of revenue filled into the Companys coffers.

The Santhals soon found out that the land they had brought under cultivation was slipping
away from their control. The state was levying heavy taxes on the land that the Santhals had
cleared, moneylenders (dikus) were charging them very high rates of interest. They were
taking over the land when debts remained unpaid, and zamindars were asserting control over
the Damin-i-Koh area.

By the 1850s, the Santhals felt that the time had come to rebel against zamindars,
moneylenders and the colonial state, in order to create an ideal world for themselves where
they would rule. The assembly of Santhal complained that their comrades had been punished
while nothing had been done to the mahajans, whose exactions had compelled them to take
the law into their own hands. In course of time the insurrection spread all over the Santhal
areas.

The Santhals took to guerrilla fighting. This was a new experience for the whole of Bihar. It
was surprising to see the Santhals making their own armies, composed of rebellious peasants
marching against their oppressors.

It was a supreme tribute to their organisation and voluntary discipline that without any
pervious military training, such a large number of persons, exceeding 10,000 assembled and
disassembled at a very short warning.
The Santhal army brought down the postal and railway communications. The government
realised that the Santhal rebellion possessed all the characteristics of defying the government.
Surely, the Santhal revolt was very strong but it could not succeed against the power of the
government. It was suppressed. However, despite failure, the insurrection was successful.

It was after the Santhal Revolt (1855-56) that the Santhal Pargana was created, carving out
5,500 square miles from the districts of Bhagalpur and Birbhum. The colonial state hoped
that by creating a new territory for the Santhals and imposing some special laws within it, the
Santhals could be conciliated.

Indigo revolt (1859)

Indigo was identified as the major cash crop for the East India Companys investments in the
18th Century. Indigo had worldwide demand similar to cotton goods, salt and opium during
that century. Indigo plantations in Bengal date back to late 18 th Century. With expansion of
British power in Bengal, indigo planting became more profitable due to the demand for blue
dye in Europe. It was introduced in large parts of Burdwan, Bankura, Birbhum, Murshidabad,
etc.

European Indigo planters had a monopoly over Indigo farming in India. The foreigners used
to force Indian farmers to harvest Neel and to achieve this, they resorted to brutally methods
to suppress the farmers. The European indigo planters left no stone unturned to make profits.
They pitilessly pursued the peasants to plant indigo instead of growing the food crops. They
provided loans at a very high interest. Once a farmer took such loans he remained in debt for
whole of his life before passing it to his successors. The farmers were totally defenceless
from the brutal indigo planters, who resorted to mortgages or destruction of their property if
they used to disobey them.

Peasants were illegally beaten and detained in order to force them to sell Indigo at non-
profitable rates. If any farmer refused to grow Indigo and started growing any food crop, he
was kidnapped, women and children were attacked, and crop was looted, burnt and
destroyed. If peasant approached court, the European judge would give order in favour of the
European planter. The privileges and immunities enjoyed by the European planters placed
them well above the law.
Government rules were in favour of the planters. By an act in 1833, the planters were granted
a free hand to oppress. Sometimes even the zamindars, money lenders and other influential
persons were at the side of the planters.

Ultimately, Indigo peasants launched revolt in the Nadia district of the Bengal presidency.
They refused to grow Indigo and if the police tried to intervene, they were attacked. European
Planters responded by increasing the rent and evicting peasants from their land which led to
more agitations and confrontations between the two.

In April 1860, all the cultivators of the Barasat taluka and in the districts of Pabna and Nadia
started strike. They refused to sow any indigo plants. The strike soon spread to other places in
Bengal. The revolt enjoyed the support of all the categories of the rural people, missionaries,
Muslims and the Bengal intellectuals.

The Bengal intelligentsia played an important role by organizing a powerful campaign in

support by using Press as the tool. It had a deep impact on the emerging nationalist
intellectuals. Harish Chandra Mukherjee thoroughly described the plight of the poor peasants
in his newspaper The Hindu Patriot. The Hindu Patriot which first published as a weekly in
January 1853, from the very beginning it took a hostile tone toward the indigo planters. Sisir
Kumar Ghosh, who later found Amrita Bazar Patrika, was one of the
important muffasal correspondents of the Patriot. He reported from Nadia and Jessore. His
brave fight for justice for the ryots became invaluable in a situation where there was no
political organisation to support the peoples cause.

The revolt was ruthlessly suppressed. Large forces of police and military, backed by the
British Government and some of the zamindars, mercilessly slaughtered a number of
peasants. In spite of this, the revolt was fairly popular, involving almost the whole of
Bengal.

Indigo Rebellion was not a class struggle in anyway as there was no struggle between the
Zamindars and the peasantry; rather the real objective of the Zamindars was to oppose the
encroachment of Europeans on principle and to fight for their own vested interests, though
they espoused the cause of peasantry and cultivators against the planters.

The revolt had a strong effect on the government, which immediately appointed the Indigo
Commission in 1860. In the commission report, E. W. L. Tower noted that not a chest of
Indigo reached England without being stained with human blood.
Government issued a notification that the Indian ryots cannot be forced to grow indigo and
that it would ensure that all disputes were to be settled by legal means. By the end of 1860,
Indigo planters shut down their factories and cultivation of indigo was virtually wiped out
from Bengal. Evidently it was a major victory of the peasants to provoke such emotion in the
Europeans minds. Thus the revolt was a success

Deccan Riots (1875)

As British rule expanded from Bengal to other parts of India, new systems of revenue were
imposed on the peasants. The Permanent Settlement was rarely extended to any region
beyond Bengal province. Since the revenue demand was fixed under the Permanent
Settlement, the colonialist could not claim any share of this enhanced income. Keen on
expanding their financial resources, the colonial government had to think of ways to
maximise the land revenue. So in territories annexed in the nineteenth century, temporary
revenue settlements were set up in place. The revenue system that was introduced in the
Bombay Deccan came to be known as the ryotwari settlement. Unlike the Permanent
Settlement system, the revenue was directly settled with the farmer. The average income from
different types of soil was estimated, the revenue-paying capacity of the farmer was
calculated and a proportion of it fixed as the share of the state.

The first revenue settlement in the Bombay Deccan was made in the 1820s. The revenue
demanded was so high that in many places farmers left their villages and migrated to new
regions. In areas of poor soil and fluctuating rainfall the problem was particularly acute.
When rains failed and harvests were poor, peasants found it impossible to pay the revenue.
By the 1830s the problem became more severe. Prices of agricultural produce fell sharply
after 1832 and did not recover for over a decade and a half. This meant that there was a
further decline in peasants income. At the same time the countryside was disturbed by a
famine that struck during 1832-34. One-third of the cattle in the Deccan was killed, and half
the human population died. Those who survived had no agricultural stocks to help them
survive through the crisis.

Inevitably, they borrowed. Revenue could rarely be paid without a loan from a moneylender.
But once a loan was taken, the farmer found it difficult to pay it back. As debt mounted, and
loans remained unpaid, peasants dependence on moneylenders increased. They now needed
loans even to buy their everyday needs and meet their production expenditure. By the 1840s,
officials were finding evidence of alarming levels of peasant indebtedness everywhere.1

Cotton Boom and decline

Before the 1860s, three-fourths of raw cotton imports into Britain came from America.
British cotton manufacturers had for long been worried about this dependence on American
supplies. When the American Civil War broke out in 1861, a wave of panic spread through
cotton circles in Britain. Raw cotton imports from America fell to less than three per cent of
the normal. Frantic messages were sent to India and elsewhere to increase cotton exports to
Britain. In Bombay, cotton merchants visited the cotton districts to assess supplies and
encourage cultivation. As cotton prices soared, export merchants in Bombay were keen to
secure as much cotton as possible to meet the British demand. So they gave advances to
urban sahukars who in turn extended credit to those rural moneylenders who promised to
secure the produce. The ryots in the Deccan villages suddenly found access to seemingly
limitless credit. They were being given Rs 100 as advance for every acre they planted with
cotton. Sahukars were more than willing to extend long-term loans. Between 1860 and 1864
cotton acreage doubled. By 1862 over 90 per cent of cotton imports into Britain were coming
from India.2

As the Civil War ended in 1865, cotton production in America revived and Indian cotton
exports to Britain declined steadily. Export merchants and sahukars in Maharashtra were no
longer interested in extending long-term credit. They could see the demand for Indian cotton
fall and cotton prices fall. While credit dried up, the revenue demand increased. The first
revenue settlement was in the 1820s and 1830s. Now it was time for the new one. And in the
new settlement, the demand had increased dramatically: from 50 to 100 per cent. Yet again
farmers had to turn towards the moneylenders. But the moneylenders now refused loans. He
no longer had confidence in the peasants capacity to repay.

The refusal of moneylenders to extend loans angered the ryots. They were infuriated by
moneylenders who were being insensitive to their plight. The moneylenders were violating
the customary norms of the countryside. In one of the case investigated by the Deccan Riots
Commission, the moneylender had charged over Rs. 2,000 as interest on a loan of Rs. 100.

2
The uprising

Through the nineteenth century, peasants in various parts of India rose in revolt against
moneylenders and grain dealers. One such revolt occurred in 1875 in the Deccan. The
movement began at Supa, a large village in Poona district. It was a market centre where many
shopkeepers and moneylenders lived. In 1875, ryots from surrounding rural areas gathered
and attacked the shopkeepers, demanding their account books and debt bonds. They burnt
account books, looted grain shops, and in some cases set fire to the houses of sahukars
(persons who acted as both a moneylender and a trader). From Poona the revolt spread to
Ahmednagar. Then over the next two months it spread even further, over an area of 6,500
square km. More than thirty villages were affected.3

As the revolt spread, British officials saw the spectre of 1857. Police posts were established
in villages to frighten rebellious peasants into submission. Troops were quickly called in and
many convicted. But it took several months to bring the countryside under control.

Deccan Riots Commission

When the revolt spread in the Deccan, the Government of Bombay was initially unwilling to
see it as anything serious. But the Government of India, worried by the memory of 1857,
pressurised the Government of Bombay to set up a commission of enquiry to investigate into
the causes of the riots. The commission produced a report that was presented to the British
Parliament in 1878.4

Champaran Movement (1917)

When Gandhi returned from South Africa, he tried the experiment of non-cooperation in a
smaller way by leading the peasant struggles in Champaran (Bihar) and later on did the same
in Kheda. These struggles were taken up as a kind of reformist movement but the idea of it
was to mobilise the peasants for their demands.

The Champaran peasant movement was launched in the year 1917. Its objective was to create
arising among the peasants against the European planters. These planters took up illegal and
cruel methods of indigo cultivation. Gandhi studied the grievances of the Champaran
3

4
peasantry. The peasants opposed not only the European planters but also the zamindars. The
Champaran peasantry terribly suffered in the hands of European planters. The landlords and
the government officials together also oppressed the peasants.

In Champaran and in the whole of Bihar, there was a huge increase in the land rent. The
peasants were forced to grow neel and this curtailed their freedom of cultivation. They were
forced to devote the most fertile part of their land for growing particular crops which was
desired by the landlord. They were also required to give their maximum time and energy to
the crops demanded by the landlord.

The peasants were paid very poor wages. These were so low that it was very difficult for
them to earn their livelihood. Explaining the situation of peasants in Champaran, D.G.
Tendulkar writes The tale of woes of Indian ryots, forced to plant indigo by the British
planters, forms one of the blackest in the annals of colonial exploitation. Not a chest of Indigo
reached England without being stained with human blood.

One very important reason for the Champaran movement was the sub-human life led by the
people there. When Gandhi visited Champaran, he was very much displeased by the extreme
poverty of the peasants. He said The peasants in Champaran are leading their lives like
animals, suffering from all kinds of miseries.

Uprising of the movements

On 10th April, 1914 the sufferings of the Champaran farmers were discussed
comprehensively at the annual conference of the Bihar Provincial Congress Committee,
which found that the Champaran ryots were in a very serious situation.

Next year, in 1915, the Provincial Congress Committee had recommended for the
composition of an inquiry committee to take stock of the Champaran peasantry. It was
actually in 1916 that the Indian National Congress, in its Lucknow session, discussed the
peasant problems of Champaran. It was decided that something needed to be done to give
immediate relief to the peasants of Champaran.

On 14th May, 1917, Gandhi wrote a letter to the District Magistrate of Champaran, W.B.
Heycock, in which he showed his concern to give the farmers the freedom from landlords and
government. Gandhi wanted to strengthen the relations between the zamindars and tenants.
Rajendra Prasad was very much unpleased with the inhuman life led by the Champaran
peasants. He was himself, an eye-witness to the poor and miserable condition of the peasants.

The struggle of the Champaran peasants took place from April 1917. The British government
adopted very serious methods to oppress the peasants. They were tortured for not paying the
huge revenues. Among the methods adopted were setting Dhangars and Doms, the low caste
people, on the high caste tenants decides the policemen tying them down and beating them,
and putting logs of wood on their chest.

In another method of torture the hands were put underneath the leg and tied to the neck, the
leg being raised. If the peasants did not pay even then, they were brought to the factories.
They were forced to embrace a neem tree with both their hands tied together, and set upon by
policemen.

On such occasions, the indigo planter used to be present on the scene. On the other hand, the
red ants on the tree would bite the man tied to the tree, but he could do nothing as his hands
were tied. The Champaran peasant movement had to undergo severe sufferings.

But the participation of the general peasantry and the ideology of non-violence gave strength
to the peasants. It is interesting to look at the outcomes of this movement. The Champaran
movement is described to be a success story in the history of peasant movements in India.
One very important achievement of the movement was the enactment of Champaran Agrarian
Act passed by Governor General of India on 1st May, 1918.

Kheda Satyagraha

The Kheda peasant satyagraha is also known as no-tax peasant struggle. It was a movement
launched in March 1919 under the leadership of Gandhi, Vallabhbhai Patel, N.M. Joshi,
Shankerlal Pareekh and others.

It was again an experiment, quite similar to that of Champaran, which was based made on
non-violence. It was also participated by intelligentsia. Incidentally, the movement provided
an opportunity to the educated public workers to establish contact with the actual life of the
peasantry. The educated workers learnt to identify themselves with the peasantry and made
themselves available for sacrifices.
The Kheda peasantry mainly consisted of the Patidar peasants. The Patidars have always been
known for their skills in agriculture. The land of Kheda a part of central Gujarat is quite
fertile for the cultivation of tobacco and cotton crops. Educationally also, the Patel cultivators
are well-off. The struggle of the peasants was organised for several causes.

Causes which led to the Satyagraha

The government reassessed the Kheda land and the cultivated crops. On the basis of land
data, collected in this way, the revenue was increased. This was unacceptable to the peasants.

The peasants had suffered a famine and this had resulted in a large-scale failure of crops. The
government, however, did not accept the failure of crops and insisted on the full realisation of
land tax. The peasantry, on the other hand, made its own inquires and emphasised persistently
that the government was not justified in demanding the full land tax.

The Gujarat Sabha consisting of the peasants, submitted petitions and telegrams to the highest
governing authorities of the province requesting for the suspension of the revenue assessment
for the year 1919. But the officials maintained and rejected the popular demand for non-
payment of tax. When the government refused to consider the demands of the Kheda peasants
for non-payment of land tax, Gandhiji exhorted the peasants to resort to satyagraha.

In some cases, the government removed the opium crop by alleging that it was without
permission. This was considered to be a mischievous technique adopted by the government.
The Patidar peasants and the intelligentsia developed its faith in satyagraba.

It was observed by Mahatma Gandhi that The beginning of an awakening among the
peasants of Gujarat has come. The non-payment of land tax led the government officials to
auction the peasants cattle, confiscate their houses, and take away their movable property.
The peasants were given notices of fines and penalties. The Kheda movement was terminated
owing to the acceptance of some of the prime demands of the peasants.

Achievements of the movement

It was settled that the well-to-do Patidar peasants would pay up the land rent and the poorer
ones would be granted remissions. The bulk of the peasant mass who constituted the small
farmers were by and large satisfied. The result was that the Government reached an
agreement for both the parties. Tax for the current year and next year was suspended and all
confiscated property was returned.
The importance about this movement is that, it created an awakening among peasants about
their demands. On the other hand, they sought their involvement in the struggle for
independence. The impact of the success was also realized among the peasants of Gujarat and
the neighbouring states.

Moplah Riots (1921)

The Moplah peasant movement was engineered in August 1921 among the peasants of
Malabar district in Kerala. The Moplah tenants were Muslims and they agitated against the
Hindu landlords and the British government.

Their grievances related to lack of any security of tenure, renewal fees, high rents and other
oppressive landlord exactions. In the 19th century as well, there had been cases of Moplah
resistance to landlord oppression but what erupted in 1921 was on a different scale altogether.

Actually, the freedom movement covered a span of long decades, beginning from 1835 to
1947. The social and economic background of the Moplah has been quite heterogeneous. The
elites among the Moplah earned their livelihood by working as petty traders and merchants.

However, the masses of Moplah earned their livelihood by working as small agriculturists.
They were the tenants of the big landlords who happened to be high-caste Hindus. Though
the Moplahs were poor they imitated the traditional ways of Nayars and acquired the
reputation of warriors. There was British rule in Malabar. The officials in collaboration with
Hindu landlords exploited the Moplahs and oppressed them a great length.

The Moplah agitation of 1921 was preceded by several movements between 1835 to 1921.
D.N. Dhanagare elaborates the series of Moplah movement which took place before the
major Moplah movement of 1921. He traces the history of Moplah movement as under:

Significantly, as soon as the Jenmi landlords, backed by the police, the law courts and the
revenue officials, tightened their grip on the subordinate classes, the Moplah peasantry in its
turn started to revolt against its oppressors. The first such outbreak occurred in 1836 and
thereafter between 1836 and 1854, 22 similar uprisings occurred, of which two, one in 1841
and the other in 1849, were quite serious.

In general, outbreaks followed a similar pattern, almost invariably it would involve a group of
Moplah youths attacking a Brahmin Jenmi, a Nayar official or a Jenmis servant; sometimes it
also involved the burning or defilement of temples, and occasionally the burning or looting of
landlords houses. Such a rebels often took refuge in a mosque or seized a Hindu temple for
their final stand against the police or troops, who in the end would shoot them down.

The Moplah movement of 1921 was altogether different. First, it erupted among the Muslim
peasants against the Hindu landlords. Second, it was characterised by violence. Third, the
movement as the history goes fell in the trap of Hindu-Muslim riot. During this period there
was Khilafat movementa movement raised for the attainment of freedom for Muslims.

Some of the causes of Moplah peasant movement are given below:

Any analysis of the peasant movement of Moplahs should take into account that the Moplahs
were Muslim peasants. Their landlords who were called Jenmis were mostly Hindus. The
relations between the Jenmis and the Moplahs were historically quite unfriendly. In other
words, the relations were both economically and religiously antagonistic. Since 1835 the
Hindu landlords suppressed the Moplah tenants. Thus, the basic cause of the Moplah
agitation was the operation against the Jenmis.

The land tenure system in Malabar was quite unfavourable to the Moplah tenants. There was
total insecurity of tenure to the Moplahs and they could be ejected from their land without
any appropriate notice.

The immediate cause of Moplah agitation was the renewal of fee at an exorbitant rate fixed
by the Jenmis. This was unbearable for the Moplahs.

The exactions practised by the Jenmis were of very high order. More than often the Moplahs
were discriminated against the Hindu tenants.

The course of events that led to the Moplah movement can be described as under:

The first impetus for Moplah resistance against the landlords came from the Malabar District
Congress Committee held at Majeri in April 1921. This conference supported the tenants
cause and demanded legislation to regulate landlord-tenant relations.

Following the Minjeri conference of 1920, the Moplah tenants formed an association which
had its branches in the whole of Kerala. This brought the Moplah tenants under one
organisation.

Yet another motivating factor for 1921 Moplah agitation was the Khilafat movement which
constituted a wider part of national struggle for independence. This movement developed its
roots in Malabar also. The Moplahs took active part in Khilafat movement also. Actually, in
practice, the meetings of the Moplahs and the Khilafat could hardly be separated. The bonds
between the Khilafat movement and Moplah tenants became so much mixed that the
government issued prohibitory notices on all Khilafat meetings on 5th February, 1921. This
displeased the Moplahs and ended up with the agitation of the Moplah peasantry.

The British government was weakened as a result of the First World War. It was not in a
position to take strong military action against the Moplahs. As a result of this, the Moplahs
began to exhibit increasing science of turbulence and defiance of authority.

The final break came only when the district magistrate of Eranad taluka, on 20th August,
1921, raided the mosque at Tirurangadi to arrest Ali Musaliar a Khilafat leader and a highly
respected priest. The people were quiet and peaceful, but the police opened fire on the
unarmed crowd and many were killed. A clash ensued and government offices were
destroyed, records burnt and the treasury looted. The rebellion soon spread into the Eranad,
Vallu- vanad and Ponnani talukas all Moplahs strongholds.

In the agitation the targets of Moplah attack were the unpopular Jenmis, mostly Hindus,
police stations, treasuries and offices, and British planters. The Hindu landlords who were
lenient in their relations with the Moplahs were spared by the latter.

Interestingly, the Moplah rebels travelled several miles through territory populated by Hindus
and attacked only the landlords. This gave a communal flavour to the peasant agitation. As a
matter of fact, the Malabar people in general lost all their sympathy with the Moplahs.
Communalisation of peasant agitation was suicidal for the Moplahs.

Bardoli Movement (1928)

Bardoli is a historical city of Gujarat known for its modern history. The city had close
association with Iron Man of India, Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel. It has witnessed major
historical events during Indias fight for freedom. Bardoli rose to the centre stage of this
revolution soon after Gandhiji started his revolt against British rule. This taluka in Surat
district has played great role in this movement. The most significant event took place in 1928
called as Bardoli Satyagraha

This movement was the decisive factor in history of Indian freedom struggle and political
career of Sardar Patel. This satyagraha laid the foundation of biggest civil disobedience
movement against British rule. In 1928, authorities raised the land revenue in Bardoli. The
region was already reeling under the grunt of famine and floods. This unjustified levy of tax
was opposed by the Congress leaders who set up the Bardoli Inquiry Committee to initiate
this movement. Vallabh Bhai Patel was one of the most strong and prominent leaders from
Gujarat. As such, he was given the command of this movement. He was respected by the
farmers and entire Gujarati community.

Soon after the irrelevant tax hike by British government post natural calamities in Bardoli,
this revolt began taking shape. Patel was authorized to lead this struggle as per his
understanding. He talked to local peasants and farmers. He told them regarding the
consequences of this revolt which included their properties being confiscated and going to
jail. The authorities were sure to curb this movement with full force. But the villagers were
adamant to fight for their rights. They joined hands with Patel. He then held talks with
Mahatma Gandhi who left this movement entirely up to Sardar Patel and the people of
Bardoli. In fact, Vallabh Bhai Patel was given the title of Sardar by the locals of Bardoli.

The movement heated up in the summer months of April and May. Sardar wrote letter to
government to reduce this land revenue. But the Governor of Bombay rejected his plea and
instead announced the date of tax collection. This gave rise to future turnout of events. Patel
urged farmers to reject paying this tax. He was supported by other leaders from Congress
including Mohanlal Pandya, Narhari Parikh, and Ravi Shankar Vyas. Each of them was
assigned one zone of Bardoli to control and lead this revolt. Patel also appointed some
informers to keep an eye on actions taken by the British government.

The fellow countrymen and Gujaratis from all parts of India gave their fully fledged support
to this movement including financial aid. But Sardar asked his supporters to refrain from
gaining sympathy. Instead, he wanted famers of Bardoli to fight against this injustice. To curb
their efforts, officials called Pathans from northwest provinces.

They forcibly confiscated the properties of Bardoli farmers forcing them out of their own
houses. When auction of these properties began, entire country refused to come forward to
take part in it. Sardar Patel appointed several volunteers to keep close watch on the
auctioneering officials. Whenever these officials visited any village in Bardoli taluka, an
alarm was raised by these volunteers. As a result, villagers would go to the forests and
officials never knew the names of owners for each land or property.
This was a well-managed revolt. Any tenant or villager, who opposed this movement in any
manner, faced social boycott. Only one village was reported to have paid the taxes at
increased rates and only few rich businessmen from Bombay approached to buy the
confiscated properties of Bardoli. All these people faced severe social boycott from all
sections of society. The revolt irked the anger of some members in Bombay Legislative
assembly as well. They were miffed by the treatment meted out to these poor farmers and
resigned from their position to show their support for them.

Consequences of Bardoli Satyagraha

As anticipated, this movement was a huge success. It was effectively led by Sardar Patel who
left no stone unturned to ensure its positive outcome. Finally, in 1928, government agreed on
certain terms and conditions to save it from any further disgrace. It decided to restore the
seized properties and reduced the rate of increase in tax to mere 6.03% as against the earlier
rate of 30%. Interestingly, government was bound to cancel revenue collection for that year.
Sardar Patel worked hard to ensure that every farmer got his land back. Lands that were
purchased during auctions were again bought by wealthy people from Bombay and then,
returned to their respective owners.

It was only after this movement that the political stature of Sardar Patel became
magnanimous. This revolt gave encouragement to several other non-cooperation movements
in consequent years as well.