Tag Archives: Muslims in India

Arif Mohammad Khan give a perspective on how to view BJP’s victory

“The masjids during Ramzan were used to goad the followers to vote for particular parties.”

” The country was partitioned when the Muslim League said we are feeling insecure and raked up passions. During Shah Bano case, they said the same. How long will you ( the media ) keep giving space to these persons who create problems while saying country is insecure. ” – asks Arif Mohammad Khan in interview to Karan Thapar.




CENSUS 2011: What It Really Shows

Original Source : Organiser

– By Dr.JK Bajaj

The recently released data of religious census is an eye opener for many.  While Hindus have first time been enumerated below 80%, Muslims have registered the highest growth rate in the last decade with 24.6%. This trend is consistent from the Independence and many factors are contributing to it. The decadal decline of Hindus is 0.7%, while that of Muslims is 0.8% on the positive side. The Muslim growth rate is consistently higher than the national average. The growth rate is alarmingly higher in specific states namely, Assam, Pashchim Banga, Kerala, etc. These numbers have diverse repercussions on policy matters.  Organiser  comes  with  the  demographic, socio-economic  and  political  imperatives  of  this stark reality in Bharat.

The long awaited  religious  data  of  Census  2011  has  finally  been  published.  The  data  largely confirms what had already become known from the leaked information that has been in the public domain for several months. Briefly, the Muslims have increased their share in the  population of the Bharatiya Union by 0.8%; Christian share in the country as a whole has remained unchanged, but they have gained substantially in the North-East, especially in Arunachal Pradesh, and in several pockets of high Christian influence in central and southern Bharat; the share of Bharatiya Religionists, including Hindus, Buddhists,  Sikhs and Jains, has correspondingly declined.

The Hindus now form less than 80% of the population of the Union. Their share has come down from 80.46% in 2001 to 79.80% in 2011. The share of Sikhs has declined from 1.87 to 1.72%, of Buddhists from 0.77 to 0.70 and of Jains from 0.41 to 0.37%. Share of Other Religions and Persuasions (ORPs), who belong mainly to various Janjati religions, has marginally increased  from 0.65 to 0.66%. The share of those who have not stated their religion has increased from 0.07 to 0.24%; in all, 28.6 lakh Bharatiya have chosen not to state their religion in 2011, in 2001 there were only 7.3 lakh Bharatiya in this category.

Since some decline in the number of Bharatiya Religionists and a corresponding rise in the number of Muslims from decade to decade has become the norm, it is easy to conclude from the data that things are absolutely normal and that no serious change is taking place in the religious profile of the Bharatiya population. This has been the reaction of many journalists and commentators. Some of them have even concluded that the data indicates a slowing down of Muslim growth. And some  extra-secularist  demographers  have  even  started  saying  that the really significant part of the census data is not the relatively higher growth of Muslims but the relatively higher improvement in their gender ratio! But that has been the way of the mainstream Bharatiya demographers; they insist on closing their eyes to the obvious decline of Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists and the glaring rise of Muslims in general and of Christians in particular pockets of Bharat. And to divert attention from the elephant in the room, they keep drawing attention to irrelevant and extraneous issues.

An increase of 0.8% in Muslim share is not small
The increase of 0.8% in Muslim share has been generally seen as a small normal increase. The number does seem small in itself. But this increase in the share of Muslims and    a corresponding decline in the Bharatiya Religionists is not a one-time  phenomenon.  It  has  been happening continuously from decade to decade since the beginning of the census period. A change of above 0.8% per decade seems to have become the norm for at least the last three decades. The Muslim share increased by 0.88% between 1981 and 1991, it increased again by 0.84% between 1991 and 2001, and now it has increased by 0.80%. Cumulatively, in the period since Partition, the share of Bharatiya Religionists in the population of Bharat has declined by about 4% and that of Muslims has increased by the same amount. This level of change is not small by any standards.

Muslims form 14.2% of the Bharatiya population now; their share was 13.4% in 2001, 12.6% in 1991, 11.7% in 1981 and only 10.4% in 1951. There are 17.2 crore Muslims in Bharat in 2011 compared to 3.7 crore in 1951. Bharat may now be hosting the second largest population of the world, behind Indonesia, which had 20.7 crore Muslims in 2010, but probably ahead of  Pakistan, whose total population in 2011 was 17.6 crore.

The Gap between Muslim and Hindu Growth remains high

Between 2001 and 2011, Muslims have grown by 24.6 and the Hindus by 16.8%. Sikhs, Jains andBuddhists have registered a much lower growth. The Muslim growth is 46% above that of Hindus and 39% above the national average. This gap is very large. In 2001, the gap between  the Muslim  growth  and  the  national  average  was  somewhat  smaller  at  36.8%,  and it was even smaller in the earlier decades. It seems that with the decline of the growth rates of  all communities the gap between the growth of Muslims and others has been only widening.
It is true that the growth rate of Muslims has declined from 29.5% of the previous decade to 24.6% now, but the national average has also declined from 21.6 to 17.7%. In relative terms, the national average has declined by about 18% and in the Muslim growth by 17%; this has led to awidening not narrowing of the gap. What matters in creating the imbalance between different communities is the gap between their growth rates, not the absolute rates of growth. The imbalance can keep increasing even as absolute rates for all communities decline.

Larger Muslim gains in specific parts of Bharat
The gap between the growth of Muslims and others is much higher than the national average of 0.8 percentage points in many States of Bharat. Below are some States that have seen the largest gap in the growth rates and the largest change in the share of Muslims and others.

Assam: The share of Muslims in the population of this state has risen from 30.9% in 2001 to 34.2% in 2011. In 1971, the Muslims had a share of only 24.6%; they have gained by 10 percentage points in just four decades.  During 2001-2011,  Muslims  in  Assam  have  registered  a  decennial  growth  of  29.6%;  Hindus,  on  the  other  hand,  have  grown  by  just 10.9%. Christians have also recorded a substantial growth of 18.2%.

Muslims now have a commanding majority in several districts of the State; their share in Dhubri is 80%. It is important to look at the data of Assam up to the level of the sub-districts; in the earlier decade, Hindus in several sub-  districts  of  lower  Assam  had  registered  a negative growth indicating a forced exodus of the non-Muslim  populations.  It  is important to look at the state of those and the neighbouring sub-districts in 2011.

Pashchim Banga: The share of Muslims in the population of Pashchim Banga has gone up  from 24.7 in 2001 to 27.0% in 2011. Muslim share in this State up to 1971 was around 20%; they have gained by about 7 percentage points in these four decades. The decennial growth of Muslims and Hindus in the State during  2001-2011  has  been  21.8  and  10.8%,  respectively. Christians have also registered a significant growth of 27.8%. It would be interesting to look at the changes in the relative shares of the two communities in the districts that have a dominant presence of Muslims.

Uttarakhand: Muslim proportion in Uttarakhand has risen from 11.9 to 13.9%. The decennial growth of Hindus in this State has been 16%, compared to 39% of the Muslims and 40% of the Christians.

Adjoining Districts of Uttar Pradesh: Several districts of Uttar Pradesh neighbouring Haridwar and Udham Singh Nagar of Uttarakhand, including Saharanpur, Muzaffarnagar, Bijnor, Moradabad, Rampur, Jyotiba Phule Nagar and Meerut have recorded extraordinary Muslim growth as in the previous decades. This region is on its way to becoming   Muslim-majority;  Rampur already has a Muslim share of 51% in 2011.

NCT of Delhi: Muslim share in Delhi has gone up from 11.7% in 2001 to 12.9% in 2011. In 1951, the proportion of Muslims in Delhi was less than 6%. Between 2001 and 2011, Muslims here have grown by 33%, while Hindus have grown by 20.7%.

Haryana: The most surprising change is in Haryana. The share of Muslims has begun to grow rather rapidly since 1981. Now their share in the State is 7%, it was 5.8% in 2001 and only 3.8% in 1961, when the State was formed. In the newly created Mewat district, Muslims now form 79% of the population. In the taluk of Nuh in this region, the proportion of Muslims has gone up from 71 to 77%, in Tawdu, it has gone up from 49 to 57% and in Hathin, from 54 to 59%. This is high growth indeed.

Kerala: The share of Muslims in Kerala has gone up from 24.7 to 26.6%. The share of both Hindus and Christians has declined. Muslims in the State had a share of only 17.5% in 1951 and about the same in 1901. In the last six decades their share has increased by 9%age points.  During  2001-2011,  Hindus  in  Kerala  have  grown  by  only  2.6%  and  Christians  by  1.4%,  but the Muslims have grown by 12.8%. The growth rates of the three communities during 1991-2001 were 7.4, 7.8 and 16%, respectively.

We have not yet been able to look at other areas of high Muslim growth, especially in the chicken neck area covering several districts of Bihar, Jharkhand and Pashchim Banga. From the above analysis it is clear that though the increase of 0.8 percentage point in all Bharat share of Muslims seems small and ‘normal’, it has implied substantial change in the religious demography of many parts of the country. There is considerable difference in the growth of Muslims and others even in the less obvious States like Punjab, J&K, Himachal Pradesh, etc.

Christians have continued to increase in various pockets
According to  all-Bharat  figures,  Christians  have  grown  somewhat  slower  than  the  national average. Between 2001 and 2011, they have recorded a decennial growth of 15.5%, compared to 16.8% of the Hindus and 17.7% of the total population. The share of Christians in the population of the country has remained nearly unchanged at 2.3%. But they have recorded substantial increase in specific pockets of the country, while their proportion has declined in States like Kerala, Goa and Andhra Pradesh. Below, we list some of the States where Christians have made deeper inroads in the last decade:

Arunachal Pradesh: The share of Christians in the population of Arunachal Pradesh has gone up from 18.7% in 2001 to 30.3% in 2011. This is very high growth indeed. Decennial growth of Christians in the State has been 104% compared to 31% of the Muslims and just 6% of the Hindus. Unlike several other States of Northeast, Arunachal Pradesh had remained outside the Christian reach until 1971. In 1971, they formed just 0.79% of the population; their share increased to 4.3% in 1981, 10.3% in 1991, to 18.7% in 2001 and now it has reached 30.3%. Many districts of Arunachal Pradesh have now become Christian majority. They form 75% of the  population in Tirap district now; several tribal communities in the State have been nearly fully converted to Christianity.

Meghalaya: In Meghalaya, the proportion of Christians has risen 70.2% in 2001 to 74.6% now. This is another State where those tribal communities that had remained outside the fold of Christianity are being converted in large numbers from decade to decade. In 1991, the proportion of Christians in the State was 64.6%; it was 52.6% in 1981 and only 35.2% in 1961. The State now seems to be on the way to getting fully Christianised in the manner of Nagaland and Mizoram.

Manipur: In Manipur, Christians have shown a surprising rise in their share from 37.3% in 2001 to 41.3% in 2011. The Christian share here in 1971 was 26% and it was less than 20% in 1961. The Christian presence in Manipur is limited to the hill districts, while the valley remains largely Hindu. Even then the share of Christians has been rising from decade to decade.

Tripura: Tripura did not have much Christian presence till recently. Their share rose from 1.7 to 3.2% between 1991 and 2001 and has now gone up to 4.4%. Their presence in the State still remains limited, but it is rising.

Sikkim: Like Tripura, Sikkim also had little Christian presence till 1971, when their share in the population was counted at 0.79%. Their share began growing after that; it rose to 2.2% in 1981, 3.3% in 1991 and 6.7% in 2001. In 2011, 9.9% of the population of the State has been counted  as Christian. This is a significant rise and indicates that like Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim may also be on the way to rapid Christianisation.

Besides the northeast, there are pockets of high Christian presence in Tamil Nadu, Orissa and inthe central Bharatiya States. Christians have registered significant increase in their proportion in Kanyakumari district of Tamil Nadu, where they are on way to acquiring a majority. In Odisha, their share in Gajapati, Kandhmal and Rayagada districts has increased considerably. Gajapati is now 38% Christian. Their presence in the older pocket of Christian influence in Sundargarhin the north of the State has remained nearly unchanged at around 18 to 19%. Christian share has grown marginally in Jharkhand and has remained unchanged in Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh.

Contextualising the religion figures
The data thus provides a clear picture of the increasing Muslim presence in the whole subcontinent and of the grossly increasing Muslim or Christian presence in several parts of the Bharatiya Union. It shall be of great interest to relate the numbers of different communities with other socio-economic parameters like literacy,  work-participation  rates, etc.  The 2001 Census had for the first time provided such detailed information on the basis of religion. That information gave us many insights. For example, we learnt that Muslim female literacy in at least 9 larger States of Bharat, including Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh,  Jharkhand, Odisha, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Maharashtra was higher than that of Bharatiya Religionists; in many of these States, the difference between the female  literacy of Muslims and Bharatiya Religionists was of more than 10 percentage points in favour of the Muslims. According to Sachar Committee, in most of these States, poverty amongst Muslims was lower than the average and the average bank deposits of Muslims were higher than others. Yet in all these States, the growth rates of Muslims were also higher than that of  others. This clearly contradicts the pet theory of the demographers that the higher growth rates of Muslims are merely a reflection of their relative poverty and illiteracy. The data  provided by the Census of 2001 and the Sachar Committee does not seem to have encouraged the demographers to revisit their theories and prejudices; yet it would be useful to get similar  religion-wise socio-economic data for the Census 2011.

Given the critical importance of the religious demography for understanding the changing  social, political and geographical balance within Bharat, the Census should consider making thereligion data part of the Primary Census Abstracts, so that these numbers become available up to the town and village level and can be correlated with various other socio-economic aspects of the population. Making religion data part of the PCA would also take away the  various compulsions that sometimes lead to unnecessary delays and speculation about these  figures.

Dr JK Bajaj (The writer is director, Centre for Policy Studies)

Legal Notice by Dr. Pravin Togadia for publishing fabricated news

Dr Pravin Togadia, general secretary of VHP has denied saying the sentences attributed to him in Times of India and some other media and sent a legal notice to media houses. Dr Togadia has clearly said that report published in media is fabricated and written with malicious intention to malign his and organisation’s name.

RSS leader Ram Madhav tweeted: “Praveenbhai had not said anything that was attributed to him. It ws a fabricated news. No Swayamsevak thinks on those lines.”

Click here to Download PDF version of the notice


TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN & TO ALL PUBLIC COMMUNICATORS, GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS & SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS As advised by & on behalf of my client Dr. Pravinbhai Mohanlal Togadia, age 57 yrs, I S. D. Jani Advocate 12, Shivshakti complex, High court Road, Bhavnagar, Gujarat  India do hereby state as under.


1.          That the report about a misinformed incident in Gujarat as appeared in an English newspaper Times of India dated April 21, 2014 which per our information, has appeared in the said news paper’s almost all India editions under varied headlines, is false, malafide & mischievous.

2.          That significantly, on the same day, i.e. today i.e. April 21, 2014 in yet another English newspaper namely Indian Express dated a completely different report has suddenly appeared which is about a misinformed description of an incident in Uttar Pradesh village in dist Pratapgadh.

3.          That it also is noticed that a heated debate has begun on yet another English TV channel namely Times Now on the said misinformed mischievous report as mentioned in the said Times of India.

4.          That the entire sequence of events as mentioned in the above 1, 2 & 3 clearly show that there is a bigger conspiracy against my client not only to defame him in public life but also to put his life & the lives of his family members & of the people associated with the organizations he is associated with in danger.

5.          That my client happens to be an International Working President of VHP i.e. Vishwa Hindu Parishad with Head Office in Delhi. The said organization is known to be caring for Hindu Well-being & welfare.

6.          That my client has been provided with the security of the Z+ level by the concerned governments to protect him from physical attacks on his life.

7.          That under the rules of the above said security level, the travel, stay & other details of the secured person are supposed to be kept confidential by the concerned authorities who provide the security to ensure that no pre-planned attacks take place on the secured person.

8.          That my client was travelling at night around 11 pm from Bhavnagar City ,Gujarat on April 19, 2014 for a night stay at the house of Mr. Bhavin S. Jani  the town Bhavnagar.

9.          That while travelling my client was told by one of the security men that a large group was protesting on the route because know that Togadia were to travel from this route.

10.        That my client as mentioned above was traveling at night, asked the security man as to how did the group know of the route which was supposed to be confidential per the security rules. The concerned person did not reply.

11.        That after reaching the night stay place i.e. the house of Mr. Bhavin S. Jani again my client was informed that the same group that was protesting for some reason wanted to meet him. Although tired by the day’s hectic work of introducing the free medical service to all in India, my client agreed to meet the said group for 5 minutes.

12.        That then the group of around 1000 people came to give my client a memorandum & presentation about how their houses were purchased under force & duress by some people.

13.        That the said group also informed my client that they stayed in an area in Bhavnagar before & even there their houses were forcibly purchased & that they moved to another area where there were temples & that even the new place they are being hounded to sell their houses to another group.

14.        That hearing their plea, as a law abiding citizen, my client advised them to follow the legal process of writing to the local administration, the concerned state government & approach the court if they felt that they are being forced into any selling of their houses.

15.        That my client also informed that there had been a ‘Disturbed Area Act’ existing in some places in Gujarat which was enacted by the earlier Government & that the said group may find out if the said act was applicable to them in the said matter.

16.        That we wish to state here emphatically that there was nothing socially or legally wrong in the above advice given by my client to the said group as mentioned above.

17.        That after one full day of this incident & with no provocation whatsoever, to our distress & surprise, we found the malicious report about our client in the English news paper namely Times of India dated April 21, 2014.

18.        That the said report as mentioned in above 17 gives a completely false story intended to malign my client socially & also putting his life in danger.

19.        That the timing of the other media reports such as in Indian Express front page which are totally unrelated of the misinformed incident of 2012, popping up on the same day i.e. April 21, 2014 mentioning my client’s name in a malicious way & then media debates followed by these reports are a definite conspiracy of planted stories by the vested interest parties against my client.

20.        That we hereby deny any such malicious reporting by all the media as mentioned above & demand the immediate CBI enquiry into the matter as mentioned hereunder:
(a) That who, how, to whom & why disclosed the security information such as travel route, stay place & so on, which is supposed to be kept confidential for the Z+ category
(b) That who all were involved in tracking the movement of my client during his travel & disclosing to the public in general even without verifying with my client whether he knew the said people.
(c) That who arranged the said Times of India reporter to be at the secured route late at night without any information to & permission from my client despite the Z+ security.
(d) That who managed the same say simultaneous appearance of reports in two different English news papers all India i.e. the misinformed, false & malicious reports of 2012 & 2014 that is a night before.

21.        That my client while denying of speaking of any inflammatory words as mentioned in the said Times of India report under different headlines all India as filed from Gujarat, demands a CBI investigation into the larger conspiracy of putting his life under threat by disclosing his security travel route & place of stay to general public.

22.        That my client now fears that this is a larger conspiracy in the General Elections time to draw benefit in votes at the cost of his freedom & his life. That my client also fears that the said orchestrated malafide, mischievous & malicious reporting of unrelated misinformed incidents in different media has been aimed at targeting his public & social life as well as the lives of my client, his family members & the people in the organizations with which my client is associated with.

23.        That the above suspicion is strengthened with the fact that for the past 3 months my client has been travelling extensively in India to introduce the Free Medical service for the poor & needy patients. That the regional media had been mentioning the same as but the said English media has not been mentioning the positive medical service however, the same Times of India, Indian Express & Times Now have simultaneously targeted my client on the misinformed unrelated incidents in a criminally defamatory, malicious & mischievous ways. That this proves that there has been a completely political conspiracy behind such ill-reporting about my client with the intention to harm his reputation, image & life and then to draw political mileage out of all this

24.        That once again while denying the concocted reporting in the above said & if so in any other media as false, malicious & malafide, we state here that such criminal conspiracy against my client may cause danger to my client’s life & reputation & that in such circumstances the entire criminal, financial, social & technical liability will be of the concerned Governments, its authorities, its various departments & all the people including the said media & all public communicators who have been involved in such a criminal activity against my client as conspirators.

25.        That we urge the Hon. Supreme Court to take note of the probable lethal attack on my client’s life, reputation & also lives of his family members as well as the people associated with the organizations to which he offers his services.

26.        That we urge all the public communicators to immediately refrain from spreading malafide, false, criminally defamatory & dangerous stories against my client & putting him in life threat, failing which my client will be free to take further legal steps as stipulated under all prevalent laws & Acts.

Place: Bhavnagar ,Gujarat

Date : April 21, 2014                                                                                                      (S. D. Jani)

Copy to:

1) The Hon, Supreme Court, New Delhi                                                                         Advocate

2) The Chief Minister, Gujarat

3) The Union Home Minister, India

Source : http://www.samvada.org