Mamata Banerjee Warns BJP Against Distorting History, Criticizes Focus on Siraj ud-Daulah

Mamata Banerjee launched an attack on the BJP on Sunday, accusing it of repeatedly trying to demonize Siraj ud-Daulah, the last independent Nawab of Bengal, and cautioning the saffron party not to force her to bring up the past.

During a Sunday afternoon rally in Dhubulia, the chief minister discussed the recent phone call between BJP candidate Amrita Roy and Narendra Modi on the Siraj and Nadia feudal ruler Krishnachandra Roy, who she did not identify. The BJP has made available an audio recording of the call that was recorded between Modi and the candidate, who is the wife of a Krishnachandra Roy descendent.

Here, the BJP candidate has made several statements. Instead of Mir Jafar, the Bengali people backed Siraj ud-Daulah during the 1757 conflict with the British. I won't discuss the character of the guy who opposed Siraj ud-Daulah — good or bad. "That name is being brought up now, the person who stood (against Siraj) as Lord (Robert) Clive's friend to finish Bengal's war of Independence," the speaker said. "Have you forgotten history, Modibabu?"

The legacies of 18th-century personalities Siraj and Roy have begun to loom strongly in Bengal's political discourse this election season ever since the telephone conversation was made public.

Roy had controversially betrayed Siraj in the crucial Battle of Plassey in order to support Mir Jafar and other British colonists.

During the discussion, Amrita Roy (who is still known by some as Rani in Krishnanagar) praised her husband's ancestor for his contribution in 1757. Her explanation for Roy's betrayal—which she did not address—was that he was motivated to "save the Sanatan dharma" in Bengal. Modi seems to concur.

In the past, Siraj has been famous as a hero and is often believed to have been sinned against rather than as a sinner.

Known for not practicing community discrimination, he lost his life at the age of 24 while attempting to fend off an overwhelming foreign opponent's imperial invasion. More crucially, the subcontinent did not see the emergence of Hindu or Muslim nationalism until after the Indian Rebellion of 1857, which was encouraged by the British as part of their divisive Divide and Rule policy.

"Never seek solace in falsehoods. I'll have to turn to the pages of history (for a fact-check) if you do that, and then there won't be room for you. The populace will utterly reject them out of disdain. The Trinamul head, who was in Krishnanagar on Sunday to campaign for her candidate Mahua Moitra, stated that everyone needed to be cognizant of history.

Mamata was alluding to the historical record that Roy had allied in 1757 with the group of traitors commanded by Mir Jafar, which included individuals such as Rai Durlabh, Yar Lutuf Khan, and Omichund. Collectively, they helped the East India Company armies under Clive beat Siraj and ultimately contributed in the British colonization effort.

In addition, the chief minister made fun of the BJP for calling Amrita Roy a princess.

Furthermore, they're referring to Raj Mata (Queen Mother)? Where did a Raj (Royal) or a Mata (Mother) come from? Nowadays, in our democracy, every individual is a Raja or a Raj Mata. "Those who still think of themselves as kings ought to remain in their palaces," she said.

The BJP candidate responded by referring to Siraj, who was born in Murshidabad, and even the Mughals as "outsiders." This was in line with the controversial Sangh Parivar viewpoint, which maintains that India has been ruled by "foreign, colonial" forces since the 12th century, when Islamic rulers arrived in the country following Muhammad of Ghor's arrival from what is now Afghanistan.

"They are speaking without understanding the past. They are just stating these things to further their own, selfish agendas. Among the bohiragawto Mughals was Siraj. Why are you acting so obsessively towards him? To you, who is he? inquired Amrita Roy, pointing out that Mamata ought to be aware of Krishnachandra Roy's achievements in her capacity as chief minister.

She continued, perhaps forgetting that she was the one who had first brought her husband's ancestor's heritage to light during the election campaign. "Why not address current issues such as corruption, Sandeshkhali, arrested ministers, instead of dragging in things from two to three centuries ago?"