• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

some interesting info about bangladeshi hindus..

Not open for further replies.


Active member
i came across this news by accident.

not much is heard about bangla deshi hindus, except my bengali hindu friends who swear that they are bengalis first and all bengalis feel 'common'.

so, i was surprised to read the article below. it is a new law, restoring seized hindu lands. apparently those who seized these lands, after bangla independence, during the years recent 2001 -6, are political bigwigs. sounds familar to india, right?

now they are restoring some back, though half heartedly. also interesting to note that the hindu population, 18% in 1961 declined to 9%. i tend to believe this, as the source is a respectable e-paper from sri lanka.

wonder, if the indian media, atleast the calcutta media, covered this news.

When I was working in Calcutta during 1979 to 1982,many bengalis (from Bangladesh but now Indian citizens)were working in my department.
All younger Hindus preferred to come over to India while elders of the same family preferred to stay back in Bangladesh to safeguard their property there.
They used to go to Bangladesh to see their parents.The life becomes difficult for 'Hindus' living in countries where Islam is declared as state religion.
While a majority of followers of Islam are good people and are very much secular in their outlook in countries like INDIA,USA,they tend to be different
when they are staying in countries where 'ISLAM' is state religion.
While the present ruling party in Bangladesh is very much pro-India,the opposition party when in power is pro-Pakistan.
I think, it is better that persons following different faiths are made to stay in all countries like India and USA instead of having separate countries only based on religion.
Even in India, there are some districts in Kerala and West Bengal,and Kashmir, where the Muslim population is in majority and Hindus are in minority,we hear reports of harassment of Hindus by the majority community.These incidents never appear in national newspapers.
Last edited:
Ever since Independence, there has been some effort in getting compensation for the properties Hindus had to abandon when they were forced to move to India from then East Pakistan. I know of people who had got some money. But the process is glacial and yields only 10% of the property value, if that much. Corruption on both sides of the border inhibits the compensation process.

On the flip side one might ask that if people could not defend their property, does the national government have any obligation for reimbursement?
Unfortunately kashmiri pundits who were forced to leave kashmir and are refugees in india have no voice and are forgotten by our secular government. Illegal bangladeshi influx into india is estimated to be over 10 million and despite supreme court's observations on illegal stay, our secular government has not taken any action.

About 100 pakistani hindu families now in india want asylum, but the govt. refuses to grant the same.
On the flip side one might ask that if people could not defend their property, does the national government have any obligation for reimbursement?

I would think this argument is untenable. Did the Government of the day promise "Right to Property" to its citizens? If it did, is it not the duty of the government to enforce its writ and ensure that the Right does not merely remain on paper. Did not the government disarm the individual and take away the individual right to protection with arms and ammunitions and substitute it with State protection in the form of police, para-military and military etc.? If the State permits violation of right to a select group by remaining a mute spectator, who is to compensate for the loss of property?

If the flip side of the argument is a serious thought, are Microsoft etc. justified in demanding their IPRs are protected by passing anti-piracy legislation etc. in the countries where their products are sold?
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads