Prior to the abolition of Zamindari in East Bengal (Bangladesh) in accordance with the East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act of 1950, the Bhawal Zamindar estate was the second largest zamindari (feudal landholding) in the Dhaka district, next only to the Dhaka Nawab estate of theKhawja family. In fact, its enormous landholdings within Dhaka city began from today's Bangla Motor right up to Tejgaon and beyond to the north of the City.
The illustrious Zamindar, Raja Bahadur Rajendra Narayan Roy Chaudhuri of Bhawal, died in 1901, leaving behind his widow Rani Bilasmani Devi and six children — daughters Indumayi, Jyotirmayi and Tarinmayi, and sons Ranendra alias baro (eldest) Kumar, Ramendra alias mejho (second) Kumar, and Rabindra alias sejho (youngest) Kumar.
Ramendra Narayan Roy was one of three brothers who had inherited the estate from their father. He was popularly known to people as "mejho Kumar".
In 1904, citing gross mismanagement, the Bhawal estate was taken over by the colonial British Court of Wards.
Rani Bilasmani, mother of the Kumars', successfully filed a lawsuit against the Court of Wards and won the case in 1905, whereby the jurisdiction of the estate reverted back to the proprietorship of her sons, with the eldest Kumar Ranendra as the legal head of the family.
Meanwhile, a great tragedy descended upon the Bhawal Raj family. Rani Bilasmani died in 1907, of illness.
The second kumar of Bhawal, Ramendra Narayan Roy, was yet to take up the zamindari management when the famous incident of the Bhawal case took place. He spent most of his time hunting, in festivities, or with his several mistresses. By 1905, he was said to have contracted syphilis.
In 1909, he went to Darjeeling to seek treatment, accompanied by his wife Bibhabati Devi, her brother Satyendranath Banerjee, and a large retinue, but reportedly died there at the age of 25.
After Mejo Kumar suddenly died in Darjeeling, there were conflicting reports that he was cremated and also that his dead body had mysteriously vanished from the cremation grounds, before being consigned to the flames. A sudden heavy thunder shower drove the mourners and others to seek shelter, abandoning the lifeless Kumar on the unlit funeral pyre.
After the torrential downpour had died down, the mourners on return were surprised to find that Kumar's body in the meantime had mysteriously vanished.
The riveting tale shrouded in myth and mystery, fact, and fiction, begins from here on.
The matter would have ended there. But soon there arose unsubstantiated charges of a palace conspiracy and dark family politics were hinted at.
Over the next ten years, the other Bhawal princes also died, and the colonial British Court of Wards took control of the estate on behalf of their widows.
To make matters worse, the eldest Kumar died in 1910, followed by the death of the youngest Kumar in 1913. All three Kumars had died childless. The Bhawal raj was now bereft of any legitimate male heir to the zamindari.
In 1915, the colonial British Court of Wards under the Board of Revenue, went into action again and took over the management of the estate. Thus, the stage was set for a confrontation, which would increasingly take on a fervently patriotic, nationalistic and anti-colonial overtone against the British Raj.
However, all this would dramatically change the situation with the miraculous appearance of a strange sannyasi, naked except for a loincloth, smeared in ash, with long matted hair, on the Buckland Bund near the Ruplal House in Dhaka in 1920. He bore a striking resemblance to the second (Mejo) Kumar of Bhawal.
Later on, during his subsequent visits to the Joydebpur rajbari, the sannyasi was hugely welcomed and recognised by the tenant farmers as their second Kumar.
WikipediaThereafter, the sannyasi finally disclosed that he was indeed the Ramendra Narayan Roy, the missing Raja of Bhawal. He claimed that he had been poisoned by his own family, and was saved by a group of Naga Sadhus who found him lying unconscious, took him to their abode and nursed him back to recovery. He suffered memory loss and wandered for the next 10 years throughout India with the Sadhus. While returning from Chittagong to Dhaka in 1920, he recovered his memory and was instructed by his guru to return home.
Through all this unfolding high drama the widowed Rani Bibhabati adamantly refused to meet the sannyasi, declaring him as an interloper.
However, the biggest loser from this sensational development, would be Rani Ananda Kumari, wife of the youngest kumar.
She played a pivotal role, adopted a boy, Ram Narayan Roy, as the new Kumar of Bhawal. Surprisingly, this move was endorsed by the British.
And that, many years later, it was further alleged that the Kumar had been poisoned by his own wife, Bibhabati, in connivance with her secret paramour, the family doctor.
In 1921, the claimant arrived in Dhaka at the Bhawal Rajbari with two lawyers to meet the District magistrate who recorded his claim.
In June, the Board of Revenue announced in public that they had proof that the Kumar's body had been cremated in Darjeeling and therefore the claimant was an impostor.
The Board of Revenue claimed that the whole matter was a conspiracy organised by interested parties who wanted to use the estate for their own purposes.
After the claimant moved to Calcutta in 1924, he also received recognition in local social circles.
In 1930, lawyers working for the claimant, supported by the sisters and elder sister-in-law of the Kumar, filed a declaratory suit in Dhaka claiming the name and property of Ramendra Narayan Roy against Bibhabati Devi and other landholders who were represented by the British Court of Wards.
In court, the Sannyasi declared that he had fallen victim to a conspiracy hatched by his brother-in-law Satyendranath Banerjee, an unemployed graduate who wanted to control his share of the estate through his childless sister. He further alleged that Satyendranath had bribed the family physician, Ashutosh Dasgupta, to state that the Rajkumar was suffering from syphilis and was persuaded by the conspirators to go for treatment to Darjeeling.
The trial began on November 30, 1933. Judgment was delivered in favour of the plaintiff/complainant in 1936.
The claimant moved to take up residence at the estate, but the colonial Board of Revenue did not release any funds to him.
On October 5, 1936, the British government filed an appeal against the judgment of the lower court in the Calcutta High Court, again in the name of the wards of the Court of Wards. The hearing began on August 14, 1939.
On November 25, 1940, the Calcutta High Court upheld the verdict and the appeal was dismissed.
In 1943, the colonial British government in consultation with the lawyers representing Rani Bibhabati then filed for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the Privy Council in London seeking redress. However, the war and the German blitz on London delayed the hearing, which finally began in 1945. After a prolonged hearing, the Privy Council in London also dismissed the appeal in its judgment in favour of the sannyasi, on July 30, 1946. (Total 16 years ).
The next evening the claimant (sannyasi), finally declared lawfully as the second Kumar of Bhawal, went to offer puja at a Kali temple in Calcutta, where he suffered a stroke and died two days later.
A forensic study conducted on the dead body of the sadhu suggested that he was indeed the Kumar: Based on a detailed list of 21 physical identification data, a total of 19 attributes from that list were identical matches, between those of the sannyasi and that of the Kumar, an overwhelming statistical fact, indicating that the dead sannyasi was indeed the actual Kumar of Bhawal.
The Bhawal Raja episode evinced much curiosity largely because of the mysterious disappearance and later the equally mysterious appearance of the sannyasi after decades and the Raja claiming his rightful ownership of the Raj estate and the prolonged Bhawal case for a long period of 16 years, including its being discussed at the Privy Council.
During my recent visit, I was shocked to find the entire palace occupied by the District Administration of Gazipur. Moreover, we came across several government departments, namely, Ministry of Information, Drug Administration and the Shilpakala Academy occupying several rooms. The palace was under lock and key, with dozens of curious visitors trying to have a glimpse of the photographs/manuscripts and belongings of the one mighty Rajas.
Nothing has been done as yet to preserve the legacy of the Bhawals. Nobody has bothered to develop this place into what could have been a gem. The Bhawal Rajas' story could be nicely enacted and made interesting through an audio video display/light and sound show. Movies on the Sannyasi Raja have been made in Bangladesh and India and there are many books on the events that took place.
Within an hour's drive from Dhaka, It could be one of the prime tourist destinations. All that is required is a quality restaurant, toilet facilities, souvenir shops amidst a manicured garden. Moreover, several rooms could be rented as part of a guest house. Such has been done in India and elsewhere. The Rajbari can be outsourced to private organisations.
I would request the concerned authorities to immediately relocate the DC office and other government departments and restore the premises as one of the top-end tourist destinations. I am sure the government will find a better place to relocate the few government offices. Let us restore the glory of our past.
Dr Shamim Ahmed is a senior public health and nutrition specialist, passionate traveller and photographer.