Making of a Primitive Bandit Criminal: Trial of Jadonang in the British Colonial Court

Introduction

The freedom struggles of the highlanders of the northeastern region of India against British colonialism were, in contrast to valley movements, barely able to influence their neighbours. From rough terrain to cultural barriers to ideological differences—a weak network of trustees with the state—there are various reasons why these movements remained unpopular. In the anti-British colonial resistances such as the Anglo-Khasi (1829–33), ¹ the Anglo-Naga war at Khonoma (1845–79), ² the uprising in the Jaintia Hills (1862–63), ³ the Garo Hills (1873), ⁴ Sambhudhan Phonglo led the resistance movement in the North Cachar Hills (1870s–83), ⁵ the resistances in the Lushai Hills (1871–89), ⁶ the Kuki revolts (1917–19), ⁷ and so on, the highlanders fought and sacrificed their lives for the indigenous community causes and these have become inevitable events in modern Indian history. But the history writings of the northeast highlanders has struggled for an appropriate place in Indian history pedagogy at the national level.

Among these events, I found that the Zeliangrong movement has some unique, extraordinarily historical charms that stem predominantly from the non-violent ethos of the Gandhian movement and the dubious colonial trial against the millenarian Jadonang. In short, the objectives of this article is to reveal the unpremeditated Linnaeus classification and clubbing of different communities by colonial officials; apprehension of colonial state and an emerging social class, namely Moharrirs and Lambus ⁸ in Zeliangrong society with the popularity of Jadonang and the socio-religious institution he led; manipulation of the state judicial process by the political agent of Manipur resulting in the falsification of evidence; creation of banditry; and how the colonial state wrecked the centuries-old bonding between highlanders and valley communities in Manipur. However, the main focus is on discriminatory processes of the colonial justiciary. Debates about the origin of the Zeliangrong (Makuilongdi, Bhubhan Hills, Chinglung) and ethnographical explanations of the race, identity and culture of the Zeliangrong are not included in this study. ⁹

Zeliangrong Tribe

A political union called Zeliangrong was formed in Imphal on 15 February 1947 through the merger of the four cognate tribes Zeme, Liangmei, Rongmei and Puimei. ¹⁰ This entity becomes a common (imaginary) space for the shaping of a collective consciousness, a memory, an identity of these tribes. Zeliangrong settled predominantly in the Naga Hills (now Nagaland), in the North Cachar District of Assam, in Tamenglong and in the south-western foothills of the Manipur Valley. ¹¹ A very pertinent point of reference is that Jadonang germinated a new collective identity of the Zeliangrong tribes in the 1920s. ¹² Under his leadership, the convergence and divergence of myths, worldviews and cosmogonies of these tribes had undergone on a large scale and ultimately created a common identity. After his demise, Rani Gaidinliu continued the Zeliangrong movement in the North Cachar Hills (Assam) and the surrounding areas. Ultimately, in the second half of the twentieth century, two major indigenous beliefs of Zeliangrong were emerged, namely Heraka (in Assam) and Tingkao Ragwang Chapriak (in Manipur). ¹³ Now the faith of indigenous religion is very uncertain as the majority of the Zeliangrong population has become Christian.

Emergence of Jadonangas Messiah of Zeliangrong

Kambiron, a small village on the National Highway 53 (Silchar–Imphal) where Jadonang was probably born in 1905, ¹⁴ grew up and gained fame as a muh in his early teens. ¹⁵ The essential qualities of being a muh are in-depth knowledge of indigenous medicines including dream interpretation, abilities to please deities, malevolent and benevolent spirits. ¹⁶ He started rendering his medical service for Zeliangrong villages in the Barak ranges, North Cachar Hills, Tamenglong, Imphal Valley. The colonial intervention with the local economy, the social and political system brought about a chaos situation under various aspects. ¹⁷

Through his journey as a medicine man, he learned that Zeliangrong was nearly swallowed by two demons, on the one hand internal feuds, by and large, driven by archaic art of state and unstructured belief systems and on the other, British colonial power hand in hand with missionary, imperial science and education, other institutions (administration, justice, police). He knew that the primary work, to encounter these existing problems, was to restructure the traditional system and create a new ‘order of things’.

Apparently, by assimilating the belief systems of three cognate tribes of Zeliangrong, he began to establish a new faith similar to Vaishnavism in Manipur and Cachar valleys. According to him, belief in the Supreme Being (TingkawRagwang), ¹⁸ deities, spirits are under his control. This was not monotheism, preferably purified reductionist polytheism. He firmly believed that the faith could eliminate all other irrelevant matters in indigenous animism; ultimately, they could fight against colonialism, namely Pothang, ¹⁹ house taxes, and the emergence of a new social class in the Zeliangrong community. ²⁰

In the early 1920s, he began on building a common belief centre across traditional barriers by converging the worldview, cosmology and ethos of Zeliangrong. He popularised the space of the Bhuban cave and Bisnu (a god who lives in celestial and terrestrial kingdoms but is dissimilar to the Hindu god). He claimed that he met the son of Bisnu (not Hindu god). Thus, in 1925–26, Jadonang established a congregation centre in Kambiron and there began the journey of the social religious movement of the Zeliangrong community with an imaginary space called Makam Gwangdi (kingdom). Jadonang slogan was Makammeirui Gwang Tupini. ²¹

In the early 1920s, Zeliangrong people suffered from famine, colonial government taxes and Christian missionary activities. His congregation tried to convince the Zeliangrong public of the irrationality of the traditional multiple sacrifice practices. Jadonang preached the cessation of religious sacrifices with big expensive animals to deities and other malevolent and benevolent spirits, and convinced that the ultimate destiny of the human soul was the abode of Tingkau Ragwang. ²² Consequently, expensive animals such as mithun sacrifices had declined in number and in many cases large animal sacrifices were replaced by fowl. ²³ He constructed an exemplary temple cum prayer centre and kept a pet python in it. ²⁴ His followers believed that Jadonang sometimes manifested itself in python. On some levels, the Zeliangrong revival movement may have been inspired by the teachings and doctrines of Vaishnavism. ²⁵ Of course, Jadonang gave priority to the assimilation of three cognate tribes’ traditional concept of gods, goddesses, benevolent, malevolent spirits and deities. ²⁶

There was a soldier unit called Riphen and followers of this faith received basic training in the traditional martial arts and firearms handling. Some SBML rifles were bought from Cachar and other sources for training purposes in Riphen. ²⁷ Rani Gaidinliu led ‘women’s unit’ trained its female cadres in espionage, composed patriotic songs and taught male cadres in culinary arts and housekeeping. At the headquarters, Jadonang performed muh services and also preached about his belief system as well.

Whether you called it primitive socio religious movement or excitement of a headhunting community, this movement have ritual sides. Jadonang formalised—first introduce a new ritual with minimal sacrifices by omitting many taboos (initiation), second, construction of temple and congregation centre, third, many hymns were composed, and lastly, Boudaan (symbol represents the Supreme Being, Tingkaw Ragwang). ²⁸

Surveillance and Arrest of Jadonang on Seditious Charges: I

Jadonang was arrested twice (on 6 December 1928 and 18 February 1931) on charge of spread of seditious propaganda against the state and his millenarian speeches. In his first case, he was released after three days in detention due to insufficient evidence. The story of his arrest began with his conflict with Moharrirs and Lambus, ²⁹ which kept him trapped in the whirlpool of colonial complex dark networks. ³⁰ The rapidly growing Tingkaw Ragwang faith in Zeliangrong inhabited villages—in the North Cachar Hills, Tamenglong, Imphal valley—became a great challenge for British Empire and also for the Manipur State Durbar. Under colonialism, Moharrirs and Lambus became a new but powerful (elite) class in the highlands of Manipur and Assam. Similarly, the Moharrirs and Lambus enjoyed their power in the Zeliangrong inhabited areas, and some of them found Jadonang to be an irresistible stumbling block in the exercise of their power. In particular, Satpou (a friend of Jadonang), ³¹ the chief of Nungthut village, and Jilakpou, who served as a Lambu (peon cum messenger) and also as a petty road Moharri under British administration in Manipur; both could not remain silent at Jadonang’s popularity. They continued to provide colonial officials with all information about Jadonang and Tingkaw Ragwang faith, which were sometimes fabricated to work for them. One of the fascinating incidents was the arrest drama of Jadonang in 1927. The depressed Jadonang returned home in January 1927 because M. K. Ghandhiji’s sudden withdrawal from his schedule to lead a non-violence protest in Silchar. He expected to meet Gandhiji and joined his movement with his 200 followers (100 boys and 100 girls). On the way he bumped into S. J. Duncan (SDO of Northwestern Subdivision of Tamenglong) ³² and Jilakpou Moharri. Jadonang showed Duncan his respect from the back of his pony. Duncan found nothing wrong with that, but Jilakpou, a man shrouded in greed and jealousy, instigated Duncan to arrest Jadonang for failing to show due respect to a senior British officer SDO. Duncan knew that arresting someone without valid legal reason is a risky move in his job. Therefore, after meeting Jadonang in January 1928, Duncan spent 10 months gathering details of Jadonang and Tingkaw Chapriak faith. He then submitted a detailed report to the authority in which he mentioned the strength of Tingkaw Chapriak faith, and public perception on Jadonang as the Messiah by 400 above mentioned followers. And in the report Duncan voiced his suspicions that the religious movement led by Jadonang led was probably influenced by the Indian national movement. ³³

After his released from custody, he became a more popular leader and began building more Tingkaw Chapriak temples in Zeliangrong villages. The devastating flood in the Cachar area in June 1929 may be one of the reasons for social and political unrest in the Barak ranges in 1929 and 1930. Now more people joined Tingkaw Chapriak. The followers strongly believed him as God chosen messiah of Makam Gwangdi. He urged the Zeliangrong villagers to discontinue house tax payment to the colonial authorities instead of contributing to his institution.

Now the British administrators sensed the possible threats and its consequences towards the hill administration (Barak Hill ranges of Manipur and Assam and Naga Hills) and the economy of the Manipur valley. J. H. Hutton’s (Deputy Commissioner of Naga Hills), ³⁵ Tour diaries, official reports and other official records from J. C. Higgins (Political Agent of Manipur) and J. P. Mills ³⁶ (Commissioner of Surma valley) vividly reflected their efforts to dismantle the movement of Jadonang. In the ‘administrative reports’ of Assam and Manipur the British portrayed him as messiah, healer, priest and spirit who was plotting an uprising against the British and the Kukis settlers. ⁴⁴ They deliberately misinterpreted Jadonang and his movement because the primary aim of British India was to subjugate the socio-religious movement of Zeliangrong and destroy Jadonang at any cost. Colonial officials called his movement as the ‘Naga Raj’ movement, but neither Jadonang nor Gaidinliu used the term Naga during their struggle against British colonialism.

Surveillance and Arrest of Jadonang on Seditious Charges: II

In 1930, J. C. Higgins, the then Political Agent of Manipur, set up a serious conspiracy to destroy Jadonang’s popularity. He communicated W. A. Crosgrave (Chief Secretary of Assam) and asked His Highness permission to arrest Jadonang. J. C. Higgins reported that,

there is no great threat at this moment and area is less in expansion where a man called Jadonang claimed himself as sorcerer, medicine-man and king of Naga Raj but he asked to pay tax to him instead of the government, and collected 70 mithuns from eight Naga Hill villages.

In parallel, Higgins again reported that ‘Jadonang is not only deserved as a miraculous healer but also a leader who believed by Zeliangrong people that one day he will become a king’, to J. P. Mills (Commissioner of Surma valley). With all these plots to arouse suspicion against Jadonang, Higgins indirectly convinced the authorities to capture him. Through wires, Higgins demanded Mills and Crosgrave to deploy armed forces in the Zeliangrong inhabited areas of the Naga Hills and the North Cachar Division. He directed senior Assam Rifles officials to station troops in Tamenglong area. ³⁷ Once this arrangement was over, he passed on movement details of Jadonang to Christopher Grimson (Deputy Commissioner of Cachar) and at the same time asked him to arrest Jadonang from Bubhan Hill (Assam). According to Gangmumei, Jadonang received prior notification from the colonial authority to report to the nearest police station. On 19 February 1931, Jadonang and his 50 followers went down from the Bhubhan Hills to meet the British officials. The Lakhipur police arrested him without any physical scuffles on the way.

But colonial (archival) sources tell something differently, that on 16 February 1931, C. Grimson issued an arrest warrant against Jadonang and directed the Sub-Inspector of the Lakhipur police station to arrest Jadonang and produce at Silchar immediately. On 18 February 1931, Khyati Narayan Das, SI cum OC from the Lakhipur Police station and his team ³⁸ arrested Jadonang in Lakhipur Bazar. On 21 February 1931, Jadonang was charged with 108 CrPC (dissemination of seditious matters) and was remanded in custody until 2 March 1931. ³⁹ Thus Jadonang was arrested for the second time by British officials. His attorney sought bail at the Cachar District Magistrate court, but the District Magistrate (Grimson) issued a non-bailable warrant stating that although he was arrested in Cachar, Jadonang was from the princely state of Manipur, so the decision should be made by his native state authority. ⁴⁰ J. C. Higgins proposed Grimson that Jadonang be deported to Manipur. ⁴¹

Extradition and Exhibition of the Arrested Jadonang

J. C. Higgins’s main aim was to destroy aura, charisma, trust and power of Jadonang so that in the future native people would think twice turning against the British Raj. Captain Bulfield, with a platoon of Assam Rifles and 190 coolies, went to Cachar to bring Jadonang back to Imphal for the trial. On the way to Cachar, he first demolished the huts and temple of the Tingkaw Chapriak headquarters at Kambiron and even killed Jadonang’s pet python and then went down to Jirighat. On his way back, his troop displayed the chained Jadonang in the bazaars of Nungkao, Tamenglong, Lukhambi, Kangchup and the Khwairamb and Bazar (women’s market) of Imphal. This procession was a very important event in the history of Manipur because the state took savage barbarian steps to demonstrate the power of the British Empire power—‘the empire on which the sun never sets’. In February 1931, the Manipur state government collected fine of ₹2,970 from Jadonang’s support villages and confiscated 29 firearms from alleged villages.

Trial of Jadonang

Jadonang was put behind the bar from 29 March 1931 to 29 August 1931. In the meantime, J. C. Higgins was hunting for evidences before the trial began. The ego of Higgins synchronised with his colonial official power and the supremacy of the British Empire, resulted in a series of fabrication of evidences and manipulation of the trial journey. And eventually the minority became helpless and adjusted to survive without a voice during the colonial and post-colonial times. Before the trial began, Jadonang made it clear in his testimony that he neither projected himself as a god nor interfered in the activities of Lambus and Moharrirs, nor declared war on the British Raj. ⁴² Apparently, the British administrators did not have any evidence to extend his custody term. This was against the pre-conceived will of J. C. Higgins, who wanted to destroy Jadonang.

Nipped it in the Bud: In Search of Possible Evidences

The trial begins in May 1931 in the Manipur State Durbar Court. J. C. Higgins (Political Agent of Manipur) was the judge of the trial. The process started with a procession of unlicensed guns. First, regarding waging war against the state and owning unlicensed guns by him and his followers. On 25 May 1931, J. C. Higgins (through P.M.S.D.) ⁴³ sent a letter of inquiry to G. D. Walker, the Deputy Commissioner of Cachar, to verify that Jadonang had purchased two unlicensed guns (bearing ‘C283’ and ‘MISTRY 2139’ numbers respectively) from Panjinang Tarapore (Cachar). On 11 June 1931, G. D. Walker responded thus,

appear from the register of gun licenses in my office that two S.B.M.L. guns ⁴⁴ : one bearing no. C283 and other 2137 by Tulsi Mistry were stolen from the owners’ houses. But number 2139 is not borne in my register. I would request you to let me know if that gun bears the number 2139 or 2137 by Tulsi Mistry. I shall cause a thorough enquiry on receipt of your reply.

On 23 June 1931, unable to frame Jadonang properly J. C. Higgins wrote a convincing letter to Walker, ‘…the numbers on the unlicensed guns recovered from Kambiron village are C 283 and MISTRY 2139. Probably the number 2137 in your register is a mistake, as it is likely that these are the two stolen guns’. Second, on charge of murder of four (4) Meitei businessmen in Kambiron in 1930. J. C. Higgins (P.A.) and S. J. Duncan (SDO) put full effort to twist the Jadonang case from normal seditious charges to a complicated abatement of murder/criminal case (Criminal Case No.10 of 1931). S. J. Duncan submitted an investigation report to the Political Agent of Manipur. ⁴⁵

In the midst of the trial, Jilakpou Moharri (a Christian convert who incited the British officials to arrest Jadonang in 1930) a staunch enemy of Jadonang suddenly entered the scene and stole the show in a very cinematic manner. In court he alleged that Jadonang was involved in four Meitei businessmen ⁴⁶ killed in 1930 in Kambiron (headquarters of TC). Under Sections 109, 149, 202, 201 and 302 IPC it was to confirm the death sentence of six (6) defendants on 13 June 1931. Attorney Surjit Kumar Chaudhury reappealed to the HEC on 24 June 1931, on behalf of six defendants who had been sentenced to death. Most of the witnesses tried to exculpate themselves. Jadonang strongly denied his involvement in this case. ⁴⁷

A quick trial had undergone under J. C. Higgins. Out of 23 defendants, 6 were sentenced to death for their deeds. In the initial enquiry, Jadonang denied the allegation made by Jilakpou. However, out of 23 accused, 19 were in favour of Jilakpou’s testimony. They said Jadonang and his followers killed these four Meitei businessmen. But five defendants, Lungtong, Machunguong, Lulungpou, Mupuongpou and Siphai were in favour of Jadonang. They were charged with active participation in an unlawful gathering and culpable homicide. Others Mudunnang rigorously imprisoned for 5 years; Lulungtong and Machungong under Section 302 of the IPC; Taiduong, Lulungpou, Siphai, Mupungpou had remained behind the bar. But Lulungpou accepted that he shot Manipuri businessmen and Mupungpou stated that he speared a dead man wounded by Jadonang.

Two defendants, Donjai from Bolongdai and Lulungpoufrom Mukti Khullen changed their previous statements to include Jadonang and Gaindinliu as the main culprit of the said mob murder. Finally, the helpless Jadonang surrendered to the judge; confessed to the murder of four Meitei businessmen in Kambiron. It is also mentioned that he carried out orders to distribute the heads of four Meitei businessmen to the villages of Kambiron, Nungkao, Bodongdai and Kekru. ⁴⁸

Third, new evidence found for the murder of two Meitei Brahmins in Kambiron. It was brought to court at the final stage of the trial. J. C. Higgins forwarded a petition (dated 24 June 1931) from Lalungpou Kuki of Mukti Khullen to the President of Manipur State Durbar.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

People Arrested in Connection with the Murder of Four Meitei Businessmen

	Name	Place		Name	Place
Kambiron			Oklong
1	Jadonang		14	Dilong	Okoklong
2	Lungtong	Under section 302 IPC	15	Tangannang
3	Machungong	Under section 302 IPC	16	Namdichung
4	Nambiri		17	Gondonnang
5	Taichong		Kekru
6	Gaipuiga		18	Mupungpou	Kekru
7	Tiningam		19	Nagamchangpou	–
8	Madunnang **		20	Guinannang	–
Nungkao			Bolongdai
9	Moliengbam	Nungkao	21	Donjai*	Bolongdai
10	Lungtuong		22	Sirang
11	Gaidinliu		Others
12	Bonpuijai		23	Lulungpou*	Mukti Khullen
13	Lunglimang		24	Siphai	Nungba

Sources: Adapted from the four sources:

(i) MSA, File No. R-I/S-D, 237, Naga Movement 1930–33; (ii) MSA, File No. R-I/S-B 117, Confidential Pro. B-Dec. -1939; (iii) MSA, File No. 63-C/39, Supply of copies of Judgment in Rani Gaidinliu Case; (iv) Kamei,G., Jadonang a Mystic Naga Rebel, Imphal 2002, pp. 56–7.

Notes: Kambiron, Nungkao, Bodongdai and Kekru are the places identified as where 4 Meitei businessmen’s heads were buried.

*Save us, let Jadonang die.

** Jadonang’s brother

Lulungpou, mentioned as Lulungpou Kuki. I do not know whether the British used Kuki as suffix.

Sentence to death by PA Manipur (Jadonang, Lungtong, Machungong, Lulunpou, Mupuongpou and Siphai).

This statement was recorded to be used as a substitute in case the trail of the murder of four Meitei businessmen have failed. Somehow Jadonang was sentenced to death for the murder of four Meitei businessmen and died on 29 August 1931 on the gallows at the Imphal Jail. ⁴⁹ The game was over. J. C. Higgins staged a trial to kill Jadonang is clearly understood from Lulungpou’s testimony recorded on 24 June 1931.

Conjecture of the Event

According to British accounts, Jadonang and his disciples killed four Meitei businessmen and distributed tonsured heads in four villages. The Tingkaw Ragwang faith was a primitive religion that still practiced headhunting. During the trial, Jadonang made four contradicting statements about his absence from the crime scene and ignorance of the incident: (a) during this time he was in Nungkao village (Gaidinliu’s birthplace); (b) Gaidinliu was head in-charge of Tingkaw Ragwang in his absence; (c) he found out about this case after 15 days when he returned from Nungkao; (d) Gaidinliu killed them because they disobeyed the village genna, and moreover she simply followed the orders of terrestrial god Soren. J. C. Higgins’s judgement was that Nungkao was hardly a day’s march to Kambiron; all information about the incident could have reached him within a maximum of two days. Therefore, all of his statements are false and maligned. He had been there during the mob or either he might have come back from Nungkao soon and under his supervision everything was sealed as if it had never happened.

Whereas Gangmumei also gave his clarification with some social–historical reasonings. First, when the four Meitei businessmen arrived at Kambiron, the village was under genna and worshiped Dinei (mother earth). Genna means total lockdown. Those who break the law face the death penalty. But the Kambiron people allowed them to hold one night as there was one transit house. The villagers instructed them not to light fires or cook at night. ⁵⁰ But they broke the taboo. Ultimately, the mob killed them for their transgressions. Second, if the businessmen did not argue with some villagers about the shawl price during the day, the chances of an unfaithful incident would be less, although they would face some harsh penalties. According to Gangmumei, the four Meitei businessmen sold shawls to the villagers, and there was some scuffle with the locals to negotiate the price. Third, Gangmumei also claimed that headhunting in Kabui community had already disappeared. But the negligence of the Meitei businessmen led to this dire consequence. Neither Jadonang nor Gaidinliu nor the villagers of Kambiron were to blame.

Labyrinthine Web: Stitching Fragment of Evidences

J. C. Higgins, Political Agent of Manipur, assumed all roles as administrator and judge in the process of Jadonang’s trial. This is the crux of the disbelief of the entire legal process. It reminds me of the punchline of a local thug named Genda Singh in the movie Dabangg 2 (2012), ‘Yahan gawah bhi hum hai, vakil bhi hum hai aur judge bhi hum hai (Here I am the witness, I am the lawyer and I am the Judge)’. He encroached and manipulated the entire legal process of the British–Indian judicial system in favour of his whims and ego with a green signal from higher authority. It was not an exceptional case, several cases have been found where colonisers have deliberately muted the colonial justice system according to their requirements. Here comes the role of counterfactual in looking for other possible causes when the event is still shrouded in mystery. Trial of Jadonang, was it a fair trial or a state conspiracy against subaltern? Out of nowhere, Higgins arrested twenty-three Zeliangrong villagers, most of whom made statements that Jadonang took main role in killing four Meitei businessmen at Kambiron. While trying to stitch all alleged culprits’ statements together we found lot of inconsistency, fragile and suspected conspiracy elements. The murder case of four Meitei businessmen in Kambiron played a significant role in Jadonang’s trial. When we compiled all the testimonies of alleged perpetrators, many inconsistencies, fragile and alleged conspiracy elements came to light. The trial of Jadonang was essentially based on the testimony of Jilakpou Moharrirs, who alleged that Jadonang and his followers murdered four Meitei businessmen in Kambiron and distributed tonsured heads to four villages.

In Lulungpou’s first statement (Mukti Khullen) mentions that he saw both Jadonang and Gaidinliu with four Meitei businessmen in Kambiron. Later, on 24 June 1931, he submitted a petition to the court in which he mentioned that there had been another murder case of 2 Manipuri Brahmins in Kambiron. The authority has so far recovered two heads from the crime scene. If Lalungpou’s statement is true, there should be six skulls together. Or maybe those two skulls belonged to two Manipuri Brahmins who were murdered in Kambiron. In the process of trial, Higgins deliberately relegated Lalungpou’s second statement because it could change the direction of the trial.

J. C. Higgins may have brainwashed Lulungpou and Donjai, suggesting possible means of escape from this murder case, if all arrested individuals stand together and give their testimony, mentioning that Jadonang is the main culprit for the murder of four businessmen in Kambiron. In prison, both had convinced all convicts and agreed to accuse Jadonang as main culprit. In the meantime, Jilakpou was sent to Nungkao, Kambiron, Kekru, Mukti Khullen and met the elders. He played a pivotal role in demoralising the villagers and downgrading Jadonang’s importance in society through his fabricated narratives about prison life of Jadonang.

Throughout this case, there was no room for dialogue for Jadonang to express himself on his ideology about the socio-religious movement he led, the reasons for collecting taxes and ultimately his expectations from the state for the welfare of Zeliangrong community. Rather, the trial was confined within the murder of four businessmen in Kambiron.

The historical discourse insofar on the trial of Jadonang was deeply absorbed in search of causalities and the linear sequence of the facts of the event. Moreover, the text has powerfully subdued everything about Zeliangrong as if it could tell everything in the right way. It would be true to some extent that the Zeliangrong community was an illiterate community till the 1930s—very few individuals had the opportunity to enrol in the structured modern educational system and as a result the text (script) was not yet adopted as a medium for transcription of their own collective and individual memories and their own past. Lack of literacy left this small community voiceless. In coming years Christian missionaries predominantly controlled the knowledge production mechanisms in Zeliangrong region so that Jadonang and the traditional belief system took a back seat for a long time. It was already late by the time local scholars started writing about Jadonang in the 1980s, the memories relating to the Jadonang trial faded and maligned over time. My submission is that J. C. Higgins’s rigorous effort to gather evidences and documentation, with colonial institutional support, on murder case of four businessmen and Jadonang’s involvement need to be revisited. Well documentation does not mean that description will be correct.

Conclusion

Non-violence resistance, civil disobedience movement, the unification of small conglomerate tribes, the fight against colonialism through religious teachings based on the imaginary (community) space of nation called Makam Gwangdi, are core elements of the Zeliangrong socio-religious movement led by Jadonang. A community leader who opposed the state imposing an irrational house tax on the shoulders of poor highlanders, and against the newly emerged class in the Zeliangrong community under colonialism with the Gandhian ideology, was arrested and sentenced to death on seditious charges and also murder of four Meitei businessmen. Jadonang represented himself more as an apostle of Tingkaw Ragwang (Supreme Being) and his main goal was to liberate the Zeliangrong community from foreign oppression. But the colonial officials defined Jadonang and Gaindinliu as ‘semi savages and intensely superstitious’.

British colonial archival sources misrepresented Jadonang and the Zeliangrong freedom movement he led. British administrators recorded him in their reports, correspondences as ‘Naga King’, ‘Naga Raj’, armed rebellion, head hunter, anti-Meitei or anti-Kuki, heretic, and so on. J. C. Higgins defined the socio-religious movement led by Jadonang and Gaidinliuas as ‘Naga Raj’, and other white ethnographers defined the Zeliangrong movement as the ‘millenarian movement’ (Ursula Graham Bowes), messianic movement (Stephen Fuchh and Hutton, J. P. Mills and Robert Reid). They considered the Zeliangrong movement to be an illogical, unclear uprising by superstitious people which has no bearing on freedom and nationalism.

The state used brutal force despite trying to understand the fundamental cause of this movement. The sturdy grip of the state over the system and the smooth coordination of police, administrative and judicial orders could have led to generate false information against Jadonang. Thus, his voice for the upliftment of downtrodden Zeliangrong tribe had been distorted and proven to be a communal Naga rebel with criminal minds. During the trial, the state (prosecutor) did not enquire about the philosophy and motto of the socio-religious movement he was leading, rather so busy on trying to prove Jadonang as the main culprit for Kambiron incident, possibly happened in March 1930.

Not just the collective conspiracy of state institutions, at its core all white officials were shrouded in Western reasons, which blinds them to understanding the culture of small tribes. During the trial, they sometimes portrayed him as a madman, savage, head hunter, superstitious, and a man with blind reasons. The court could have resolved to transfer him to the Tezpur Lunatic Asylum, which had been in existence since 1876, if Jadonang’s well-being really mattered to them. They later removed the term insanity because a maniac could not be prosecuted. And interestingly, the court did not ask about his religious school.

British colonial officials considered the highlanders to be primitive and so their cultures. So, their ethnographical work did not put effort to understand the deeper meaning and complex cultural network of these communities. As in other hilly terrains, in the Zeliangrong inhabited areas the colonial power supported the Christian missionary works. William Pettigrew arrived in Imphal on 6 February 1893, and after 6 months he left for Ukhrul and began missionary work, including providing elementary education to the locals. The wave of Christianity also reached the Zeliangrong community in 1914 through the missionary Pettigrew. In 1919, Christianity reached the mountain villages of Rogmei. Jilakpou of Kaikao was baptised in 1920 and then became a Moharrirs, then many Kaikao villagers became Christians in later years. The first Rongmei church was established at Kaikao on 9 September 1923. Due to scuffle between newly converted Christians and village elders, these converts had to leave Kaikao and settled at Sempang. ⁵¹ Narrating the advent of Christianity in this community is because Jilakpou took a pivotal role in manufacturing the facts and emotional turns of illiterate natives with sweet threats. He was the first person to instigate the arrest of Jadonang on seditious charges. Indeed, behind the scene, there have been unforeseen clashes between two religions where subalterns have failed.

His voice was filtered and eventually buried with hazy memories. Pain pushes itself in helpless situations, not always, the human mind tends to create an artificial memory, and in parallel the brain teaches to store itself as if it really happened, and later began to remember that memory as a memory of an event that actually occurred. Here the trial—based on eyewitness testimony and the judgement of an unshakable power—ultimately created two kinds of public bitter ‘divided memory’ ⁵² on Jadonang where he was completely overshadowed by the so-called ‘truth’ and ‘justice’ (in the order of things) of the British colonial system. First, Zeliangrong developed a dejected memory that if Jadonang had not killed four Meiteis, the Tingkao Chapriak faith would grow more and the valley people would support his cause. Thus, the Rongmei tribe nurtured a ‘collective mourning’ ⁵³ although (they were convinced) their intuition denied the fact of the court that Jadonang was a savaged superstitious murderer. On the flip side, the valley’s larger population may have felt that the colonial judice system was doing justice to four Meitei businessmen and their families. Higgins showed arrested chained Jadonang in Khwairamb and ima Bazar before he was put behind the bar and the court verdict had shaken the court centuries-old social–political fabrics and mutual trust between the highlanders and valley dwellers. Consequently, it overhauled the growth of the Tingkao Ragwang faith. In the 1980s only the Tingkao Ragwang Chapriak started moving forward as a religious institution in Manipur.

Resurrection of Mahatma Gandhi!

After several months of Jadonang’s execution, his sad followers tossed away burdens, griefs, and rage with a rumour, that is, ‘Gandhi is coming soon’. Which means the soul of Jadonang will be resurrected as Gandhi. Why they chose Gandhi as the metaphor for Jadonang is an interesting point. It has been proven that Jadonang and his teaching philosophy were non-violent and familiar with the M. K. Gandhi led freedom movement. Several excitements occurred (1932–35) in the Manipur Hills and Naga Hills, believing that ‘god Gandhi is coming’. ⁵⁴