THE MURDER OF BANAMALI 83
acquired knowledge of the passing away of a founding theatre personality, though a wide gap remained between what had happened and what was reported. Thus, Banamali's murder was unconnected to theatre. Here was an individual murdered for his real life role as the naib—viz. representative—of the Balanga zamindar. The fact that this 'gruesome act' transgressed dominant codes of peasant society becomes clear if one takes into account the way popular memory retains it. Thus, one gets repeated references to the murderers chopping off Banamali's body into pieces or the way they garlanded themselves with his intestines2—almost carnival-like images constructed over time. References to Banamali's footsteps determining the land owned by him (viz. any land he 'stepped' on 'became' his 'property') virtually attempt to rationalise the carnival imagery, associated with the murder of an oppressive tyrant.3
My interest in this 'case' goes back to 1980, though I have heard about this murder from my childhood about the 'gruesome act' and the bardic compositions by the jogi singers praising/cursing Banamali. .As articulated by a friend way back in 1980, his grandmother used to rebuke him as a child whenever he was naughty and troubled her, saying that if he harassed her then he would meet his 'doom', like Banamali.4 This perhaps reflects on the serious fall-out of this event and the way it has been retained in popular memory.
This paper explores several facets of social history, entering Balanga through this 'gruesome act'. The sources used include a document of 611 pages related to the murder 'case', in which various aspects beginning from the First Information Report lodged at the Nimapara police station to the evidence of 245 witnesses and the Session Court's judgement is incorporated. It also relies on the oral testimonies collected during my field work at Balanga and neighbouring Rupdeipur.
Balanga was under Asutosh Chandra Mitra. An absentee landlord, he paid the government Rs 10,000 as revenue and an additional patni revenue of Rs 9,000. Asutosh had bought Balanga in auction sale around 1878.5 Banamali was his naib or representative, who was given full powers, excepting that he could not sell the zamindari. Banamali had been appointed as the naib since 1894. The structure of absentee landlordism implied a link between Balanga and Calcutta. Asutosh, who resided at Calcutta, visited Balanga only once in 1902 for about a week. Consequently, the Balanga zamindari was completely under the control of Banamali. Given this, if one were to search for the power structure at the local level it would not be too far-fetched to locate Banamali as its pivot.