From Gujarat to Maharashtra, why will BJP's demand for Bhil Pradesh increase tension?

Bhil Pradesh News: The grand gathering of tribals in Mangarh, Rajasthan has increased political excitement from Gujarat to Maharashtra. This grand gathering was about Bhil Pradesh, in which the tribals have demanded a separate Bhil state by cutting 49 districts of 4 states for themselves. The demand for Bhil Pradesh is not new, but the way this 108-year-old demand has come out of the closed bottle. It is being said that the political equations of 4 states can be affected.

Not only this, if the demand for Bhil Pradesh gains momentum after the gathering in Mangarh, then it will have a direct impact on the Bharatiya Janata Party. Let's know why and how…

First understand the demand for Bhil Pradesh

The Dravidian word Veel has been transformed into Bhil. Veel means - bow. Bhil is the oldest tribe of India and its population is around 1 crore in the whole country. The demand for Bhil Pradesh was made in the year 1913 before independence. At that time, in Mangarh itself, social activist and nomadic Banjara tribe's Govindgiri had demanded a separate state with his 1500 supporters. At that time he was arrested.

People of the Bhil community say that when Tamil Nadu can be created for Tamils ​​and Maharashtra state for Marathas, then why not Bhil Pradesh for Bhils?

For the last few years, this demand has again intensified in Rajasthan. The reason for this is the rise of Bharatiya Adivasi Party in Dungarpur area. In the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, this party won the Banswara seat by forming an alliance with the Congress.

How will this demand increase the tension of BJP, 3 figures

1. According to the proposed map, there has been a demand to include 49 districts of 4 states in Bhil Pradesh. These include Banswara, Dungarpur, Barmer, Jalore, Sirohi, Udaipur, Jhalwara, Rajsamand, Chittorgarh, Kota, Baran and Pali districts of Rajasthan, Aravalli, Mahisagar, Dahod, Panchmahal, Surat, Baroda, Tapi, Navsari, Chhota Udaipur, Narmada, Sanwarkantha, Banaskantha and Bharuch districts of Gujarat, Indore, Guna, Shivpuri, Mandsaur, Neemuch, Ratlam, Dhar, Dewas, Khandwa, Khargone, Burhanpur, Barwani and Alirajpur districts of Madhya Pradesh and Palghar, Thane, Nashik, Dhule, Jalgaon, Nandurbar, Balsad districts of Maharashtra.

Districts like Surat, Indore, Kota, Thane are also the business centers of their respective states.

2. The demand for Bhil Pradesh is being made by tribal organizations. The number of tribal voters in these states is very high. For example, there are 21.1 percent tribals in Madhya Pradesh, 14.8 percent in Gujarat, 13.4 percent in Rajasthan and 9.3 percent in Maharashtra. They easily influence the assembly and Lok Sabha elections.

3. In terms of seats, tribals are quite strong in these states. 45 seats are reserved for tribals in the 230-seat Madhya Pradesh assembly, 14 in the 288-seat Maharashtra assembly, 25 in the 200-seat Rajasthan assembly and 27 seats in the 182-seat Gujarat assembly. These seats play a big role in making and breaking governments.

4. The states which are being demanded to be divided into Bhil states are ruled by BJP and the coalition. There is a demand to include 12 districts of Gujarat in Bhil state. There are 69 assembly seats in those districts, out of which BJP currently has 59 seats.

Similarly, the districts of Maharashtra which are being demanded to be included in Bhil Pradesh have 58 assembly seats, out of which 42 seats are currently with the NDA. Assembly elections are to be held in Maharashtra this year and in Gujarat in 2027.

In Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh too, BJP dominates the areas where Bhil Pradesh is demanded. In such a situation, if this demand catches fire, then BJP's problems may increase in these areas in the coming time.

What does BJP have to say on the demand for Bhil Pradesh?

So far no big leader from the Bharatiya Janata Party has given a statement on this. However, Babu Lal Kharari, Tribal Affairs Minister of Rajasthan Government, has definitely rejected this demand. Kharari says that the demand for a state cannot be made on the basis of caste and religion.

In a conversation with journalists, Kharari has said that the demand for small states is right for development, but not on the basis of caste and religion. This will spoil the fabric of society.