Kishanganj: A proposal to acquire nearly 250 acres of land for the Indian Army in Bihar’s border district of Kishanganj has triggered widespread protests, with villagers, farmers and local representatives opposing the move, citing dense habitation and the presence of religious sites on the identified land.
The land has been marked in four mouzas — Satbhitta and Kanhaiyabari under Kochadhaman circle, and Shakor and Natwapara under Bahadurganj circle. According to preliminary inputs from the district administration and revenue department, around 240 to 250 acres have been identified across these locations.
Residents claim the proposed land is not vacant but densely populated, with hundreds of homes, farmlands, mosques, an Eidgah and graveyards situated within the marked area.
Villagers fear displacement and loss of livelihood
In Satbhitta village, anxiety and uncertainty is evident among residents. Najmuddin, a local farmer, said his family has cultivated the land for generations.
“Our homes, mosque and graveyard are here. If this land is taken away, where will we go? The government can choose another location, but shifting an entire population is not possible,” he said.
An elderly woman from the village said relocating religious sites was unimaginable. “Land is not just soil; it is our identity. We respect the Army, but we cannot abandon our homes and faith,” she said.
Villagers argue that acquisition would mean the loss of their homes, agriculture-based livelihood and religious heritage.
Political opposition intensifies
Leaders of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) have strongly opposed the proposal. Bahadurganj MLA Tausif Alam said they were not against the Army or national security but objected to the selection of densely populated land.
“The identified area is filled with houses, mosques, Eidgah and graveyards. This acquisition will ruin hundreds of poor families,” he said.
Kochadhaman MLA Sarfaraz Alam has submitted a memorandum to the District Magistrate seeking alternative land. AIMIM state president Akhtarul Iman has also met Chief Minister Nitish Kumar in Patna, urging the government to reconsider the location.
Congress MP Mohammad Jawed raised the issue in the Lok Sabha, stating that displacing local residents would not be appropriate and calling for alternative arrangements.
Zila Parishad member Nasik Nadir has suggested utilising available government land instead. According to local representatives, around 12 acres of government land is available in Kochadhaman and Thakurganj, though officials indicate that the Army’s requirement of 250 acres cannot be met through small scattered parcels.
Why the Army wants land in Kishanganj
Kishanganj holds strategic importance due to its proximity to international and inter-state borders. The district lies about 20 km from the Bangladesh border and 114 km from the Nepal border, and is close to West Bengal and the Siliguri Corridor, often referred to as the “Chicken’s Neck” — a narrow stretch connecting the Northeast to mainland India.
Security agencies have long flagged concerns in the region, including infiltration, cattle smuggling, drug trafficking and illegal arms movement. In recent years, the Army has strengthened its presence in sensitive areas such as Dhubri in Assam, Chopra in West Bengal and parts of Kishanganj to bolster border security.
Union Home Minister Amit Shah had earlier stated during a visit to Seemanchal that border security remains a top priority and that infiltration and demographic changes would be examined by a high-level committee.
Officials say a permanent Army station in Kishanganj would enhance security preparedness in this sensitive corridor.
Administration says survey underway
Sources in the district administration said a preliminary survey report has been sent to the state government. The report includes details on land area, population density, religious structures and availability of alternative land. No final order has been issued so far, and the acquisition remains at an initial stage.
As protests intensify, the state government faces a delicate balancing act between strategic security requirements and the concerns of local residents. Whether authorities opt for alternative land, proceed with the current proposal, or halt the process in view of public sentiment remains to be seen.
