Depending upon the various proverbs the colonial anthologists established a simple idea regarding Indian caste system, the main object of this publication is to highlight their areas of concern. The colonial government saw caste as a technique to contract with a vast population by breaking it down into discrete portion with definite individuality (Kevin Hobson). Within the scientific narration of the colonial anthology, the Indian common people witnessed the upheaval against colonial rule, principally in the middle of the 19^th century the colonial writers without any prior preparation narrated the proverbs in their writing about social custom of the common people, and that translation were not in mysterious language but as a summary and natural inclination of different races. Without changing the core issues of those versions in colonial writings those unchanged versions spread over. The philosophy of revolution and opposition in payment of land revenue bridged the communication which is controlled by military discipline. There was an indication to the effect that all these irrelevant matters connected their creations in colonial politics, there was doubt regarding the reality of the writing or versions of their own choice for own interest. Afterwards, many anthropological and historical writings took place regarding Indian society the course of which still in vogue in recent time. All new courses of research regarding Indian castes had been rightly evaluated with empirical outlook.

The characteristics of caste and creed after 1857 revolution:

According to Rachel J. Tolen, “Colonial rule was realized not only through the consolidation of overt "political" power but also through the consolidation of knowledge about the ruled. Such massive projects as the census, the Gazetteers, and a series of Castes and Tribes volumes written about the different regions of India were undertaken with the goal of amassing a body of knowledge about the various peoples of India, their customs, and their manners, in order to aid in their efficient administration” (Tolen,1991:108). British colonial rule classified certain peoples as criminals whom they considered disorderly and dangerous. This was done due to the certain imperatives of administration. It was the need of a consolidating colonial regime that dispersed all elements which sought to challenge the British authority. By the mid-19^th century, the concern regarding the social order had become primary in the mind of colonial government. Peasant insurgencies, the depredations of Thugee and some other people living by crime were attacking the very structure of the colonial state. According to Criminal Tribe Act 1872 section 2, “If the local government has reason to believe that any tribe, gang or class of persons is addicted to the systematic commission of non-bailable offences, it may report the case to the governor general in council, and may request his permission to declare such tribe, gang or class to be a criminal tribe” (Simhadri, 1991, Tribes Act, 18/1 see Appendix of the book).

Certain primary and hereditary groups were classified as criminals. Crime was held as per their professional activity. It is basically from the assumption about Indian society that, India was best seen as a collection of castes. The colonial government passed the ‘Criminal Tribes Act’ in 1871. The new act notified approximately 150 tribes in India as criminal and giving the police wide powers to arrest them and monitor their movements (Dilip d' Souza).

According Radhaskrishna,“ As far as this particular use of the Criminal Tribe Act was concerned, any low caste, vulnerable sections of the population could be declared a criminal tribe and forced to work in an enterprise; any persons including a manager of an enterprise could be made responsible for their control, and any site, including an enterprise could be declared a criminal settlement”(Radhskrishna, 2000: 256). The movement of the members of tribes designated as criminal was regulated through a system of passes. Local authorities were place of residence of the offender or of a suspect. Village headman, the watchman and the landholders of a locality inhabited by the offender were also authorized to keep surveillance.

The techniques of the recognition of legal communities were unreasonable and were hardly ever based on adequate verification of fact. The government relied upon town headmen and landlords’ account in several affairs for basic actions of declared individuals as owed to some fraternity of thieves (Kumar, 2004:1078). It utilised to be in favour of the landlords to have itinerant groups notified if local highly regarded persons of the like of headman and landlords were made to blame for describing. The informed and the authorized individuals could then type a resolved and flexible employees in their area and could always be organised in check on the risk of legal prosecution (Radhakrishna, 1989).

On the whole, ethnographies and administrative accounts of criminal tribes have ignored the temporal dimensions and are a historical. Thus the present is sometime assimilated into past through an assumption of timeless continuity of the traditions of a group. The social mores of one group are meshed into the other and hence criminality imbued with a kind of timeless. This representation of criminal tribes is based on certain assumptions of the British about Indian society, in general and the relationship of caste and occupation, in particular. However, as Crooke noted: ‘it could be well guarded against the supposition that this classification of caste in any way represents existing facts. It must not be forgotten that there are only a few of the caste group of tribes which invariably adhere to the original trade or handicrafts which may have caused their association in the past’ (Crooke, 1890: XI iv). This discourse lacked in precision, accuracy and rigour leading to the classification of criminal tribes.

In the discussion before the enactment of the Criminal Tribes Act (Acts xxvii of 1871) a member of the victorious executive council J.F. Stephens is quoted to have said that, “The special feature of India is the caste system. As it is, traders go by caste; a family of carpenters will be carpenters a century or five centuries hence, if they last so long. Keeping this in mind, the meaning of professional criminals is clear. It means a tribe whose ancestors were criminals from the time immemorial, who are themselves destined by the usage of caste to commit crimes and whose descendants will be offenders against law, until the total tribe is destroyed or accounted for within the manner of Thugs. Once a person tells you that he is the associate degree bad person against law he has been therefore from the start and can be therefore to the top. Reform is impossible, for it is his trade, his caste, I may almost say his religion is to commit crime” (Raghavaiah, 1968: 188-89).

The colonial writers were always trying to highlight the characteristic views of various castes and creed depending on intensity of revolution. In the year of 1857, the British writers always considered the Indian people who did not bend their hands to the British as an enemy by using a word ‘turbulent’. As an example, the story of Gujar and Meos is to be mentioned. They are becoming highly active during the revolution (Crooke, 1896:493). That is why all colonial administrators considered these two competitions as their enemy estimating their proverbs and proceedings. Crooke has mentioned, “During revolution Meos’ are become fomous for their opposition against British” especially those who lived in Greater Rajputana, Punjab, United Provinces and Middle India. A proverb was well circulated that before going for establishing any relationship with the Meos, anybody should behave badly and wisely with Mayos as a right step. Even it was said that blood thirst of one 12 year old son of Meos becomes so determined for fulfilling revenge against their opposition (Crooke, 1896:493). But in Central India Sir J. Malcolm described them as ‘most desperate rogues’. ‘Though they are stigmatised’, he goes on to say, ‘as robbers and assassins, they are admitted to be faithful and courageous guards and servants. Their chiefs invariably took the lead in robberies on a large scale. In the Punjab they are the boldest of the criminal classes, leaving their villages in gangs which sometimes remain absent for a year at a time. They have agents and ‘fences’ in all the larger cities of central and Southern India, and commit robberies throughout the Deccan” (Crooke, 1907: 144).

The races which took part in 1857 revolutions or forwarded opposition against British rule and who did not come forward for payment of land revenues or stopped payment, those races were earmarked as persons of criminal nature, fighters and burglars. According to the colonial anthology, the races that have been always against the British rulers were of a criminal nature, such as persons belong to Gujar races. Because “...the Gujar retains much of the dormant savagery of olden times, and when the Mutiny wrecked for a time the power of the British in the Upper Ganges Doab, it was the Gujar who took advantage of this state of misrule, burnt and looted our cantonments “(Crooke, 1907: 115). Crook had mentioned from the life history of Babar for narrating the Gujar nationals. In his sketches the story of Gujar had been pictured as criminals and exploiting community.

Naturally ignoring political idealism colonial interests were more important to the British. In the daily life there might be any importance of some proverbs but the British used those containing proverbs for fulfilment of their own interests as a result the characteristics of discussing races did not come to light rightly. Much depends on Indian races by the British towards the wrong direction. For this British did not make any relation to the colonial writers reflected a wrong idea of Indian society and its races. Predominantly, the methodical policy of European Countries were not introduced in the case of investigation of Indian society and its’ community. In this connection Thomas R. Metcafe said “class, by contrast which Victorian Englishman regarded on the great divide their own society, was nowhere to be found in British accounts of India’s people” (Metcafe, 1997:X). Regarding caste system, British administrators collected huge knowledge about Indian races; but they did not correctly analyse that knowledge.

Banjaras are another example of the way they were considered and classified as criminal case without comprehending their past. Research has revealed that the most of the Banjaras were not engaged in criminal activities, and those persons who committed in misdeed did so owing to certain developments, which had made their customary source of livelihood redundant (Kumar, 2004:1083). Banjaras were transporters before approaching of the British and utilised their bullocks in bearing goods all over India. They furthermore assisted Mughal and other detachments of regional and localized chieftains as a transporter of items. The increase of British rule and the development of communication and transportation facilities in the larger part of India adversely influenced their conventional profession. Many of them acclimatized to the altered attenuating factors by resolving down and talking to cultivation, other ones proceeded with their strolling lifestyle. Some of them, although, took to criminal activity. Thus by quality of certain constituents who were either lawless persons are considered criminals, the entire group was classified as criminal (Kumar, 2004:1083).

Same attitude was reflected on Kallar Group at Madras Presidency who have been involved in the indigenous ‘kaval system’. According to R.J. Tolen, “Kaval was a system whereby a kavalkaran, or watchman, was collectively paid by a village for protection of its property. Some of the communities involved in kaval had been part of an organized military and intelligence force whose ties with indigenous systems of rule in southern India had caused them to come into conflict with British forces during the early days of the subcontinent's subjugation by the East India Company. By all British accounts, the kaval system had become one of "protection" payments demanded by organized criminal gangs under the threat of arson or other means, if necessary” (Tolen, 1991:109).

In 1880 W.E. Pursar and H.C. Franshawe in their ‘Report on the revised land revenue settlement of the Rohtak District of the Hisser division in the Punjab’ stated various offensive languages regarding Rajput Muslim Rangers. These Rangers in 1857 opposed against the British rulers but paid land revenue to the British. Naturally, the British writers formed the Rangars as a criminal race. The people of the Rangar community did not pay any respect to the British law and regulation. As a result British anthologists always considered the Rangars as antagonistic. There is a Proverb: “Ranghar, Gujar, do; kutta, billi, do; ye char na ho; to khule kiware so”. “The Gujar and the Ranghar are a pair; so are the dog and the cat; if it were not for these four, you might sleep with open doors” (Crooke, 1896, 228). Crooke mentioned Gujars as a ‘boldest cattle thief in the country’ (Crooke, 1907:114). Ibbetson classified Gujars as a turbulent community. In his opinion, “The Gujars have been turbulent throughout the history of the Panjab, they were a constant thorn in the side of the Delhi Emperors, and are still ever ready to take advantage of any loosening of the bonds of discipline to attack and plunder their neighbours. Their character as expressed in the proverbial wisdom of the countryside is not a high one : " A desert is better than a Gujar : wherever you see a Gujar, hit ‘him’ ” (Ibbetson , 1916, 184). All these state sponsored observations empowered the anthropological observations. Rather colonial interests were involved in much more quantity. According to Dr. Sekhar Bandopadhyay “during the second half of the 19the century in all these observations there were unadulterated knowledge and science besides government sponsorship” (Bandopadhyay, 1990:119).

In the year 1881 when Denjil Ibbetson was superintendent of the census in Punjab, he also mentioned in his reports the proverbs to entertain only for imperialistic interest. He in his report stated that Rajput Muslim Kharrals criminal in nature. In his book ‘The Punjab Caste’ he coated Sir Lepel Griffin’s comment on Kharrals tribe : “Through all historic times the Kharrals have been a turbulent, savage, and thievish tribe, ever impatient of control, and delighting in strife and plunder. More fanatic than other Mahomedan tribes, they submitted with the greatest reluctance to Hindu rule ; and it was as much as Diwan Sawan Mai and the Sikhs could do to restrain them for whenever an organised force was sent against them they retired into the marshes and thick jungles, where it was almost impossible to follow them”(Ibbetson, 1916,175). Even Ibbetson expressed his views in the same line and stated that the Kharrals of Lahore were not of good nature compared to the Kharrals of Montgomery district. According to one Persian Proverbs, he wrote that, “ the Dogar, the Vatti, the Wattu, and the Kharrals are all rebellious and ought to be slain”. Ibbetson is admiring the Rajput inhabitant. The main reason was that all these leaders were rewarded with praiseworthy posts by the imperialists. Naturally, their loyalty or faithfulness influenced British writers. But Ibbetson gave a bad acquaintance regarding the agriculturist Gujars. He attacked Gujars with offensive proverbs, “ Jitte dekho Gujar, itte deye mar”, that means wherever you found Gujar, just attack them there. In fact, Ibbetson tried to show lowered to the opponent of British Gujars by using these proverbs, but the Brahmins were quoted as “… vile cultivators being lazy to the degree; and they carry the grasping and overbearing habits of their caste into their relations as landowners, so that whatever Brahmins hold land. Disputes may be expected. The local proverb goes ‘Brahmin se bura bagar se kal’ as famine from a desert, so comes evil from a Brahmin” (Ibbetson, 1916).

Oldham in his essay headed with “The proverbs of the people in a district (Shahabad) of North India” has tried to excerpt the daily life habits of different communities. The preface of his present essay remarked that he tried to write this essay with the help of his experience as an executive of the Shahabad district of Bihar. He quoted only two sentences regarding the geographical situation of the entire district and thereafter, he discussed about “revolutionary” races of the region. In this context, he also mentioned the proverbs: “Here lives the Bhojpuri Ahir community who are war friendly. The Bhojpuri Ahirs were mentioned as a revolutionary community in the eye of British writers. Oldham assumes prevalent proverbs wrote that “ Don’t go into Bhojpur; if you go, don’t stay; if you stay don’t eat; if you eat, don’t go to sleep, if you sleep, don’t feel for your purse; if you should fall for your purse, don’t weep” (Oldham, 1930: 323-324). According to him all the proverbs are true, which is already established in localities. On the basis of 1917 violence Oldham was pointed towards Ahirs that they are arrogant in nature. But, “Oldham does not tell the reader that these disturbances in Shahabad had followed Gandhi's mobilization of peasants in the neighbouring district of Champaran against European indigo planters, that Shahabad had for some time been the scene of organized peasant struggle against the colonial government, zamindars, and moneylenders, or that the issue of "Cow-Protection" had become intertwined with rumours about the end of British rule”(Raheja,1996:502). Crook described Ahirs in Punjab and United territory as a great robber. He stated about Samsi and Habura or Vantu that, these are more criminal than compared with Ahirs. They used to rob the businessman and convoy of the marriage party during the night (Crooke, 1907:142-43).

Official accounts of criminal tribes show a great ignorance in comprehending the history of the groups. To take one example of Bhantus (Bonington, 1931, see Census of India part III, Vol. I), a tribe found in north and central India and Karawal Nat in eastern India, the judgment of the administration and ethnography about their propensity crime was based mainly on police records. Since the history of Bantus was not recorded it was simply assumed that the present pattern of crime was a continuation of traditional criminal practices. So the government lumped both guilty and innocent alike. According D’Souza “In 1932, a British defense officer, Lieutenant General Sir George MacMunn, wrote a book known as ‘The Underworld of India’. In this note quite scholarly treatise, MacMunn rambles at length about all that he found dark and dreaded while on his tour for duty in India” (D’Souza). In a chapter of his book entitled ‘Criminal Tribes and Classes’, MacMunn wrote “ they are absolutely the scum, the flotsam and jetsam of Indian life, no more regard than the beasts of the field.”

In colonial administrative literatures, the narrative “Darya Khan” was elevated to the status of a historical event rather than an imaginative narrative. These also ignored many other ground groups, who had respected antecedence. It was only after the realities as well, like Mevs’ affinal relationship with other local mutinies of 1857 when Mevs led from the front at several places that they come to be figured as rogues, predators and savage (Mayaram, 1991). Similar reasons and rationales provided the British administration the much needed legitimacy to launch crackdowns on wandering groups of peoples in India. For the whole of the colonial discourse, there was a point of consensus that groups criminality had emerged out of the very structure of Indian society and was not the result of the marginal conditions of living, quite unlike of metropolitan discourse.

Colonial writings were enlightened very much on the subject that “ Indians when they spoke to somebody in their own language always quote the prevalent proverbs.” Risley in the first page of the first edition of “The people of India”, wrote in a part ‘Caste in Proverbs in popular sayings”, the main idea was that people for which this description was given only to establish their characteristic’s descriptions of those people (Risley,108). All these writers believed that the proverbs used by the Indian people revealed their actual mental feeling. Thereafter, it was their aim to fulfil the imperialistic interests through it identified the characteristics and different races. The colonial discourse on criminal cases and tribes in India was developed from the records of ethnographic accounts of the British administrator-historians. In certain ways, the colonial discourse on group criminality fitted within the overall paradigm of ‘Orientalism’. The identities of both west and east were pinned down as differences of the essence of human nature within a broad ontological perspective (Said, 1978) since the attributes and nature of group criminality are approached in markedly different ways.

Customs sequence and anthology:

The census commissioner of British India (1899) and subsequently (1901) the Director of Royal Anthropological Institute Mr. H.H. Risley published a book “ The people of India” where he tried to establish a simple Idea of Indian caste and creeds based on existing proverbs at that time. In the year of 1901, the census Commissioner H.H. Risley states that: “ … race sentiment… rests upon a foundation of facts that can be verified by scientific methods; that it supplied the motive principle of the caste; that is continuing, in the form of fiction or tradition, to shape the most modern developments of the caste system; and finally, that its influence has tended to preserve in comparative purity the types which it favours" (Risley, 1908). Risley also wrote that: “the caste system itself, with its singularly perfect communal organization, is a machinery admirably fitted for the diffusion of new ideas; that castes may in course of time group themselves into classes representing the different strata of society; and that India may thus attain, by the agency of these indigenous corporations, the result that have been arrived at elsewhere through the fusion of individual types” (Risley, 1908). In authoritative this account Risley exposes the British calendar of creating an association that accommodated British ethics through the use of a British interpreted caste system. It is usual absorbing to agenda that there Risley juxtaposes ‘individual types’ with castes in such a way that it seems that he believed that there was an absence of individuality within Indian society, which could be compensated through the barter of class structures. To Risley caste was not only the substance of native Indian community. It was the essential characteristics of Native Indian individuals. The entire significance of the individual was embodied in caste. Risley’s paternalistic contempt for the Native Indian people was further shown by his perception that, “ the factors of nationality in India are two- the common usage of the English language for certain purposes and the common employment of Indians in English administration” (Risley, 1908:300). Indian’s salvation, it’s only hope of becoming a nation, was through the language and sponsorship of the British, according to Risley’s product of liberal paternalism.

William Crooke in his explanations regarding celebrations of customs by the Indian people expressed that “Low caste people may heap abuse on high caste people, something using poetic of proverbial verse” (Crook, 1889). In this context, he stated the function of the famous Holi festival of South India. He mentioned regarding the tale of Ramoshis of Balghai District of Madhya Pradesh: “ Among the Ramoshis of (Balaghat District in the Central Provinces), on the day after the (Holi) pyre is lighted, they throw filth at each other,a pour mud out of a pot on any respectable man the chance to meet, and challenge him to a wrestling match; the next day cow dung is flung on all well-dressed people”(Raheja, 1996:499). According to Crooke, these entire occurrences were natural during the Holi festival. Crooke narrated these occurrences customs and rituals as natural and beyond the limit of conservations.

Different pictures were revealed in the writing of Ramgharib Choubey. In the year 1894 in the name of ‘Dushadh Song’, a small story, was published. In that story, there is an element of competition between low-caste people and the Brahmin. Being defeated in that competition the Brahmin was compelled to give marry his sister with the lower - caste community (Narayan, 2003:16-17). In the writing of Choubey, it is clearly narrated that the top position of the Brahmin was not indisputable. Many times the Brahmins had to surrender before lower caste people. The writings of Choubey were different from that of saying of Crooke. Choubey narrated these facts were curious. All of these events are nothing but few exceptions. The low –caste people had no power to challenge the superiority of Brahmins. In Indian society, the Brahmins were guided by the entire society. As Choubey belonged to Brahmin community, he always praised the Brahmins. If he belonged to the Dushadh community his written document would escape his opinion.

Well versed people of Indian national admitted that in Indian society inter-caste or higher caste marriage were not acceptable. When any inter caste marriage took place the higher caste people in the fear of losing caste became afraid. Risley wrote, “The high-born man mourns the loss of his caste as he would be the loss of his nose” (Risley, 1908:150). According to his opinion within the Indian observation caste system murderer, against this caste system helped to go away them. In case of inter caste marriage, the caste panchayets did not allow to take even water from the losing persons. Even taking water from low caste people were earmarked with the name of muskrat (Risley, 1908:150). If their bad smell entered once within anything would remain even after death for many days. He also said, as miners were men in a mine, the babies of any caste were considered as a better attraction in the society. Not to speak, in the writing of Risley this thing was not clear in any way how all proverbs were used in daily life of common people. According to Raheja, “Risley does not describe the situation in which such proverbs were elicited, nor does he describe the ends a high-caste native assistant might have had in view as he dictated certain stretches of speech to the proverb collector and not others”(Raheja,1996:498). Although there was the difference between the low caste people with high caste people he could not describe it clearly when under what circumstances such differences took place in the highest position. The matter that he established in his writing that, at intervals the Indian caste system the prevalence of caste and creeds were in for lasting.

According to the colonial administrator the Pardhi men and women in Maharashtra were like to be a branded criminal by birth. According to an 1880 report of the Bombay presidency, a locality overridden by the modern states of Maharashtra and Gujarat, members of a Pardhi sub tribe are “ habitually ragged and soiled, strolling with a sneaking gait.” They are principally jobless and landless, which they are usually and informally barred from villages. Their plight was created worse by a series of `19th century changes, as well as rapid deforestation, that stopped them from looking, and therefore the imposition of a tax on salt, that several had traded. Little question this drove several to crime- that inspired India’s British rulers to a harsh conclusion. To mend these vagabonds, the British introduced the 1871 Criminal Tribes Act, underneath that members of around a hundred and fifty tribes were forced to register with the police, forbidden to manoeuvre around freely and, in several cases, herded into barbed wire camps. The law was scrapped soon when India won independence, and thus the criminal tribes were formally “de-notified” in 1952.

It is not challenging to think about a scenario where, Brahamanas, seeing the ascendancy of English energy, allied with themselves to this recognized new judgment category and attempted to obtain impact through it. By developing themselves as government bodies on the caste techniques they could then tell the British what they considered the British desired to listen to. What would be most enhanced their own position? The British would then take this information, received throughout the filter of the Brahamanas, and interpreted it based on their own experience and their own cultural concepts. Thus, information was filtered at least twice prior to publication. As a result it seems certain that the information was lastly released was fielded with ideas that would seem to be absolutely fake to those about whom the facts was published.

CONCLUSION:

In many ethnographies and administrative accounts of such groups, castes and tribes, the authors were quite unsure of the identity of the groups. Without probing the history of the groups sufficiently, the judgment related to their criminal antecedents seem to have been made. Crook, Ibbetson, Oldham, Purser and Franch in their radical concept narrated the tales of various castes. The proverbial remarks which were narrated by them, mainly prevalent proverb of different caste and their revolutionary activities by the Indian people against payment of land revenue. India was ruled by the colonial administration within natural opposition by the Indian people. In the 19^th century, although the observations of colonial administrators regarding the Indian elite changed to some extent, but their observations regarding the Indian peoples’ opposition to British rulers continued like before time. The observations which they placed about Gujars, Meyos and Kharrals were doubtful, to some extent. However, not to speak of that the proverbs of the 19th century became much sensible for the change of village society. To save them from the hands of aristocratic landlords the lower caste people took shelter under political authorities. The proverbs of different types of people of north India which the British writers collected from the aristocratic landlord was done to safeguard their own interest. To control the free minded people they did not hesitate to call them crime prone persons. The British writers without any justification admired the speech of British rulers as true. The society like the proverbs, which were used by them that was their own comprehension. To the British, viewing the caste system from the outside and on a very superficial level, it appeared to be a static system of social ordering that allowed the elite class to maintain their power over the other classes.

In the second half of the 19^th century the explanations made by the colonial writers regarding relevant proverbs deleted many important subjects from the educational curriculum; they admitted that they collected the proverbs from the local elites. These elites of colonial states limited their relations through using prevalent proverbs with other classes of the people. Way to daily communications with unnatural shape and the proverbs used with intimation attitude became the main subject of interpretation of British writers, and at the same time they translated the daily orations and tricks which were not properly discussed. Depending upon only elite groups and keeping no relation with the vast portion of the people in general the British administrator writers and anthologists had the wrong interpretation regarding the Indian caste and creeds.

REFERENCES:

1. Bandopadhyay, S. (1990): Caste, politics and the Raj: Bengal; 1872-1937, Calcutta.

2. Bonington, C. J. (1931): The Bhantus: A Criminal Tribe of India in J Hutton (ed), Census of India, Part III: Vol 1, Government of India.

3. Crook, W. (1890): An Anthropological Handbook for the North West Provinces and Oudh, Govt. Press, Allahabad.

4. (1896): The Tribes and Castes of the North West Provinces and Oudh, Vol.II, Govt. Press, Allahabad.

5. (1907): Natives of Northern India, Archibold Constable and Co., London.

6. Dirks, N.B. (2001): Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India, Princeton University Press, Princeton and Oxford.

7. Dilip d' Souza, Declared Criminal at Birth India's "Denotified Tribes", Manushi, Vol. 123, http://www.indiatogether.org/ manushi/issue123/tribe.htm

8. Guha, R (1962): A Rule of Property for Bengal, Paris Mouton and Co., Lahaye.

9. (1983): Elementary aspects of Peasant Insurgency, Oxford University Press, Delhi.

10. Hobson Kevin, ‘Ethnographic Mapping and the Construction of the British Census in India’ http://www.britishempire. co.uk/article/castesystem.htm

11. Ibbetson, Sir Denzil (1916): Punjab Castes, Government Printing, Lahore. (1983): Outlines of the Punjab ethnography: Being Extracts from the Punjab Census Report 1981, Govt. Press. Calcutta.

12. Inden, R. (1990): Imagining India, Basil Blackwell, Great Britain

13. Kumar, Mukul (March 6, 2004): Relationship of Caste and Crime in Colonial India: A Discourse Analysis, Economic and Political Weekly.

14. Mayaram, S. (1991): Criminality or Community? Alternative Constructions of the Mev Narrative of Darya Khan, Contributions to Indian Sociology, 25 (1).

15. Metcafe, T.R. (1997): Ideology of the Raj, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

16. Narayan, Badri (June, 2003): Honour, Violence and Conflicting Narratives: A Study of Myth and Reality, New Zealand Journal of Asian Studies 5(1).

17. Oldham, (1930): The Proverbs of the People in a District (Shahabad) of North India, Folklore, 41(1).

18. Pursar, W.E. & Franshawe H.C. (1880): Report on the revised land revenue settlement of the Rohtak District of the Hisser division in the Punjab, Lahore.

19. Radhakrishna, M (1989): The Criminal Tribes act in Madras Presidency: Implications for Itinerant Communities, Indian Economic and Social History Review, 26 pp. 269-96.

20. (July 15, 2000): Colonial construction of a Criminal Tribe: Yerukelas of Madras Presidency, Economic and Political weekly.

21. Raghvaiah (1966): Nomads, Bhartiya Adim Jati Sangh.

22. Raheja, Gloria Goodwin (1996): Caste, Colonialism, and the Speech of the Colonized: Entextualization and Disciplinary Control in India, American Ethnologist, 23(3).

23. Risley, H. H. (1908): The People of India, Thaker and Sprink, Calcutta.

24. Said, E. (1978): Orientalism, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

25. Simhadri, Y.C. (1991): Denotified Tribes, Classical Publishing Company, New Delhi.

26. Stephen, James Fitzjames (1873): Liberty, Equality, Fraternity. London: Smith, Elder and Co. Tolen, Rachel J. (Feb, 1991): Colonizing and Transforming the Criminal Tribesman: The Salvation Army in British India, American Ethnologist, 18(1).

Received on 29.09.2012

Modified on 12.10.2012

Accepted on 25.10.2012

Research J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 3(4): October-December, 2012, 409-421