Guwahati: Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has repeatedly claimed that his government follows a “zero-tolerance policy” against forest encroachment and that eviction drives are essential to protect ecology and wildlife. However, ground realities in Biswanath and Sonitpur districts expose a striking contradiction, raising serious questions about the government’s selective enforcement and divisive politics.
While the BJP-led Assam government has conducted brutal and large-scale eviction drives over the past two years—largely targeting Bengali-speaking Muslim settlers—vast stretches of protected forest land near Nameri National Park and Sonai Rupai Wildlife Sanctuary have been systematically encroached upon with apparent state complicity.
Massive Encroachment Near Protected Forests
A field investigation by Northeast Now has uncovered large-scale, organised violations of India’s forest laws in Biswanath and Sonitpur districts, unfolding in full view of the Assam government. Hundreds of households have occupied forest land along the Itakhola–Sijjosa stretch adjoining the Naduar Reserve Forest in Biswanath district, while more than 200 households have constructed permanent settlements—many of them pucca, multi-room concrete houses—inside forest land from Kalamati to the foothills near the Arunachal Pradesh border in Sonitpur district’s Mismari area.
These constructions appear to be in direct violation of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, which prohibits the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes without prior approval from the Union government. The large-scale tree felling, road construction, and establishment of markets inside notified forest areas also raise serious concerns under the Wildlife Protection Act, given the proximity of these settlements to Nameri National Park and Sonai Rupai Wildlife Sanctuary.
This pattern of encroachment is not new. According to a study published in Current Science by researchers Shalini Srivastava, T. P. Singh, Harnam Singh, S. P. S. Kushwaha and P. S. Roy of the Indian Institute of Remote Sensing, Dehradun, Sonitpur district alone lost 232.19 square kilometres of forest cover between 1994 and 2001. The study highlighted extensive degradation driven by human settlement expansion and land-use change, particularly in forested landscapes close to protected areas.
A separate peer-reviewed study published on nature.com by researchers Ranjit Mahato, Gibji Nimasow, Oyi Dai Nimasow and Dhoni Bushi further reinforces these findings. The study recorded a forest cover loss of 7.47 percent between 1990 and 2000 and an additional 7.11 percent between 2000 and 2010 in Sonitpur and Udalguri districts. Crucially, the researchers identified hotspots of deforestation in areas closest to national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, and reserved forests, attributing the loss to encroachments for human habitation, agriculture, and timber and fuelwood extraction.
The study strongly recommended the early declaration of Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZs) around protected areas to curb accelerating deforestation—an advisory that appears to have gone largely unheeded by successive governments.
Forest Department Sources Confirm Political Patronage
More troubling is the reported move by the Assam government to regularise these illegal occupations by granting land pattas under the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006.
Forest department sources told Northeast Now that the encroachers belong predominantly to the Bodo tribal community, having migrated from Udalguri, Baksa and Tamulpur districts under the Bodoland Territorial Region (BTR).
More significantly, sources said the Assam government is considering regularising these settlements by granting land pattas under the Forest Rights Act—despite clear violations of forest protection laws.
“Temporary huts were initially built, but they have now been converted into full-fledged villages with concrete houses,” a forest official said.
Legal experts point out that the FRA is meant to recognise pre-existing, traditional forest rights of Scheduled Tribes and other forest dwellers who have lived in forest areas prior to December 13, 2005—not to legitimise post-2005 encroachments or newly established villages. Any such move, they warn, would amount to a blatant misuse of a rights-based law to sanitise political patronage.
Satellite imagery examined by this reporter shows that dense forest cover has been replaced by settlements, markets and internal roads, indicating not sporadic encroachment but planned occupation over an extended period. Officials admit that what began as temporary structures have now evolved into full-fledged villages—a transformation that could not have occurred without administrative indulgence and political protection.
Evictions Elsewhere: One Community Targeted, Another Protected?
The contrast becomes sharper when viewed alongside the 2025 eviction drives carried out across Assam, where the government justified demolitions in the name of forest conservation and preventing “demographic change”.
Most of these operations disproportionately affected Muslim families, many of whom were officially branded as “illegal Bangladeshi-origin encroachers”.
Critics argue that the government’s approach exposes a deeply communal and political application of law—where eviction becomes a tool of majoritarian politics rather than environmental protection.
“The contrast is stark. While the Assam government invokes forest laws to justify swift and often violent eviction drives elsewhere—overwhelmingly targeting Muslim settlers—similar laws appear conveniently suspended in these areas. The selective application of the Forest Conservation Act and the Forest Rights Act exposes an eviction regime driven less by environmental protection and more by identity politics and electoral calculation,” said a rights activist requesting anonymity.
Major Eviction Drives in Assam (2025–Early 2026)
| District | Key Locations | Land Cleared | Families / Structures Affected | Date(s) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Golaghat | Rengma RF (Uriamghat), Nambor South, Doyang RF | ~11,000 bighas (~1,500 ha) + ~1,400 ha | ~2,000 families | July–Aug 2025 | Largest eviction drive; cited “demographic threat” |
| Nagaon | Lutamari Reserve Forest | ~795 ha (~6,000 bighas) | ~1,500–1,700 families | Nov 29, 2025 | Mostly Muslim settlers |
| Goalpara | Paikan, Dahikata RF | ~1,140 bighas + ~135 ha | ~580–1,080 families | July & Nov 2025 | Linked to human-elephant conflict |
| Hojai | Jamuna–Moudanga RF | ~5,250–5,756 bighas | >1,500 families | Jan 2026 | Court-monitored eviction |
| Nalbari | Barkhetri–Bakarikuchi | ~452 bighas | ~93–150 families | June 2025 | Advance notices issued |
Other eviction references: Dhubri (~3,500 bighas), Lakhimpur (village grazing reserves)
Politics Over Forests?
Rights groups and opposition leaders allege that the Assam government is weaponising eviction drives—targeting Muslims to build a polarising political narrative, while turning a blind eye to forest destruction by politically aligned communities.
“Eviction is not about forests. It is about votes,” a civil rights activist said.
By evicting one community while legitimising another’s encroachment, the government risks not only accelerating environmental damage in some of Assam’s most ecologically fragile landscapes, but also deepening social divisions, undermining constitutional equality, and eroding public trust in the rule of law.
As Assam’s forests continue to shrink—despite decades of scientific warnings and satellite evidence—the question grows louder:
Is ‘zero tolerance’ a policy—or merely a political slogan?