“According “Alauddin’s measures were truly oppressive. His

“According to Shariat, they are called payers of tribute (Khiraj Guzar) and if the revenue officers demand silver from them, they should with all humility and respect tender gold. If the officer throws dirt into their mouth, they must without reluctance open their mouth wide to receive it.”

The Qazi, further, emphasized that even the great Iman Abu Hanifa has told that Jaziya, should be levied on the Hindus and they should be permitted to follow their religion. Some other religious dignitaries of Islam have suggested only two alternatives for the Hindus living in an Islamic kingdom.

They should either be put to death pr forced to embrace Islam. Alauddin Khalji followed the advice of the Qazi and adopted oppressive measures against the Hindus. He enhanced the load of revenue and other taxes on them. He imposed 50 per cent land revenue and snatched away the privileges of Khuts and Maqaddams. It reduced them to poverty but Dr. U. N. Dey does not agree to it. He remarks,

“The Khuts and Muqaddams at no stage of Indian history ever reached the stage of poverty as is told about them in his reign.”

Dr. Dey does not agree also with the view of Barani that the wives of Khuts and Muqaddams were compelled to seek jobs in the houses of Muslims in order to earn their livelihood. In fact, Dr. Dey is of the opinion that Alauddin’s policies were not against the Hindus. But this opinion of Dr. Dey is condemned by many other historians and they consider the policies of Alauddin anti-Hindu. Dr. K. S. Lai remarks,

“Alauddin’s measures were truly oppressive. His chief aim was to make the Hindus poor, so he abolished all the privileges of Hindu revenue officers.”

Besides levying heavy taxes, he destroyed, Hindu temples, broke the images of Hindu pods and kilfedi” Hindu war prisoners as they did not embrace Islam. Thus, Alauddin adopted an unjust and severe policy towards the Hindus on the advice of Qazi Mughisuddin. But if we want to know the reasons behind it, we shall have to read bet­ween the lines of the pages of history.

The number of Hindu subjects was quite large and they often revolted against the Muslim sultans due to their religious fanaticism o: economic suppression. He wanted to stop these revolts, so he inflicted poverty on them. Dr. K. S. Lai also writes, “Alauddin wanted to impoverish his countrymen so that the word ‘rebellion’ should not come on their lips.”

But Sir Wolseley Haig does not agree, with Dr. Lai. He writes, “Alauddin next framed a special code of laws against Hindus who were obnoxious to him partly by reason of their faith, partly by reason of the wealth which many of them enjoyed and partly by reason of their turbulence, especially in the Doab.”

To sum up, we may quote Dr. S. Roy about his attitude to­wards Hindus, “There are, however, good grounds to believe that in dealing with the Hindus, Alauddin was also actuated by communal considerations.” In fact, the anti-Hindu policy of Alauddin made the position of Hindus quite deplorable and led the Hindu society towards decline from economic, social and moral points of view.