Bhagat Singh Study is a blog to know about great Indian martyr Bhagat Singh and other revolutionaries of the world, who played a historic role in shaping the destiny of Indian nation and the world. Bhagat Singh and Che Guevara like revolutionaries are the icons of youth, who wish to change the world. In this blog there are photographs, documents and research material about Bhagat Singh and other revolutionaries of the world.
According to Juan Marinello, Jose Marti happened to be one of the most high ranking, authentic, great and profound historical figures of Latin America.Along with Simon Bolivar( Venezula), San Martin(Argentina),Miguel Hidalgo(Mexico), Moroles, Sucre and Toussain, he is considered as father of independence struggles of their people and untiring warrior against colonial domination. Marti is held in such high esteem by the people of Cuba that he is considered the embodiment of an exemplary son of the country. References to some of these heroes can be found in Gabriel Garcia Marquez's novel, based on Bolivar's life-'The General in his Labryinth'
Marti was son of a modest official of Spanish Govt. in Cuba, his home was typical of a poor child's dwelling in colonial factory. In one of his poem-'Yoke and Star', he depicts his house as 'When I was born without light....' Inspired by his teacher and poet Mendive, Marti became non-conformist even before he attained adolescence. He published his play 'Abdala', full of patriotic zeal and yearning for liberty.He was condemned to forced labour by Spanish colonialists at the age of 16 years and at breaking down of his health, was exiled to Spain in 1871, at the age of 18 years. In Spain, Marti joined Madrid University for studies and produced polemical speech-'The Spanish Republic in the face of the Cuban Revolution', which was published in 1873 at the age of just 20 years.His second literary work 'Adultera' was published while he studied law at the University
From Spain , Marti moves to Mexico, where he becomes a dedicated lecturer and journalist,he wrote for stage and became a drama critic. He left Mexico, when oppressive regime of Diaz took over, but the last letter before he took fatal Spanish bullet, was addressed to 'The friend of Mexico'-Manuel Marcado.
In 1877, Marti visited Cuba and Guatemala. In Guatemala, Marti wrote his autobiographical novel-'Amistad Funesta'(Unfortunate Friendship), though not considered his best literary writing by critics, but this novel depicts intimate personality of Marti and gives vivid account of Guatemala's life, he also warns Central American people about dangers being faced by them. In 1878, Marti returned to Cuba,when the 'Peace of Zanjon' was signed, but he clearly opined that Cuba can only be liberated through armed struggle. He is again subjected to oppression and is exiled again. He leaves Cuba, passes through Paris on way to Spain and then moves to New York in 1880. Same year he visited Venezuela and stayed there for six months, before leaving for New York, he wrote--'Venezuela, give me the opportunity to serve you.. I am your child..'
During the last fourteen years of his life, Marti lived in New York, he made the clear resolution to dedicate himself wholeheartedly to the task of freeing Cuba. Gradually he won over the devotion of fellow countrymen and became the unquestionable leader of the emancipatory struggle of the country. Marti founded Cuban Revolutionary party in 1891 after gaining the confidence of Cuban people, which became fundamental instrument for his armed struggle .
In days ahead, Marti took a nerve wrecking pilgrimage , a continuous restless journey through United States and Latin American countries.He mopped up valuable consent and contributions from people of Costa Rica and Dominican republic for the cause of 'unavoidable war'. He visited Mexico for last time in 1894.Marti landed in Cuba on 11th April 1895 and joined the insurgent troops as one of the many other soldiers.He became an example of self sacrifice and discipline. While mounted on horse or during camp nights, he wrote hurried notes, which are work of great depth and beauty showing the virtues of a great writer.On 19th May, 1895, a Spanish bullet ended his life at a place called Dos Rios, in Oriente de Cuba. Marti's Works
In his New York office, Marti left extensive and varied work so wide that it took its editor to compile these in 27 big volumes, an unimaginable task for anyone is short life span of just 42 years, only a genius could do it.Marti's austere revolutionary duty never stood in the way of his work as writer.His qualities as journalist during New York stay show the qualities of highly sensitive and supreme artistic manifestations. He sent his articles to 'The Nation' of Buenos Aires(Argentina), 'La America' and 'El Economist Americano' of New York, 'Universal Magazine' and 'Partido Liberal' of Mexico,'Revista Venezuela' of Carcas and 'Republic' of Honduras and so many other journals of the Caribbean and Latin America.
Apart from political and journalistic writings, Marti devoted lot of time to literary and art criticism. His literary writings filled many volumes and his analysis of world literary figures like-Darwin, Carlyle, Wilde, Flaubert, Spencer and Pushkin are considered masterpieces.Marti has great attachment with France and appreciated its enlightened writers like Victor Hugo, Luis Blance, Balzac, Emile Zola, Rousseau, Baudlaire,, Gautier and many more.
Litrary writins of Marti include poetry, plays, essays, fiction and literary criticism.His first poetic play 'Abdala' was published, when he was just 16 years old.His second play 'Adultera' was written in exile.In Guatemala, Marti wrote an Indian drama called 'Patriaa Y libertad'.Marti's anthologies include 'The Little Ismael', Simple Verses' and 'Free Verses'. There are many references to India in Marti's literary writings.There are references to Gautam Buddha as 'outstanding liberator of humanity'. He wrote about India's cultural influence on the wise men of Egypt, he refers to Tajmahal as 'pure as milk'. He refers to Ramayna, and describes The Jatakas as loveable philosophy..
In India, Peoples Publishing House , New Delhi published 'Remembering Marti', a commemorative volume in 1995, at the occasion of Marti's hundredth martyrdom anniversary. In this small volume Olga Chamario Trias and Victor Ramirez, Cuban diplomats in Delhi paid glowing tributes to the memory fo Jose Marti by describing him as ' The "Author" still at the Front'.First declaration of Havana in 1960, after the revolution led by Fidel Castro and Che Guevara begins with reference to Marti and 1976, when the first constitution of socialist Cuba was passed in National Assembly reads 'We declare our will that the law of laws of the Republic be guided by the strong desire of Jose Marti.At long last achieved:'I want the fundamental of our republic to be the tribute of Cubans to the full dignity of Man'.Fidel Castro is referred to be having the qualities of Marti in his personality.
'Our America' is considered to be the most significant writing of Marti.Marti refers to 'weapons of mind' in this essay as conquuers of all others and describes 'Barricades of ideas worse than barricades of stone'!Marti emphasises on self criticism in this seminal essay--'Nations should live in continual self criticism, because criticism is healthy, but always with one heart and one mind. Go down to the unfortunates and take them in your arms!' Marti attacks racist and reactionary rightwing fundamentalists by his scathing words--'The soul emantes, equal and eternal, from bodies distinct in shape and color. Whosoever foments and propagates antagonism and hate between races, sins against Humanity'.Yes this is the America of Martis, Bolivars, Martins, which counters the America of Bushes and Reagans...The present generation of latin America is living up to the ideals of its progressive heroes in Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, equador, Brazil and spreading to all other lands of Marti's 'Our America'. 21st century belongs to this America and not to washington ruled America!Amen!
M. Tahir speaks to seasoned author Chaman Lal who has just penned another book on Bhagat Singh
‘The sword of revolution is sharpened at the whetstone of thoughts.' You mention ‘Bhagat Singh' and see the spark in his eyes. He is Chaman Lal, author and educationist who teaches Hindi but breathes Punjabi and Urdu. For long Lal has been relentlessly trying to paint the ‘true picture' of the revolutionary through his writings. His latest book, “Bhagat Singh Key Rajneetik Dastavez”, published by National Book Trust and translated into Urdu by Hasan Musanna, titled, “Bhagat Singh Ke Siyasi Dastavez” has just hit the stands. Timely too considering Bhagat Singh's anniversary has just been observed across the country. This 233-page paperback is priced at Rs.85.
Lal, former Chairperson, Centre for Indian Languages, JNU, is a man on a mission. Delivering lectures, writing articles and books on Bhagat Singh has made Lal an authority on him. It all started four decades ago in his native place, Rampura Phul, Bhatinda. Then Hind Pocket Books brought out a series on the freedom fighters which was serialised in “Desh Bhakt Yadan” in Punjabi. This got Lal interested in Bhagat Singh. He has not looked back since.
This book is important as the documents throw enough light on Bhagat Singh's beliefs. They prove beyond doubt his deep thoughts and clear political vision, based on Marxism. In fact, Bhagat Singh, keenly aligned with Lenin's views, was studying Lenin till just before the hanging.
Why another book?
If you ask Lal, ‘why another one' as he has already penned half a dozen books on the revolutionary in different languages, he says, “See, people don't think of Bhagat Singh beyond a freedom fighter who threw a bomb in Delhi Assembly and was hanged by the British. I want to change this mindset and bring out the real Bhagat Singh, the intellectual who could have been a hero of the masses, at par with Gandhi if not better, due to his deep political views and a clear roadmap to freedom!”
According to him the British Empire was seeing in him an ideological hero and a leader like Lenin and the history has neglected this revolutionary and reformer. He aims to right this wrong with the new venture in a country that is at times guilty of selective memory.
The documents collected in this book show Bhagat Singh in a new perspective who by his own admission was an atheist who refused to say ‘Wahe Guru' before hanging. His dislike for Naram Dal, old stalwarts of freedom struggle, the Non-cooperation Movement and a policy of wait and watch is more than evident. He was the man of action rather, truly following the French revolutionary, Vaillant, who had said, “It takes a loud voice to make the deaf hear.”
He was also influenced by communist reformers and was impressed by the popular unrest during the 19th Century around Europe, America and Russia, specially the Tsar period. According to Lal, Bhagat Singh was the first freedom fighter who brought ‘Inquilab Zindabad' slogan into political arena while throwing the bomb in Delhi Assembly.
Why this translation in Urdu? Lal shuffles in his seat looking into the collection on his desktop to inform that Zahida Hina of Pakistan has called Bhagat Singh a ‘Pakistani Shaheed' and this Urdu book would support a Pakistani democratic movement or more aptly a Left democratic movement.
He is also striving to set up an archive on the lines of Gandhi and Nehru.
Beyond literature, even cinema has focussed on Bhagat Singh. Just a few years ago we had a spate of films on the revolutionary. Lal is clear about the portrayal of Bhagat Singh in films.
According to him the character of Bhagat Singh was more objective in Rajkumar Santoshi directed flick, The Legend of Bhagat Singh. He didn't like Ramanand Sagar's Bhagat Singh but found Guddu Dhanoa's Shaheed touching for its songs. He, however, has serious reservations about the much talked about Rang De Basanti. For the moment though, he would have us all reading Bhagat Singh. The language can be of our choice, the subject remains the same.
Urdu book-'Bhagat Singh ke Siyasi Dastavez' can be ordered at Ahmad Ali Sheikh, Sheikh Mubark Ali Publisher,62,Muzang Road Safanwala Chowk Lahore-Phone-6361306,mob.-03334266930 Or Imran Haque,Deputy Director(Sales),National Book Trust,Nehru Bhavan Vasant Kunj,New Delhi-110070.Email-nbtindia@nbtindia.org.in,phone-011...-26707700-02
Madan RaiAap ke Bhagat ingh ke bare men lekhan par Hindu men lekh dekha.mujeh jahan tak jankari hai ,ees par pahla mahatwapoornkary aapne Heerawal men leekhe lekh se aarmbh keeya tha.Hame to aap ke aaur Merityu Bodh kelekh se hee ees mahan krantikari ko sahi paripreksh men janne ka aawsar meela.Han Hansraj Rahbar ke yogdan ko bhi nahin boolaya ja sakta hai.
Bhgat sing ki inqalabi jado jahad ke bare main to bachpan se hi bahut kuch pardhte aae hain aur un kai logon se mil chuke hain jo keh Bhagat sing ki underground zindgi ya Jail ke sathi rahe hain aur unse Saheed e watan Bhagat sing ke bare m...ain bahut kuch sun chuke hain.Janab hassan Sb nain professor Chaman Lal ki kitab Bhgat Sing ke Sayasi dastavezaat ka Urdu main tarjuma kar ke Bhagat Singh ke Sayasi nazriyat se hamain aur aane wali naslon ashna karwane ka fareeza ada kiya hai. Yaqeenan is se Pakistan main Bhaghat Singh ke chahne walon main beshumar Izafa ho ga Aur hamari azadi ki tehreek aur perwan chardhe gi.
Yeh jang hai jang-e Azadi
Azadi ke parcham ke taleSee more
My Urdu book-'Bhagat Singh ke Siyasi Dastavez' can be ordered at Ahmad Ali Sheikh, Sheikh Mubark Ali Publisher,62,Muzang Road Safanwala Chowk Lahore-Phone-6361306,mob.-03334266930 Or Imran Haque,Deputy Director(Sales),National Book Trust,Nehru Bhavan Vasant Kunj,New Delhi-110070.Email-nbtindia@nbtindia.org.in,phone-011...-26707700-02
by Haroon Khalid
From 1900 till 1947, for almost half a century the famous Bradlaugh Hall of Lahore situated on the Rettigan road, remained a symbol of Revolution for the entire British India. Charles Bradlaugh, Lala Lajpat Rai, Maulana Zafar Ali Khan, Ajeet Singh, Bhagat Singh, and Jawaharlal Nehru all towering figures of their times have been associated with this hall. What should have been preserved as the museum of political revolution in Lahore lies in shambles near the University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences today. There is a huge lock on the entrance of the hall placed there by The Evacuee Trust Property Board (ETPB). The gloomier aspect is that not many people of the city today are aware of the political, cultural and social significance of the Bradlaugh Hall. There are a few people who are actually aware of its existence.
Rettigan road in the late 19th century was occupied by massive British bungalows. This was the elite section of the town. Charles Bradlaugh, an English Parliamentarian, advocate of Indian freedom from the British yoke, bought a piece of land here. Bradlaugh unlike his fellow British conservatives belonged to a different school of thought. He was one of the most famous atheists of his time who refused to take the oath on Bible when elected in the Parliament. He was also one of those Parliamentarians who advocated that the Indian people should be allowed to choose their own fate; in the Parliament. His resolution was accepted.
In Lahore, he had earlier purchased this vast tract of land; however no hall had been constructed so far. The British Government could not appreciate his sympathy for the Indians so they initially took the contract of laying down railway tracks from him and then ordered him to leave Indian land immediately. He bought a boat, stocked food and anchored the boat on the bank of Ravi. His contestation was that since he was not on Indian ‘land’ therefore he was not disobeying the State. He was later forced to leave. In England he gathered together members of the civil society and the labor class to advocate for the cause of Indian freedom.
Surinder Nath Banarjee in 1900 after the departure of Charles Bradlaugh inaugurated this hall. He was a member of the Indian National Association which was incorporated into Congress later. From 1898-1905 he remained the President of the Indian National Congress.
Perhaps the greatest contribution to this hall came from Lala Lajpat Rai. He was born on the 28th of January 1865 in Ferozpur to Ghulab Devi. Ghulab Devi Hospital on the Ferozpur road is named after her. He joined the Government College Lahore in 1880 from where he got a degree in Law. As part of Gandhi’s non-cooperation movement he founded the National College inside this Hall to impart quality education to Indians, who did not want to join British institutions. In 1928 when the Nationalists boycotted the Simon Commission there were speeches organized here against it hosted by Lala Lajpat Rai, Maulana Zafar Ali Khan, and Syed Atta ullah Shah Bukhari. The National College takes us directly to Bhagat Singh and his comrades. In 1922 he joined this college where he met Sukhdev and Yashpal his future compatriots. He remained here till 1926 and his political bearings were marked by his stay here. During that juncture and even after that many plays and other cultural activists were organized here with the focus on freedom of India. Another comrade of the Naujawan Bharat Swabha Bhagat Singh’s party Shareef Mateen, an inhabitant of Lahore remained in refuge here during the case against Bhagat Singh. He was present here with party members, the parents and brother of Bhagat Singh. During the trial his parents used to sit outside the hall on a charpoy and people passing by used to acknowledge them. The British Government established a Police check-post nearby to monitor the activities of the refuge.
Bhagat Singh was brought to this college by his Uncle Ajeet Singh a prominent figure of the Gaddar Movement. In the first half of the 20th Century political activists from the Gaddar Movement, Kissan Tehrikh and Pagadi Sambhal Jutta found refuge here. In the 1920 the famous Mohan Roy founder of the All India Communist Party and member of the International Communist Manifesto gave a memorable speech here, exhorting people to stand up for their rights and fight the British Imperialism. Inder Kumar Gujral a freedom fighter and former Prime Minister of India mentions of this hall in the most reminiscing tone. He says that this is where his political journey began from, where they formed their first Student Union. They heard the revolutionary speeches of Jawaharlal Nehru and poetry of Josh Miliabadi here for the first time. They also heard here Haran Mukherjee, Dr. Muhammad Ashraf, Mian Ifthikharuddin and Dr. Saifuddin Kachlo.
When the first film studio in Lahore was setup in 1933 it was organized in fields next to the Bradlaugh Hall property of the Hall.
It is a pity that a Hall, which remained so close to the Independence of British India and a center of cultural activity for half a century, saw a complete turn of fate after the creation of Pakistan. For a little time after 1947 it was used to store food stuff after which till 1980s, it served as a steel mill. It reopened as a technical education centre, the Milli Technical Education Institute however because of a dispute between the Directors; one of them took possession of the Hall and rented it out to private academies. Finally the Evacuee Trust Property Board (ETPB) took possession of the Hall claiming to be the legal owners of the property and since 2009 it has been closed. Now it is a sanctuary for criminal activities.
It is high time that the government realizes the political and cultural significance of the Bradlaugh Hall and conserves it as a museum of Revolution. Portraits or sculptors of the various important personalities who have been related to the Hall can be put up and a short history of the movements that have sprang up from here or that have remained in focus here can be put on the walls with pictures from the movement. The Hall can be open to general public. If steps are taken in this direction the significance of this Hall would be reestablished and the waning interest of our people in the history and culture of our land can be revived.
Lahore Central jail, where the three revolutionaries were hanged on the day in 1931, has been practically demolished. Their cells have been razed to the ground as if the establishment does not want any sign of their hanging to remain. It is a pity because Bhagat Singh’s sacrifice, long before partition, could have been a link of sorts between the two countries.
Three years ago, some of us located at Lahore the place where Bhagat Singh and his two comrades were hanged. Ironically, the locality where the scaffold for hanging was put up, has been named Shadman (abode of happiness). I asked residents of the colony if they knew who Bhagat Singh was. Many of them had heard the name. Some had a vague idea of his confinement and hanging.
“When we came here, there were only police quarters, which were pulled down as the colony expanded,” said a man in his fifties. The then Lahore Deputy Commissioner had not even heard of Bhagat Singh’s name.
Fortunately, the place of hanging is a bit removed from the main road. There is a pond which gives serenity to the site. We paid homage to the martyrdom of the three on March 24 to avoid the Pakistan National Day celebrations. The following year, we could not hold even a meeting because the authorities had clamped Section 144. The recurrent blasts at Lahore this year kept us away.
The busy roundabout, near which the scaffold for hanging was put up, has a story which is told and retold. This is the place where Nawaz Mohammad Ahmed Khan, father of Ahmed Raza Kasuri, then a member of Pakistan’s National Assembly, was shot at.
Former Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had reportedly “instructed someone” to kill Kasuri, a staunch opponent. When the bullets were fired through automatic weapons, Kasuri was negotiating the roundabout. His father, sitting next to him, received fatal injuries near the scaffold.
Kasuri’s grandfather was one of the officials who had identified the bodies of the three revolutionaries. Old timers believe that nemesis caught up with the Kasuri family when Mohammad Ahmed Khan was wounded at the roundabout. Ironically, Bhutto himself was hanged some 25 years ago.
Bhagat Singh was a staunch secular who knew no borders of prejudice or bias. For him the world was divided between the haves and the have-nots. Religion or caste did not figure anywhere. In an essay on “Why am I an atheist?” he argues: “Any man who stands for progress has to criticise, disbelieve and challenge every item of the old faith. If after considerable reasoning one is led to believe in any theory or philosophy, his faith is welcomed. His reasoning can be mistaken, wrong, misled, and sometimes fallacious. But he is liable to correction because reason is the guiding star of his life. But mere faith and blind faith is dangerous; it dulls the brain, and makes a man reactionary.”
Bhagat Singh maintained a notebook throughout his internment. A voracious reader as he was he would write down in his notebook the sentences he liked. Dwelling on his lack of faith in any religion, Bhagat Singh quoted from the notebook Upton Sinclair, an American socialist. The latter wrote: “Just make a man a believer in immortality and then rob him of all his riches and possessions. He shall help you even in that ungrudgingly. The coalition among the religious preachers and possessors of power brought forth jails, gallows, knots and these theories.”
The saddest day was March 23. It began like any other day when the political prisoners were let out of their cells in the morning. They normally remained out during the day and returned after sunset. But on March 23 when warden Charat Singh showed up at 4 p.m. and asked them to get back in, they were surprised.
It was too early for them to be locked up. They had often stayed long after sunset despite the warden’s rebukes. But this time he was not only strict, he was also adamant. He would not say why. All that he muttered incoherently was “orders from above.” They guessed that it was the hanging of Bhagat Singh and his two comrades.
The scaffold was old, but the hefty hangmen were not. All the three men sentenced to death stood on separate wooden planks, with a deep ditch of water running below them. Bhagat Sigh was in the middle. The noose was tightened around each one’s necks. They kissed the rope. Their hands and feet were tied. The hangmen pulled the rope and removed the rafters from under their feet. It was a crude mechanism. The bodies, limp and drooping, remained hanging from the scaffold for a long time. They were brought down and examined by a doctor who pronounced them dead.
I have not been able to understand why the government is reluctant to put a copper plaque at the place in the Central hall of Parliament where Bhagat Singh threw a bomb, purposely of low intensity, to draw the attention of authorities to the two proposed Bills relating to public safety and trade disputes before the House.
He said: “It takes a loud voice to make the deaf hear.” These are immortal words uttered on a similar occasion by Valliant, a French anarchist martyr, who said: “We strongly justify this action of ours” to open the ears.
During my six-year-long membership of the Rajya Sabha, I requested all Lok Sabha Speakers of different political parties to put the plaque at the bench in the public gallery from where Bhagat Singh threw the bomb and the place on the floor where it landed. My efforts bore no fruit. This is the least homage we can pay to the memory of Bhagat Singh.
These are photographs from Gorakhpur,which I visited in June 2010,Faizabad, which I visited in June 2008 and Shahjahanpur,which I visited in 1989.Shahjahanpur photos I have scanned and then loaded on computer.
Najm Hosain Syed arguably is the best Punjabi writer of the twentieth century poet , critic , playwright teacher, scholar, historian and leader of Punjabi Language Movement. His writings about Punjabi heroes Dullah Bhatti ,Ahmed Khan Kharal (two plays) and about our classic poets , all of whom were revolutionaries Nanak , Shah Hussain , Bulleh ... See moreShah Waris Shah , Sachal Sarmast et al , are a legion . He is a writer who is also a teacher , songwriter and composer par excellence . He is leader of thought in the Leftist and Punjabi Language Movements in Pakistan . Sir, you as language teacher would understand that the class struggle of the people is very closely linked to people,s languages in South Asia . People as varied in life as late Prof Kishen Singh and Punjabi leftist poet Paash Shaheed acknowledged Najm,s contribution .This is a short introduction about Najm Hosain Syed .Those who do not know about him do not know much about the Punjabi language today . Though my father , a leftist/ Congressman taught me about Bhagat Singh as a child , as any Punjabi father should ,it was Najm who introduced me to the historical /real Baghat Singh . Our magazines, best ever in the language , Maan Boli / Pancham , published all the writings of Bhaghat Singh ; that is where I learned about your Historical contribution to Bhagat Singh, life and history writings . Najm Is actively engaged with project Bhagat Singh,s life. And hopefully when we bring the repertoire theater of Najm,s to East Punjab a play about Bhagat Singh will be among them. Here are two of his short poems , first about class consciousness of Bhaghat Singh and one about his dream of India,s future , then . The poems are in Punjabi . The first with Bhangra taal is purpotedly a letter in reply to an upper class friends expression of sympathy :-O, hun tay aa gaey haan ! :Laambay keekan rahiay !Hun tay aa gaey haan :Yaari taeree saadee koi nahin ;Aevaen taenu jhooth paey kahiay : Hun tay aa giay haan , lambay keekan rahiay ;Tera saada jut vaer da ay ; Eha rah milan da ay toray ;Saanun khabray ajay saar nahin ; Koee jit puri jit nahin ; Haar koee puri haar nahin ; Hun tay aa gaey haan , laambay keekan rahiay ;Hun tay aa gaey haan !Jee marnun mar jewnu koee bahar nahin , hun tay aa gaey haan ; Lambay keekan rahiay , hun tay aa gaey haan ! The second poem is more complex . It is imagining the thoughts of the Hero at the time of his death , his all seeing eye that made him what he was ! "Asaan vaekh laey aj raat bhalak jo avny hae !Hae hirkkh jeha toray na vekhan !Jinhan bhet nah bhalia kal tay aj di ghaat ander ; Oha bujhian battian baal suttay ! Asan vekh lia aj raat bhalak jo avna hae !
Amongst the numerous Punjabi patriots that have been borne over centuries, arguably, Sardar Bhagat Singh’s personality stands as the tallest in stature, fame, and sacrifice. However, a strange event occurred after the death of this son of Punjab. The land that he called his mother got divided into two parts. This partition not only divided land but also mentalities, families and heroes. A strong sense of ‘us’ and ‘them’ were forged, to invoke patriotism, justifying the partition, or the betrayal, fueling nationalism. What is Indian is anti-Pakistani and vice-versa.
In this division of history, where does Bhagat Singh stand? He was an Indian when he died, but can he become a Pakistani after Pakistan, based on his ancestral village. Logic has it that he should become an Indian like Allama Iqbal became a Pakistani. We know that Bhagat Singh was an atheist. Can Pakistanis even dare to own atheist heroes? Now that is a path I am frightened to tread on.
Atheist or not, Muslim or Sikh, these distinctions cannot undermine the intellect, the passion and the sacrifice of Bhagat Singh. Irrespective of which country owns Bhagat Singh, the fact of the matter is that he was born in a small village on the Jaranwala-Faislabad road, called Banga, now part of Pakistan. He spent most of his adult life in Lahore. His political struggle was launched from this city; he murdered J.P Saunders in this city. His trial took place here and he was finally hanged in Lahore, on the 23rd of March 1931.
The struggle of Bhagat Singh was not for the Muslims, or the Sikhs of India, as, ironically, the Khalsa movement, later, tried to portray. He fought for the repressed, irrespective of the religion. His best friends were Muslims; at least they were, before they became atheists. Like Che Guevara, Malcolm X, and Nelson Mandela, he is a symbol of empowerment, to the oppressed, yet I don’t understand why, whereas, a lot of people in Pak-land appreciate the efforts of the former turn red when Bhagat Singh is mentioned.
From 20th to 25th of November 2008, the fifth Punjabi Lokh Mela was organized and celebrated at the Government College of Jaranwala. This is an annual affair, and each year a Punjabi hero is celebrated. This year was the 100th birthday of Bhagat Singh, because of which the Mela was arranged at Jaranwala, close to the birth village of Bhagat Singh. My mother and I along with some of our friends went to the see the Mela, on the 23rd of November 2008. Our expectations were high; imaginations shaped by a large amount of Indian movies and dramas we have seen. But we were disappointed. The previous night three token blasts had occurred at the Alhamra Cultural complex, during the Rafi Peer Festival. There were just a few hundred local attendees. After trying our best to fully enjoy ourselves, we left in vain, to our next, much more exciting, stop, the residence of Bhagat Singh.
At a few kilometers from this place, on the right side of the road, if one is going from Jaranwala, a broken road leads to the forgotten village of Banga, where once songs about the bravery of Bhagat Singh were sung.
After suffering tremendously on the road, we reached Banga in one piece. The road, made of mud, was perpetually uneven. At the residence of Bhagat Singh we were greeted by Advocate Sanaullah, as if he was already expecting us. His family settled here after the partition. I could not help but appreciate his efforts to preserve the original architecture of the legend. He has not changed the intricate doors that were in vogue during that juncture. He has kept the strong safe that belonged to the family of Bhagat Singh. Perhaps his greatest contribution was the nourishment of the berry tree, whose seeds were laid by Bhagat Singh, himself, according to Sanaullah. Next to the tree was one of the original doors from that time. He told us that on the frame of the door Vande Matram was written, in blue ink, now no longer present.
The original house was an area of 2 canals, now divided into five houses, according to Sanaullah. Most of the original structures of those times have been eliminated. Just one room, within the property of the advocate, in a depredated state is still extant. It was reported to be the drawing room of the family. It was now below the present surface of the house.
Following this we headed towards the school where Bhagat Singh studied. Facing the school was an open ground, where, once, children from the school used to play. Now it is a playing field for bacteria found in the stagnant water. Behind the pond was a tall tower of a mosque, which was once a Gurduwara, according to Iqbal Qaiser. This was, primarily, a Sikh village, with just a few Muslim houses.
The school is in shambles, yet still functional. The primary classroom where Bhagat Singh used to study now exists without walls and roofs. Advocate Sanaullah reported that he is writing desperately to the government to revamp this classroom, but to no avail. He informed that the previous Governor had accepted to preserve the school and the house, and also uplift the village, but then the regime changed. The papers are still with the Governor.
Before the partition, the villagers had put up a statue of Bhagat Singh in one corner of the ground, next to which they used to commemorate the memory of Bhagat Singh, by arranging an annual festival. All changed after the partition.
Just as we were leaving the village, I asked a young boy, with no shirt, around 6 years of age, if he knew who Bhagat Singh was, he retorted, with pride, it seemed, Bhagat was the greatest Punjabi warrior.
Chandershekhar Azad was born on 23rd July 1906 in Bhavra village of Jhabua district in present day Madhya Pradesh. He was born to mother Jagrani Devi and father Sita Ram Tiwari in a hut. His father Sita Ram Tiwari had migrated from Badraka village in Unnao district near Kanpur. His elder son Shukdev was born in Badraka. Parents had five children but only Chandershekhar Azad survived.
Azad had some elementary education in village,before going to Bombay at the age of 12-13 years, where he did some menial jobs. He went to Benaras and got enrolled in Sanskrit school. Here under the influence of non cooperation movement launched by Mahatma Gandhi in 1921, he took part in the movement and got 15 lashes on his back,shouting every time 'Mahatma Gandhi ki Jai'. He was badly bleeding after the punishment,but did not accept medication in jail and prefered being taken care of by some freedom fighter. After Gandhi withdrew the non cooperation movement as a fall out of Chauri Chaura incident on 4th February 1922,Azad got disillusioned by Gandhi and Congress movement. As Shachindernath Sanyal was trying to regroup revolutionary movement,Azad joined Hindustan Republican Army(HRA) along with many other young men like Ram Prasad Bismil,Ashfaquallah,Roshan Singh,Rajender Lahiri,Bhagat Singh etc. In Kakori rail dacoity on 9th August 1925, Azad and Kundan lal could not be arrested,whereas Bismil-Ashfaq-Roshan-Rajinder were hanged on 17th and 19th December in different jails of U.P.
In 1928,Bhagat Singh,Azad and many others regrouped in Ferozeshah Kotla grounds of Delhi on 8&9th September and rechristened their organisation as Hindustan Socialist Republican Army(HSRA) and it political wing as HRS Association.Chandershekhar Azad with the name of Balraj was appointed commander-in-chief of the armed wing and Bhagat Singh became the ideologue of political wing. They wanted to make mass organisations of students,youth and workers,but Lala Lajpat Rai's death at the hands of cruel British police lathi charge, made HSRA pledge to take revenge for this 'national insult'. Accordingly Bhagat Singh and Sukhdev killed police officer Saundres on 17th december 1928 at Lahore in front of SSP office. Azad supervised the whole operation and killed sub inspector Chanan Singh after repeated warnings, as he tried to follow and catch Bhagat Singh and Rajguru.
Later when organisation decided to send Bhagat Singh to throw bomb in Central Assembly Delhi on 8th April 1929, against the wishes of Azad, he saw to take care of all aspects of this act as well. Later HSRA planned to rescue Bhagat Singh from jail,but the plan was abandoned due to death of Bhagwati Charn Vohra on 28th May 1930 at Ravi Banks Lahore during bomb experiment.
Chandershekhar Azad remained active in the organisation,but on 27th February 1931 at Alfred Park Allahabad ,he was encircled by British police allegedly at the deception of someone in the group, named later as Vir Bhadar Tiwari. Sukhdev Raj with him at that time.Encounter took place around 9.a.m.Azad made Sukhdev Raj flee and faced the police with his mouser till the end,wounding many British officers. Even after firing stopped,British police was scared to go near his body. News spread in Allahabad and people gathered in large numbers. Police tried to cremate the body in hurry,but people foiled their attempt. Senior leaders like Kamla Nehru, wife of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Padamkant Malviya, nephew of Madan Mohan Malviya and editor of 'Abhyudue', joined the funeral procession. Shachindernath Sanyal's wife made a passionate speech exhortin people to take with them the ashes of Azad's cremated body as people in Calcutta did at Khudi Ram Bose's cremation in 1908. People followed her advice and nothing survived of the ashes.
Azad used to go to Pt. Nehru's house in Allahabad and Pt. Moti Lal Nehru, father of Jawaharlal was more sympathetic to them.Moti lal nehru died on 6th February 1931. Jawaharlal nehru had given money to Azad for sending Yashpal and Surender Pandey to Moscow for the study of Socialist thought,which did not materialise after his martyrdom.Though Azad was not intellectual like Bhagat Singh,but he was convinced wit the ideas of Socialis. He has listened 'Communist Manifesto' from Shiv Verma in its Hindi rendering and was impressed with it.
Azad was very close to Bhagat Singh and both were like Ho Chi Minh and Gen. Giap combination of Vietnam or Castro-Che Guvera combination of Cuba or even Mao-Chu Teh combination in China. Had their revolutionary movement grown and succeeded in India, another combinatio would have been created. My salute to the memory of one of the finest, most honest,brave and sincere revolutionaries of India!
Azad's widowed mother lived in her village,without believing that Azad has been martyred. Jagrani Devi was brought to Jhansi by two of Azad's best disciples-Bhagwan Das Mahour and Sadashiv Malapurkar in 1948, only then she came to terms with Azad's martyrdom. She died in March 1951 and was shown fire by Sadashiv Malapurkar, revolutionary comrade of Azad. Bhagwan Das Mahour was married to Master Rudra Narayan's daughter, at whose house Azad used to spend long time in Jhansi.
Swarn Singh, who died on 20th July, 1910, according to Malwinderjit Singh Waraich, author of many books on revolutionaries and revolutionary freedom movement of India, was the younger uncle of Bhagat Singh. Incidentally Swarn Singh died at almost same age-23 years, as Bhagat Singh kissed the gallows around same age.
Swarn Singh, the youngest son of S. Arjan Singh was born in 1887 at Khatkar Kalan , exact date of birth is not yet known. Along with his elder brothers-Kishan Singh,father of Bhagat Singh and Ajit Singh, close associate of Lala Lajpat Rai and Sufi Amba Prasad, he also got his education from Saidas Anglo Vedic school Jalandhar. As Kishan Singh and Ajit Singh were both active in freedom struggle, so Swarn Singh also followed their path. He was particularly associated with Ajit Singh’s activities in Lahore, like organizing Bharat Mata society and ‘Mohabbatan-e-Watan’ and focusing on peasant problems of those days. Ajit Singh used to bring out lot of literature in Urdu and English those days and Swarn Singh played major role in publishing activities.He was accused for publishing and selling books and pamphlets like—‘Bandar Bant’,’Divide and Conquor’, “Peshwa’,Hindustan Mein Angrezi hakumat’,’Ghadar’, ‘Baghi Masih’, ‘Amanat mein Khayanat’ and many others Because of his activities, he was also jailed many times and caught tuberculosis in jail. In a book edited by well known historian Dr. Ganda Singh for Punjabi University Patiala-‘Seditious Literature in The Panjab’, all the intelligence reports of those days, collected in the book, give vivid description of Swarn Singh’s activities and also refer to his being at the advanced stage of consumption, because of which he could not be tried for certain cases against him. So it is clear that Swarn Singh dedicated his life to nation, though he came from a well to do family and because of jail sufferings, he became consumptive, he did not receive any proper treatment for that and passed away on 20th July 1910, at the age of just 23 years.
Veerender Sandhu, author of family history of Bhagat Singh in Hindi has referred to Swarn Singh as being appointed Superintendent of an orphanage in Lahore in 1905, where lot many orphan children were brought by his elder brother Kishan Singh from Rajputana, because of severe drought there. Swarn Singh turned out this orphanage into a revolutionary training centre for children. He became a propaganda secretary of ‘Bharat Mata Society’ established by his elder brother Ajit Singh. After Ajit Singh’s deportation to Mandalay jail in Burma in 1907, Swarn Singh published his anti British articles from Lahore and he was convicted on 20th July 1907 and sentenced to one and half year imprisonment, where he caught consumption. He was tortured in jail by putting him with Mahasha Ghasita Ram for drawing water from well like oxen are put up. He refused to obey the illegal orders and he was confined to isolated cell for long time.
Swarn Singh was married to Bibi Hukam Kaur, who suffered silently, while he was in jail, rather than celebrating his married life with her and later she lived a widowed life for 56 years, dyeing without an issue in 1966.All her affections she gave to Bhagat singh, who was also very caring of both of his aunts. Harnam Kaur, also without an issue, waited for 38 years for the return of her husband Ajit Singh from exile, who returned to India in March 1947, only to be with her for last six months of his life, passing away in Dalhousie on 15th August 1947, at the dawn of independence.
The whole family fo Bhagat singh served the nation. His grandfather Arjan Singh trained his three sons and grandson Bhagat Singh for serving the nation.In fact Bhagat Singh was pledged to nation by his grandfather on his thread ceremony in early childhood. Bhagat Singh’s father suffered jail terms many times as Congress party activist and remained member of Punjab Assembly during 1937 elections. Kishan Singh’s younger brother Ajit Singh remained deported and exiled for nearly four decades. Ajit Singh’s younger brother Swarn Singh was no less active than other members of his family in patriotism and suffering for nation, however he remained most unknown and least talked about. It is time for the nation to acknowledge and recognize Swarn Singh’s selfless service to the nation and his contribution to freedom struggle by celebrating his death centenary in a befitting manner. Would the people’s organizations and Govt. of India and Punjab pay attention towards their long delayed duty in this regard?
Chaman Lal
“Gandhi and Bhagat Singh’, V.N Datta, Rupa & Co., New Delhi, 2008, pages 126, Price- Rupees 295/
Chaman Lal
Ever since death sentence for Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev in Lahore conspiracy case-II was pronounced on 7th October, 1930 by a controversial three member special tribunal established by British colonial government, it became a national issue to get the lives of these patriots saved. And who could save these precious lives? In general perception it was Mahatma Gandhi, who was thought to be the tallest national leader of India at that time. Since then this question has never been settled. Every now and then, this issue again erupts, why did Gandhi not save the lives of these young men? Or could he save or not save? This issue had been discussed umpteen times, ‘Mainstream’ had series of articles, both in favour of and against Gandhi, but without any convincing conclusion. Academia had remained more or less aloof from this contentious issue, but with well known historian V.N.Datta’s latest publication ‘Gandhi and Bhagat Singh’, the debate has entered academic world also.
V. N. Datta has referred to earlier debates on the issue and has come out with his own views as well, which are of course in favour of Gandhi to a large extent. Although no one gave thought to this view, whether this issue deserved so much energy and space and such long time to continue? Before probing the different aspects of this contentious question, one should look at the background in which this question got focused and later even struck. Bhagat Singh and his revolutionary group after getting their organization renamed as “Hindustan Socialist Republican Association’ from earlier simple ‘Hindustan Republican Association’ on 8th and 9th September 1928, went into quick political actions, but they were trapped in the quagmire of British repressive actions on Indian masses and had to act against their own ideological perspective of building socialist movement with organizing masses in foreseeable future and thus creating an alternative to Indian National Congress for liberating the country. As the group requested Lala Lajpat Rai , a tall national leader, though with whom they had differences on communal issue, to lead the mass protest against the visit of Simon Commission to Lahore on 30th October, 1928, Lalaji fell to the brutal lathi blows of colonial police while leading the mass demonstration and succumbed to injuries on 17th November, 1928. There are two famous statements of that occasion, one issued by Lala Lajpat Rai himself on the same evening, i.e. 30th October, 1928, while addressing mass rally against this brutality by British police officers, namely Scott and Saunders, Superintendent and Deputy Superintendent of Police at Lahore at that time. Lala Lajpat Rai proclaimed in highly charged mass rally that ‘every blow on his body will prove to be the last nail in the caffeine of the British colonial rule in India.’ Other equally charged reaction came after the death of Lala Lajpat Rai, this was by Basanti Devi, the widow of most respected national leader C.R.Das that ‘whether the youth of this country have lost their shame? Whether our young men will avenge the death of our tallest national leader at the hands of a lowly British police officer? Known to be the most sensitive to the dignity of Indian nationhood, revolutionary group of Bhagat Singh had no option under the circumstances to uphold the dignity of Indian nationalism by avenging the death of Lala Lajpat Rai, who was the symbol of Indian nationalism at that time, despite their bitter differences with him. On 17th December, 1928, exactly one month after the death of Lala Lajpat Rai, Saunders was shot dead by Rajguru and Bhagat Singh, with the cover given to them by Chanderrshekhar Azad. Though they all escaped from Lahore in a very daring manner and could even had lie low for sometime, but the sharp intellect and growing political maturity in Bhagat Singh led him to take further clear decisions. Bhagat Singh could see that in spite of reaching the consciousness of the need to have socialist revolution in India through insurrection, like in Russia in 1917, he and his group was not equal to that great task. He knew that their days are numbered and they must perform such spectacular actions which could awaken the sleepy masses of India. He wanted that the socialist ideas of his revolutionary group and his own must reach every nook and corner of the country and they had to sacrifice their lives to awaken the masses. Bhagat Singh was more than absolutely clear that sacrifice of some of the leading leaders of the group was must and due to his involvement in Saunders murder, he had to be one of those, who must accept this moral duty towards the nation and its people. It was with such clear understanding that the second spectacular action of throwing harmless bombs in Central Assembly Delhi, ( ‘To Make the Deaf Hear’), to protest against anti people legislations like ‘Public Safety Bill’ and ‘Trade Disputes Bill’ was planned very meticulously. The decision not to escape and use courts as platform to propagate their ideas was also taken with political maturity. Further to sing national songs and raise slogans in the court and get brutally beaten up publicly at the hands of British police in response, was also part of that political design. Even to use the weapon of hunger strike and observe record hunger strike of 115 days, with the loss of their dear comrade Jatin Dass after 63 days was to rouse the masses and they did succeed in their target.
Bhagat Singh delayed the Lahore conspiracy case proceedings, much to the chagrin of British colonial rulers, but he never wanted to save his life. He agreed to allow and appeal to Privy Council for this purpose but with the clear understanding that ‘Execution must not stop’. His wish was that ‘they should be executed at the time when Indian people’s rise in masses to demand for their release was at its peak’. That is what exactly happened. He was executed exactly when the whole nation had woken up and Bhagat Singh had become a household name and it proved Gandhi’s apprehension expressed to Irwin, true, that ‘their execution will make them ‘national martyrs’, so they became defeating both Gandhi and British crown design to marginalize them from Indian political scene.
‘Gandhi and Bhagat Singh’ is an enlarged and revised version of a long keynote address delivered by Prof. V.N.Datta at the international conference held on ‘Bhagat Singh and his Times’ at Panjab University, Chandigarh in September 2007 by ICHR and Institute of Punjab Studies. In a short preface the author argues that ‘The question of Bhagat Singh’s life and death has to be seen from a broader perspective, especially within the framework of the British Imperial system operating in the country, which is generally ignored’. The author also questions the view of some of the historians that ‘Bhagat Singh was a convinced and confirmed Marxist, Socialist and Leninite’. The author takes this view to be one dimensional. Prof. Datta also poses the question—‘What was his (Bhagat Singh’s) legacy? What was his achievement? The author counterpoises the view of Gandhi that Bhagat Singh’s mode of militant nationalism was ‘most injurious to the cause of Indian independence. Still more Prof. Datta proclaims that ‘Sukhdev was the real brain and organizer of the entire programme’ and ‘his role has been ignored’, further ‘ Sukhdev still awaits a historian!’. For a small book of about 125 pages, these questions and observations are too tall. The book divided into eight chapters includes in appendices, notice by HSRA after killing JP Saunders, the leaflets thrown in Central assembly after throwing the bombs, Governor General’s statement after Gandhi-Irwin pact and Karachi Congress resolution of 31st march 1931 on ‘Fundamental Rights and Economic Changes’. Apart from useful index and bibliography, Chronological table of Bhagat Singh’s life has also been included in the book.
In the first chapter, the author refers to the debate that took place mostly in the pages of left weekly ‘Mainstream’ on Gandhi’s role in this whole episode. While Ashok Celley, D.P.Das and A.G.Noorani took a strong stand that Gandhi had not sincerely tried to save the lives of these young revolutionaries, Anil Nauriya and Prem Bhasin counter these views by supporting the view that Gandhi did his best to save the lives. Some other authors have also been referred from their books. K K Khullar and Kuldip Nayar are quoted as supporting Gandhi for making efforts, while D(G?) S Deol, Manmathnath Gupta and also A.G.Noorani in his book ‘The Trial of Bhagat Singh’ have been referred to castigating Gandhi in this context. S. Irfan Habib has been referred to be a bit ambivalent on this issue. Some British historians like Roy Jenkins, Andrew Roberts and Allan Campbell Johnson have been shown as describing the events or Gandhi-Irwin negotiations in a matter of fact manner. In fact the major article in this regard was penned by D.P.Das, which was published under the title ‘Gandhi and Bhagat Singh’ in Independence Day number of ‘Mainstream’ in 1970. D.P Das had based his arguments on the basis of documents of British bureaucracy in national archives. He also referred to Lord Irwin’s autobiography, in which he has referred to his dialogue with Gandhi on this issue. This article has created ripples, as for the first time Gandhi’s image was questioned in a very serious manner. A.G.Noorani later added this article in his book in appendices and he himself supported all the arguments of Das with his own painstaking research in the process of writing ‘The Trial of Bhagat Singh’. Ashok Celly argued that Gandhi never tolerated any other view in the national movement apart from his own views. He refers to the throwing away of Subhash Bose from Congress party despite being democratically elected President, as he had defeated Gandhi’s candidate in elections. D.G. Tendulkar and Pattabhi Sitaramaya are quoted for espousing Gandhi’s moral dilemma in this regard as being a votary of non violence; he could not defend an act of violence by the young men. INA General Mohan Singh and author G.S.Deol are unhappy with Gandhi’s passivity in this matter. All this debate is concentrated on only on one issue, which was why Gandhi did not make it the condition of Gandhi-Irwin negotiations going on that time that the lives of these young men will be spared and it would be converted into life sentence. Privy Council by this time had rejected the appeal on these executions and now only Viceroy could commute the sentence and all the appeals were being made to him. Since Congress party as main driving force of national movement was expected to take lead in this regard, pressure was being built on it from inside and outside to take a clear stand and further make it a condition of any agreement with British Government. Not only Gandhi, who was the undisputed most powerful leader of Congress party, even the Congress working committee also did not make it as a precondition for the negotiations with British Government. At that time Subhash Chander Bose was part of Congress party, Jawaharlal Nehru like popular leaders of the party were admirers of Bhagat Singh, yet they all were so helpless before Gandhi that none could force the issue, so their admiration for revolutionaries remained on paper and confined to speeches.
Prof. Datta has thrown some light on Gandhi’s attitude towards revolutionary or militant means in national movement in third chapter of the book. In 1909, Madan Lal Dhingra, son of a pro British rich family from Amritsar, came for higher studies to London and under the influence of Veer Savarkar’s militant views, killed Curzon Wyllie and got executed in London itself after a quick trial. Gandhi was in London in those days and he condemned this killing in most strong words. Gandhi had also referred to this case in his tract ‘Hind Swaraj’, which many people think is the key to understand Gandhian thought on Indian independence. This book written in Gujrati in 1909 was banned, when its English edition came out in 1910, for some time. Gandhi also condemned bomb hurled on Lord Harding on 23rd December 1912, during his ceremonial entry into city, after the capital was shifted to Delhi from Calcutta. Gandhi from South Africa at that time declared it to be ‘a catastrophe’. Incidentally Madan Lal Dhingra and the four persons executed in Lord Harding bomb case-Master Amir Chand, Balmukund , Awadh Behari and Basant Kumar Biswas were highly praised by Bhagat Singh in his writings on national movement. Gandhi from his South African experiences has made non violence as his creed for national movement and created a political term ‘Satyagraha’, literally meaning ‘insisting for truth, as new weapon for attaining independence for the country. Gandhi had again strongly condemned bomb thrown on 23rd December 1929 at Viceroy’s train by Bhagat Singh’s comrades. Killing of Saunders and throwing of bombs in Central assembly was also condemned as strongly as other actions of the revolutionaries by Gandhi and some other leaders of the Congress party. Gandhi had described the bomb throwing in Central Assembly as ‘the criminal act of two mad youth’.
In this longest chapter Gandhi’s Attitude, Prof. Datta has referred to some other interesting aspects of national movement, such as commercial interests or one would say national bourgeoisie’s interests. Every one know that Gandhi was too close to business magnet G.D.Birla, in fact mush of the funds for Congress party came from these business houses and largest from Birla family. Prof Datta has quoted another eminent historian of national movement Sumit Sarkar that ‘ G.D.Birla, Walchand Hirachand and Purshottamdas Thakurdas thought that the further continuance of anti-British struggle would adversely affect their commercial interests.’(Page 39) It is same Purshottamdas Thakurdas to whom Bhagat Singh had referred in his famous quote that what difference it makes to people if Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru or Purshotamdas Thakurdas take the place of Lord reading or Lord Irwin, if system does not change. Prof. Datta has quoted Gandhi’s letter to Viceroy written on 23rd March, 1931, the day he was observing silence. This is by far the strongest defense for Gandhi in favour of his ‘efforts’ to save the lives of these young men. But this letter rather than being the defense of Gandhi becomes a moral reflection on him, as the letter contains such reference to revolutionary group, which was far from truth and no one could believe that. In the letter it is said that-‘ I am able to inform you that the revolutionary party has assured me that, in the event of these lives being spared, that party will stay its hands, suspension of sentence pending cessation of revolutionary murders becomes in my opinion a preemptory duty.’(Page 42)
It is a double moral reflection on Gandhi’s considered ‘truthful’ personality. Every political personality in those days and British administration as well, knew fully well that whatever may come, Bhagat Singh and his comrades will never give any assurance on renouncing violence under pressure or to ‘save lives’. Such was their moral stature. Though it was a fact that Bhagat Singh and his group had decided to keep away from political violence and work for organizing the masses, yet they would never convey it to their sworn enemy, the British colonial rulers. Aruna Asaf Ali had vouched to this in this very chapter’s references. Here Bhagat Singh’s ‘truthfulness’ had higher credibility than Gandhi’s. Nationalist leader and Bhagat Singh’s counsel Asaf Ali was trying his best to get some dignified statement from Bhagat Singh, which could convey their political view of shunning terrorism as method, but he was not granted permission by British rulers. Gandhi writing this letter to Viceroy on 23rd March morning also makes it as a ritual, as British administration had sent secret circular to jail authorities to execute the prisoners on 23rd evening itself, though it was widely believed that executions will take place on 24th March morning as per tradition.
In fact, Prof. Datta has not quoted the passage from Lord Halifax’s (Irwin) autobiography, which had been quoted by DP Das in his ‘Mainstream’ article that during their talk on Bhagat Singh issue Gandhi had asked Irwin that would he mind if he publicly claims that he put the maximum pressure on Viceroy on this issue. Irwin had replied that he won’t mind that. So ‘the best efforts’ made by Gandhi ‘to save the lives of Bhagat Singh’ were planned in the full knowledge of British administration. In this chapter, Prof. Datta had not referred to some more facts in this regard. Durga Bhabhi widow of revolutionary Bhagwaticharn Vohra and herself an accused in attack on British Governor in Bombay had met Gandhi in this regard. Gandhi knew her well and thought she had come to seek his intervention in her own case. She was living underground those days and had warrants against her. Gandhi told her ‘to surrender’ and the rest he would take care. But when Durga Bhabhi told Gandhi that she had come to appeal him to ‘save the lives of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru’, Gandhi told her point blank that ‘he can not do anything in the matters of political violence cases’ and refused intervention. Chandershekhar Azad was desperate to save Bhagat Singh as he thought revolutionary group needed his ideological leadership most urgently. He himself had meeting with Jawaharlal Nehru in Anand Bhawan Allahabad, about which Nehru had narrated in his ‘Autobiography’. Nehru was all sympathetic, but wanted the revolutionaries to go to Moscow to get training in Marxism, he actually contributed some money for this purpose, the project which never could materialize. Jawaharlal Nehru was actually patronizing ‘Bhagat Singh Defense committee’ as well, whose secretary Kumari Lajjawati was Congress activist. Massive meetings and rallies all over Punjab and elsewhere were taken out under the aegis of this defense committee. There was signature campaign all over India to save the lives of young patriots. Record of at least two lakh signatures is preserved even today in National archives Delhi. More than forty thousand signatures are on record on just one petition from Kanpur. All these facts do not find mention in Prof. Datta’s book, when the issue of value of Bhagat Singh’s life is being discussed. The fact that Gandhi did not take into account this popular sentiment of Indian people towards Bhagat Singh does not find mention in the book. Pattabhi Sitaramaya has himself recorded this sentiment in ‘The History of Congress party’ that Bhagat Singh was no less popular than Mahatma Gandhi in those days. Even today if ‘Hindu’ survey finds Bhagat Singh having the approval rate of 64% Indians, ‘India Today’ finds Bhagat Singh at the top of Indian people’s approval rate, while Gandhi is found much down in its approval rate. Indian people rightly think that Bhagat Singh sacrificed his life to defend the dignity of Indian nationhood, which was seriously compromised with the death of Lala Lajpat Rai due to brutal police beatings. While national leaders of Congress party exhorted revolutionary youth to ‘avenge’ this humiliation of Indian nationhood at that time, clever and politically astute leaders like Gandhi diverted the issue from ‘ national dignity’ to that of ‘political violence’
Revolutionaries trusted Moti lal Nehru more in this matter, who passed away on 6th February, 1931 and revolutionaries thought that they lost ’sincere sympathizer’ to their cause. Robert Bernays has been quoted from his book ‘Naked Faquir’ in this chapter in reference to Sarojini Naidu, who had told the author that ‘Bhagat Singh ought to be punished for his crimes, but not by death. After all he is only a rebel.’ (Page 47)In this chapter there is an interesting quote from internationally renowned Urdu poet Faiz Ahmad Faiz that ‘slogan Inqilab Zindabad’ had replaced Bande Matram’ in those days.(Page51) Faiz’s daughter Salima Hashmi had confided to this author that Faiz had heard the pistol shots on 17th December, 1928 from his hostel of Government College Lahore. The college is little away from where Saunders was killed that day.
Lord Irwin has been introduced in next chapter, who was a conservative party man but ‘liberal’. After holding many senior positions he came to India as Viceroy in 1926 and served for five years. Days before he relinquished his charge as Viceroy, the ‘liberal Viceroy’ got Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru executed. In this chapter the author had quoted from editorial of ‘The People’ of 22nd March, 1931, which refers to British civil servants machinations in Punjab, including threat to ‘resign’, if these revolutionaries were not hanged.(Page 64). Prof. Datta refers to the bomb thrown on Viceroy’s train and also Punjab Governor being shot at in Panjab University Lahore convocation by young Harikishan. All these references are fine to analyze and understand, but the concluding paragraph based on these analyses is somewhat intriguing. The author concludes—‘Bhagat Singh had killed a British police officer and the punishment for murder was hanging. In imperial calculations Bhagat Singh was a cold blooded butcher who had committed the murder of a fellow human being. From the British perspective, he was a rebel, a seditionist, a challenger, and wrecker of their system, which they were zealously determined to guard against anarchists like him. Irwin realized that the British life in India was unsafe so long as political militancy was not crushed. Of course, he could not ignore the strong feelings of British bureaucracy in India, and of Home government.’(Page 66-67)
One can understand British colonial viewpoint in this regard, but that does not justify or clarify nationalist response to that viewpoint, which to say the least was pitiably inadequate. Even the historian seems to be reconciled to this perspective that the whole issue revolved around whether Bhagat Singh could live under those circumstances or not. To this reviewer this is most inadequate explanation. It was Bhagat Singh, who more than anyone else, British bureaucracy, Gandhi or Irwin, knew most clearly that ‘he can not live in those prevailing circumstances’, which he made clear in his last letter to his comrades, a day before his execution and he almost chose the path of gallows himself. Injustice done to him, however by nationalist leaders or historians, is to obfuscate his own viewpoint in this whole debate or scenario.
The author has devoted one chapter to Bhagat Singh’s self education, where he admires his personality. He quotes from Motilal and Jawaharlal Nehru to show their admiration as well. Author narrates Bhagat Singh’s life story, particularly of his college days, but he commits a blunder in referring to his first arrest by Punjab police. Author mentions-‘Bhagat Singh was arrested in connection with the Dussehra bomb outrage in 1926, and was locked up in a small cell on 17th December, 1928.’(Page 27) Actually Bhagat Singh was arrested in this case on 29th May 1927 at Lahore and released on bail on 4th July, 1927, full five weeks after his arrest. This is his only arrest by police before his final arrest on 8th April, 1929. Ironically 17th December 1928 was the day, on which Saunders was shot dead. But to be fair to the author, this could be a ‘printers devil’ .In a chapter on ‘The Trial’, author quotes A.G Noorani that ‘ Bhagat singh’s trial was a farce, politically motivated, and the procedures adopted in his prosecution were devious and a ‘negation of justice’.(Page 69) But author’s own narration of this trial does not support Noorani’s contention that strongly. Author is appreciative of Bhagat Singh’s court statement for its ‘elegance, ’lucidity’, ‘cadenced language’, ‘sobriety and seriousness of its theme’, ‘breadth of outlook and loftiness of thought’ etc., but gives its credit strangely to Jawaharlal Nehru, despite admitting that Asaf Ali had admitted only of ‘polishing’ Bhagat Singh’s language. No source had been referred to the authorship of Nehru for this statement except the author’s own imagination that the statement has ‘the striking features of Nehru’s own prose writings’.(Page 74).This shows our academia’s vision of our supreme revolutionary hero, no one wants to recognize his intellectual potential, that is why Bhagat Singh’s transition to Marxist thought is also questioned, despite his own writings as the best proof for that. In this chapter author raises the issue-‘why no eminent lawyer defended Bhagat Singh and his associates in Lahore conspiracy case’. Author even surmises that ‘lawyers wished to keep themselves out of a British police officer’s murder case because they thought that as Bhagat Singh’s counsel they might incur the ire of British bureaucracy and judiciary from which they were accustomed to seeking favors.’(Page 75). One does not know whether to laugh or cry at such observations. The fact of the matter is that the best lawyers of Lahore and from whole country were ready to offer their services and they treated this as a national cause. Lawyers like Asaf Ali, Kailashnath katju, Chanderbhan Gupta, Mohan Lal Saxena etc. had all remained concerned about this trial, including Nehru father and son duo. It was revolutionaries own decision to engage lawyers selectively. By a conscious decision they divided themselves into three groups- one group completely ignored court proceedings, they did not engage any lawyer and practically boycotted court proceedings to show ‘the hollowness of British judicial system’. Another group, which included Bhagat Singh engaged lawyer as to counsel them only and they represented themselves in the court after consulting their counsel on legal points. The third group properly engaged lawyers. Interesting fact is that the fees of revolutionaries counsel’s were paid by British rulers as per their own laws in this regard. Lala Duni Chand, Amolak Ram Kapoor, Prannath Mehta etc. counsels of revolutionaries were among the best lot.
Prof. Datta’s observation on Sukhdev that he was the real brain etc. comes from the fact that this case was registered as ‘ Sukhdev vs. the Crown’. Sukhdev in fact had made the statement to the police when he was arrested, that statement damaged the group a lot. But as Sukhdev refused to become approver and the statement he gave was due to ‘standard police tactics’ of misleading through telling plain lies to the accused. Sukhdev in jail broke his hunger strike midway, when his other comrades suffered a lot. Sukhdev did not have the consistency, patience, farsightedness and suffering capacity of true revolutionary leader, though he was one of the intellectuals and quite well read. His only saving grace has been to go along with his comrades and accept death sentence cheerfully, though he was not part of the conspiracy or actual execution of murder of Saunders. One of the travesties of justice in this case was the death sentence awarded to Sukhdev.
In a small chapter on Karachi Congress held immediately after the execution of Bhagat Singh and his comrades, the author has thrown light on Gandhi’s capacity to face criticism without yielding from his position. Gandhi told emphatically to the press that ‘the commutation of the death sentence these young men ‘was not a part of the truce’ with British’. He faced black flag demonstration and was presented black flowers in Karachi amid the slogans of ‘Go back Gandhi’ and ‘Down with Gandhism’, he was even described as the ‘ally of the British exploiters in India’.(Page 84) Prof. Datta has highlighted that how writers like Prem Chand and Rabindernath Tagore had kept quite on these executions. Gandhi declared in his speech at this congress that ‘the way of violence cannot bring Swaraj; it can lead only to disaster.’(Page 85) But revolutionaries were not fighting to get Swaraj in the country, they wanted to overthrow the system of exploitation and build socialism in due course, which of course would have been disaster for Birlas, Lalchandanis and Thakurs of the country, who funded and supported Gandhi. Author has mentioned about the resolution of condolence passed in the congress as per the wishes of Gandhi, but not the fact that how narrow was the difference in voting on revolution. In a full fledged book on Karachi Congress, which was banned by British rule, Jitmal Lunia had given details of parallel meetings of Naujwan Bharat Sabha, in which all the fiery leaders of Congress party had participated including Subhash Bose, Nehru, Ghaffar Khan and Madan mohan Malviya etc. The chapter gives figure of Rupees 18 lakhs given by Birla for the congress and promise of Rs. 30 lakhs to attend Round Table Conference in London for congress delegation. To placate left-wingers like Nehru and Subhash Bose, Gandhi got resolution of ‘Fundamental Rights and Economic Change’ passed in this session, which gave a little pro poor and democratic color to Congress social programme. But how much he depreciated Bhagat Singh was the letter Gandhi wrote to Mehta Anand Kishore on 26th June 1931, in which he refused to associated with building any memorial to Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev.(Page 90) Mehta Anand Kishore had been Congress activist of long standing and close family friend of S. Kishan Singhj, father of Bhagat Singh. In fact the first Lahore Conspiracy case in 1915 against Ghadar party activists was registered as ‘Mehta Anand Kishore vs. the Crown’. Mehta was acquitted in this case, in which Kartar Singh Sarabha and Vishnu Ganesh Pingley like uoung patriots were executed.
Comrade Ramchandra, President of ‘Naujwan Bharat Sabha’ in 1926 has given a lucid detail of how Congress party had sabotaged the Naujwan Bharat Sabha’s plan to build suitable memorial to three martyrs in Lahore. The plan was chalked during Karachi Congress itself, but Congress party used Bhagat Singh’s father Kishan Singh to throttle the plan. Congress party promised to build the memorial on its own and Mehta Anand Kishore , a Congress activist and friend of Kishan Singh was made General Secretary of All India Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Sukhdev memorial society, on whose behalf Mehta wrote to Gandhi for issuing an appeal to raise funds for the memorial. Gandhi’s response to this letter killed the whole plan. This act on the part of Gandhi show that how Congress party used these young men, when the honor of country was at stake and after gaining ground, ironically due to public sympathy for the young revolutionaries, Congress disowned the patriotic acts of these revolutionaries as ‘political violence’, thus keeping themselves aloof, but reaping the fruits of their sacrifice to get concessions from British colonial bureaucracy.
In ‘Conclusion’, Prof. Datta has rather absolved not only Gandhi, but even Irwin for the execution of the revolutionaries because it was beyond Irwin and Gandhi to save these lives as ‘they were not free and independent enough to do whatever they wished as commonly assumed. They had to act within the framework of the British imperial system operating in the country’.(Page 93) One can very well understand Irwin’s role as British imperial system’s representative, but unwittingly the author has ascribed this uncanny aspect to Gandhi’s personality and position as well, which many analysts including revolutionaries, then and now say with force of logic. Prof. Datta has also shown that leaving aside the issue of Bhagat Singh’s death sentence, Gandhi could not even stick to his position of abolishing capital punishment altogether, which almost all the democrats then and now support world over, which make his moral position further week. There is another error of dates in this chapter, ‘Why I am an Atheist’ was published in ‘The People’ of Lahore in the weekly issue of 27th September, 1931 and not on 31st September as mentioned. In this chapter author had again expressed doubts on Bhagat Singh’s English writings and he ascribes their ‘amendment’ to Asaf Ali, despite denial by Asaf Ali himself. He doubts even the authorship of articles attributed to him still as ‘mystery’.(Page 95)
Had he seen the proceedings of Bhagat Singh case, this would not have remained mystery to him. In continuing exhibition in Supreme Court Museum at New Delhi on ‘The Trial of Bhagat Singh’, number of such letters in Bhagat Singh’s own handwriting are on display there with no sign of Asaf Ali ‘amending’ or ‘polishing’ these. One may not find even a spelling error in those letters written in beautiful handwriting of Bhagat Singh.
In Recollections’ after conclusion, author has referred to his meeting with Partap Singh, who narrates the story that though Irwin has decided to commute the death sentence at Gandhi’s request, due to Dr. Muhammad Alam, a CWC member’s premature revelation to public had made Irwin order the execution. These are the kind of folk tales created after such incidents. Prof. Datta also like Kuldip Nayar has taken undue interest in the later life of Hans Raj Vohra , who had turned approver in the case and who died in Washington as journalist after living a long life. There were seven approvers in the case, out of which Phaninder Ghosh was murdered in Bihar and Baikunth Shukal was executed for that. Jaigopal was shot at in Maharashtra’s Jalgaon court by Bhagwan Das Mahour and Sadashiv Malkapurkar. Jaigopal was also hit on head with chappal by Premdutt, youngest member of revolutionary group in the court, since he was provoking the revolutionaries by ridiculing them. But none of other approvers were subjected to any kind of misbehavior on the part of revolutionaries in jail or outside. They understood perfectly that not all can stand up to police tortures. Hans Raj Vohra felt guilty and ashamed even during the trial, but his parents being of high class could get him out of country. Had Vohra written his accounts, some truth could have come out about police methods of brutality.
By this presentation of Bhagat Singh, it would look as if he achieved nothing or left no legacy, rather negative legacy in Gandhi’s terms. But the fact is that Bhagat Singh, exposed British imperial system as a system of exploitation and oppression to the core. How one would explain the ‘Jallianwala Bagh’ episode of British colonial system, the single most brutal incident, in which as per Congress fact finding team repost more than one thousand Indians were mowed down by General Dyer’s orders, out of which more than four hundred and fifty names are being in the process of putting on record now in the memorial itself. Since no justice was done to the brutal killer of people, Udham Singh had to go London to shot dead Michael O’dwyer, after 21 years of the incident, who as Governor of Punjab defended Dyer. Udham Singh was also hanged in London like Madan Lal Dhingra earlier, would anyone say that since the Jallianwala bagh killing was part of imperial system, so there was no need to bring the culprits to book. Were Scott or Saunders even questioned once for brutally hitting Lala Lajpat Rai, an old man and respected national leader. Or in neo colonial/imperial times, has any court summoned Bush and Blair for causing more than six lakh murders in Iraq and committing worst crimes against humanity, as committed earlier by Hitler and Mussolini?
Whatever Gandhi may think or the historians influenced by him may analyze, for common people of the country Bhagat Singh and Udham Singh had defended the dignity of the nation. In political movements, when movements win who counts the killings during the process of movement. Can anyone dare to book Prachanda today for political killings or earlier Castro or Che Guvera. Yes the colonialists and imperialists have always called Marx, Lenin, Mao, Castro, Che Guvera etc. with all kinds of names, yet their role to liberate the people of the world from exploitation and oppression will remain a beacon light of all liberation movements in the world. Bhagat Singh’s name also falls in that revolutionary legacy. The revolutionary legacy of not only India, but of the struggling people of the whole world. That is why, despite all political contradictions between India and Pakistan, Bhagat Singh is as much loved in Pakistan as in India. In fact one of the major Urdu writers of Pakistan, Zahida Hina has recently described Bhagat Singh as ‘the tallest martyr of Pakistan’.
Bhagat Singh and Udham Singh like national heroes did not need reprieve, they did need the proper appreciation of their deed by fellow countrymen—politicians, scholars and common people alike. Common people do understand and appreciate them for their noble deeds, but it is the politicians and sometimes some scholars, who want to defend the system and in the process misconstrue the history. But as Bhagat Singh was fond of being a phoenix, he comes alive as many times he is burnt by colonialists or their defenders.
However Prof. Datta must be complimented for bringing out many important documents and facts, whose interpretation can be different.
Chaman Lal
Professor and Chairperson
Centre of Indian Languages
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi-110067
Mob.-09868774820
Emai—prof.chaman@gmail.com
