*Is it politically relevant today to ask whether Nehru visited Bhagat Sing
in Jail?*

*Ram Puniyani*



In the recently held Karnataka elections, Narendra Modi made statements
which are not true, and which are made to raise the emotive pitch against
his opponents. In a blatant lie, in a rally in Bidar, he asked “When
Shaheed Bhagat Singh, Batukeshwar Dutt, Veer Savarkar, greats like them
were jailed fighting for the country’s independence, did any Congress
leader went to meet them?...” One is surprised as to how this can be an
electoral issue today? The central tactic of BJP and communal organizations
is to bypass the issues related to people’s needs and to distract the
attention towards one’s related to emotive issues. Issues which can put his
opponents in a bad light have been regularly resorted to by Modi. For
creating this Modi can go to the extent of saying untruths with great
amount of confidence. In this statement-question raised; he is speaking a
lie on one side and is also trying to glorify his icon Savarkar on the
other.

As a matter of fact, INC, while it had differences with the revolutionaries
like Bhagat Singh, they respected the high level of commitment and
dedication of these young men. There are reports in the Tribune  about
Nehru visiting the jail to meet Bhagat Sing and his comrades, The reports
in Tribune on August 9 and 10 of
<https://thewire.in/history/bhagat-singh-and-savarkar-a-tale-of-two-petitions>
 1929, tell us about Nehru’s meeting the jailed revolutionaries, inquiring
on them. Motilal Nehru had even formed a committee to demand the humane
treatment for the revolutionaries on fast unto death. In his autobiography,
‘Towards Freedom’, Jawaharlal Nehru gives a very touching account of his
meeting Bhagat Singh, Jatin Das and other young men, “I happened to be in
Lahore when the hunger strike was already a month old. I was given
permission to visit some of the prisoners in the prison, and I availed
myself of this. I saw Bhagat Singh for the first time, and Jatindranath Das
and a few others. They were all very weak and bedridden, and it was hardly
possible to talk to them much. Bhagat Singh had an attractive, intellectual
face, remarkably calm and peaceful. There seemed to be no anger in it. He
looked and talked with great gentleness, but then I suppose that anyone who
has been fasting for a month will look spiritual and gentle. Jatin Das
looked milder still, soft and gentle like a young girl. He was in
considerable pain when I saw him. He died later, as a result of fasting, on
the sixty-first day of the hunger strike.”



The other aspect of the statement by Modi is to equate Savarkar with the
dedicated young revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh. This seems to be a
clever ploy to elevate Savarkar to the level to which he did not belong.
While Bhagat was in jail, pending death penalty, he was requested by his
family to seek clemency, which Bhagat refused
<https://thewire.in/history/bhagat-singh-and-savarkar-a-tale-of-two-petitions>.
On the contrary he wrote to the British Government that since he and his
comrades have been sentenced to death for waging war against the empire, he
should be made to face the firing squad not just death by hanging. On the
contrary Savarkar, after being sentenced for his role in the case of murder
of a British officer; totally changed his stance in jail. From an anti
British role he wrote series of apology letters, he surrendered to British
and promised them to be of their help in future! He did remain loyal to
British after his release from jail.

As a matter of fact Congress in recognition of Savarkar’s initial role was
trying to put pressure on British Government for his release, but Savarkar
was already writing petition after petition to British to release him. From
1920 INC was asking for his unconditional release,
<http://dube%20ramkrishnan%20frontline%20april%207%2C%201995%20page%2094/> but
due to reasons best known to him Savarkar preferred to give a written
undertaking, which in a way was the *total surrender*. “I hereby
acknowledge that I had a fair trial and just sentence. I heartily abhor
methods of violence resorted to in days gone by and I feel myself duty
bound to uphold law and constitution (British, added) to the best of my
powers and am willing to make the 'reform' a success in so far as I may be
allowed to do so in future” (from facsimile of Savarkar’s letter to British
authorities). There are many such letters and British did grant him
clemency.

This act of his seeking pardon from British was a betrayal of freedom
movement; his followers present it as a tactical ploy to get released so
that he can struggle against British rule. As matter of fact after his
release Savarkar, floated the concept of Hindu nationalism, brought to fore
the word Hindutva, (total Hinduness) and stated that there are two nations
in the country, Hindu national and Muslim nation! This was precisely the
equal and opposite of the politics of Muslim nationalism being brought up
by Muslim league. This is what also contributed to partition tragedy.

So Mr. Modi on one hand speaks a lie about Congress leaders ignoring those
struggling for freedom. On the other he puts Savarkar in the same category
as Bhagat Singh. Congress was trying to get Savarkar released. Bhagat Singh
remained firm on his ideology and path of resistance against British power.
For his principles he undertook a hunger strike in jail. Savarkar on the
other side buckled under the jail conditions and surrendered to the
British. The methods like that of Goebbels methods being resorted by Modi
need to be opposed.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"humanrights movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/humanrights-movement.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to