Today we are independent India,for this many people sacrificed their lives let us discuss one by one in brief and we also discuss some independent moments also
* Excerpts from Mihir Bose's enthralling "The lost hero : a biography of Subhas Bose " published by Quartet Press, 1982 (ISBN 0-7043-2301-X)
The Strategy
"The time has come when I can openly tell the whole world, including our enemies,
as to how it is proposed to bring about national liberation. Indians outside India,
particularly Indians in East Asia, are going to organise a fighting force which will be
powerful enough to attack the British Army in India. When we do so, a revolution will
break out, not only among the civil population at home, but also among the Indian Army
which is now standing under the British flag. When the British government is thus attacked
from both sides - from inside India and from outside - it will collapse, and the
Indian people will then regain their liberty. According to my plan, it is not even
necessary to bother about the attitude of the Axis powers towards India. If Indians
outside and inside India will do their duty, it is possible for the Indian people to throw
the British out of India and liberate 388 millions of their countrymen." -
Speech
by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose at a mass rally, Singapore, 9 July 1943
The Alternative Hero of the India's Struggle
for Freedom....
It is 23 January 1981, and crowds all over India are celebrating the birthday of Subhas Bose. Politicians who have never known him, and many who fought him when he was alive, garland his statues, invoke his name and urge their audiences to follow his example. More than thirty years after his death Bose has become a myth: the alternative hero of the Indian struggle for freedom. And the banners at these meetings tell their own story. 'Subhas Bose 1897-1981'. Subhas Bose is not dead. One day he will return and rescue India.
The legends and the myths have been a long time in the making, and they express a deeper Indian unease: had he lived and returned to India after the war, he would have shaped a country far more successful than the one wrought by his rivals and successors: an India united, strong and fearless. Bose became a legend in his own lifetime, but his transformation into a myth fit to rank with ancient Hindu classics came after his death, through forces he had himself tried to harness for his cause. They were catalysed through the British decision to hold a symbolic trial of certain I.N.A. men in the Red Fort of Delhi.
The Decision to try the I.N.A....
The end of the war saw the I.N.A. (Indian National Army) scattered all over east Asia and in deep depression. As its personnel were finally shipped back to India they found the country ignorant of their existence and firmly under British control. 'Not a dog barked as they flew us back,' was how one officer recalled the journey home.
But within days of Japan's defeat the British had begun to think about the I.N.A. problem. London had left it for Delhi to decide, but Delhi was deeply divided and had yet to be convinced that Bose was in fact dead. On 24 August, the day the Japanese government announced the death, Wavell recorded in his diary:
Mudie could find nothing even in the extended definition of 'war criminal' that could be said to include Bose. His advisers were deeply worried about the consequences of a trial and the Home Department note he sent to Wavell acknowledged the difficulties of handling Bose. British interrogation of the I.N.A. and the other Indians in east Asia had established that, contrary to their own propaganda, Bose was regarded not as a puppet of the Japanese but as a great hero. He had dealt with the Japanese as an equal and had succeeded in creating India's first national army. Then there was his undoubted prestige and status in India, particularly in Bengal, where he 'ranks little, if anything, below Gandhi as an all-India figure'.
After listing the various measures that could be taken to deal with Bose, the report went on to discuss their drawbacks. Public pressure would not allow him to be hanged in India; the Burma government was unlikely to want to try him there; trials in Singapore or elsewhere would create just as many problems. A quick military execution was a solution, but that could hardly be defended, and the military might read it as a subterfuge to avoid the independence issue which would figure in a civil trial. Imprisoning him would only lead to agitation for his release. The report concluded:
But the higher echelons of the Raj were not entirely convinced that this was the right policy; in any case, it was not possible to execute 25,000 men secretly. A few were executed, but for the great majority a more selective policy was implemented. They were classified into ‘whites’ - those who had joined the I.N.A. with the intention of re-joining the British; ‘greys' - those who had been misled by Bose and the Japanese; and 'blacks'- those who had fervently believed in the cause. The whites were to be restored to their former positions in the army, the greys were to be tried, dismissed and released; only the blacks were to bear the full brunt of British revenge. They were beyond redemption, and Auchinleck was convinced that when their full story emerged the Indian public would be horrified.
The I.N.A. was already housed in camps set up in Delhi's lied Fort, and this, it was decided, would be an excellent place for a trial. The Fort was ideally situated for press and media coverage. On 5 November 1945 the trial of Shah Nawaz Khan, Prem Kumar Salgal and Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon began. Dhillon was charged with murder, Shah Nawaz and Sahgal with abetting murder. All three were charged with 'waging war against His Majesty the King Emperor of India'. The trials lasted till 31 December, and proved to be a sensation - though not in the way Claude Auchinleck wished.
The Trial & the Revolutionary
Response of the Indian People....
The war had not brought Indian independence any nearer, and the British mistook the political quiet for approval. But almost nine months after the end of the war, when the British in Delhi held their victory celebrations, the Indians went wild with fury: the old Delhi town hall was partly gutted, Indians dressed in European clothes were attacked, parading troops were booed and the police had to open fire in order to restore order.
The defence was led by Bhulabhai Desai, who in the past had been a bitter critic of Bose. By the time of his death, a few months after the trial, he was as great a champion of Netaji as any. The trial became, as Nehru said, a dramatic version of that old contest, England versus India: the legal niceties vanished and even the personalities of defendants were obscured. For Indians it was not only illegal but a slur on Indian nationalism; the victors were disposing of the vanquished in the very place where the latter had planned to hold their victory parade.
Besides, the three accused Shah Nawaz was a Muslim, Sahgal a Hindu and Dhillon a Sikh -represented all the major communities of India. Auchinleck may have hoped that would stress the communal nature of Indian politics - always Britain's strongest point; but for Indians it demonstrated that the I.N.A. was indeed a national army that Bose had indeed succeeded in getting Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs to unite for a common cause.
.SALT SATYAGRAHA BY GANDHIJI
Top 5 movements for Independence by Mahatma Gandhi
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi,
born on October 2, 1869, was a prominent leader of the pre-independence
era. He took India to a totally new level by employing movements like
non-violence, civil disobedience and civil rights during India’s freedom
struggle with the British. He is best known as ‘Father of the Nation’ and ‘Bapu’.
He led nationwide movements and campaigns for India’s independence,
eradication of poverty, expanding women’s rights, ending untouchability
and establishing Swaraj.
Gandhiji,
as he was fondly called, was the one who took all the youth and started
the challenge of removing Britishers’ Salt Tax in the year 1930. Apart
from this, he even initiated the important Quit India movement. Gandhiji joined hands with Indian National Congress and brought national issues into limelight.
For most of us, Gandhi Jayanti on October 2 is just a national holiday, but let’s brush our history and have a look at why his birthday is celebrated with zeal.
1. Champaran and Kheda Satyagraha
One of his major achievements in 1918 were the Champaran and Kheda agitations – a movement against British landlords.
The farmers and peasantry were forced to grow and cultivate Indigo, and
were even to forced to sell them at fixed prices. Finally, these
farmers pledged to Mahatma Gandhi and non-violent protest took place.
Wherein Gandhiji won the battle.
Kheda, in the year 1918 was hit by floods and farmers wanted relief from tax. Using non-cooperation as his main weapon Gandhiji used it in pledging the farmers for non-payment of taxes. Gandhiji got much public support and finally in May 1918, Government gave the provisions related to tax payment.
2. Khilafat Movement
Gandhiji in the year 1919 approached Muslims, as he found the position of Congress was quite weak and unstable. Khilafat Movement is all about the worldwide protest against the status of Caliph by
Muslims. Finally Mahatma Gandhi had an All India Muslim Conference, and
became the main person for the event. This movement supported Muslims
to a great extent and the success of this movement made him the national
leader and facilitated his strong position in Congress party. Khilafat
movement collapsed badly in 1922 and throughout their journey Gandhiji fought against communalism, but the gap between Hindus and Muslims widened.
3. Non-cooperation Movement
Gandhiji’s main motive was to
establish non-cooperation, non-violence and made this non-violent
movements as his weapons against Britishers. We are all aware about the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, where hundreds of innocent died. Gandhiji’s
strong decision took actions against British Raj and then he began to
focus on forming self-government and soon establish Swaraj. Gandhiji was a highly orthodox religious Hindu and spoke about Hindu Dharma in 1921. And hence, non-cooperation was well established. Further even the nonviolence movement included swadeshi policy – boycotting Britishers goods and services and wearing Khadi. Gandhiji tried lot of attempts of bringing Hindus and Muslims together but differences started widening.
4. Salt Satyagraha Movement - Dandi march
Salt March was an active movement carried out in the year 1930. Gandhiji
started focussing on expanding initiatives against untouchability,
alcoholism and removal of all bad habits. Salt march mainly known as
Salt Satyagraha which began with Dandi march in the year 1930. This
movement was an essential part of Indian Independence movement and
non-violent resistance against tax. Gandhiji led this Dandi march with lot of followers behind him.
On the 24th day, he vowed to produce
more salt without paying any tax and soon he broke the law for salt,
which sparked outrage among Britishers. After this, Gandhiji was arrested and this news gained a lot of attention in the press.
Gandhi’s each and every act was based on
his principles and his path of non-violence. His teachings have
influenced a lot of people, including Anna Hazare, and effective use of some movements was established since then.
5. Quit India Movement
This was a civil disobedience movement launched in the year 1942. The Do or Die phrase was applied here where a mass protest led by the All India Congress Committee
was proclaimed on a large scale. Within no time, the Quit India
Movement was crushed badly. Britishers also refused to grant
Independence to India and declared that it will happen once World War II
ends. During these movements by Mahatma Gandhi, a lot of political
leaders and followers got imprisoned for a long period of time. But then
British Government finally realised that India will no more be under
their control and the main question raised was how to exit peacefully
from such a terrible situation.
Unfortunately, Gandhiji was
assassinated on January 30, 1948, but many Gandhians are alive who still
follow his ideologies and beliefs. His main principles were truth,
non-violence and Satyagraha. Let’s hope that his ideologies and vision
continue to be realised by Gandhians.
SUBHASCHANDRABOSE
"...It is our duty to pay for our liberty with our own blood. The freedom that we shall win through our sacrifice and exertions, we shall be able to preserve with our own strength......" Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose to the Indian National Army in Malaya/Singapore
"One individual may die for an idea; but that idea will, after his death, incarnate itself in a thousand lives. That is how the wheel of evolution moves on and the ideas and dreams of one nation are bequeathed to the next." Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose"...Subhash Chandra Bose's life was a beacon to me, lighting up the path I should follow. His disciplined life and his total commitment and dedication to the cause of his country's freedom deeply impressed me and served as my guiding light..." Velupillai Pirabakaran, 'How I Became a Freedom Fighter', April 1994"...I have neither the moral standing nor the slightest desire to disparage the courage of those who engage in non-violence.... But, non-violence, so often recommended.. has never 'worked' in any politically relevant sense of the word, and there is no reason to suppose it ever will. It has never, largely on its own strength, achieved the political objectives of those who employed it... There are supposedly three major examples of successful nonviolence: Gandhi's independence movement, the US civil rights movement, and the South African campaign against apartheid. None of them performed as advertised. The notion that a people can free itself literally by allowing their captors to walk all over them is historical fantasy..." Nonviolence: Its Histories and Myths - Professor Michael Neumann, 2003
* Excerpts from Mihir Bose's enthralling "The lost hero : a biography of Subhas Bose " published by Quartet Press, 1982 (ISBN 0-7043-2301-X)
The Strategy...
The Strategy"The time has come when I can openly tell the whole world, including our enemies,
as to how it is proposed to bring about national liberation. Indians outside India,
particularly Indians in East Asia, are going to organise a fighting force which will be
powerful enough to attack the British Army in India. When we do so, a revolution will
break out, not only among the civil population at home, but also among the Indian Army
which is now standing under the British flag. When the British government is thus attacked
from both sides - from inside India and from outside - it will collapse, and the
Indian people will then regain their liberty. According to my plan, it is not even
necessary to bother about the attitude of the Axis powers towards India. If Indians
outside and inside India will do their duty, it is possible for the Indian people to throw
the British out of India and liberate 388 millions of their countrymen." -
Speech
by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose at a mass rally, Singapore, 9 July 1943
The Alternative Hero of the India's Struggle
for Freedom....It is 23 January 1981, and crowds all over India are celebrating the birthday of Subhas Bose. Politicians who have never known him, and many who fought him when he was alive, garland his statues, invoke his name and urge their audiences to follow his example. More than thirty years after his death Bose has become a myth: the alternative hero of the Indian struggle for freedom. And the banners at these meetings tell their own story. 'Subhas Bose 1897-1981'. Subhas Bose is not dead. One day he will return and rescue India.
The legends and the myths have been a long time in the making, and they express a deeper Indian unease: had he lived and returned to India after the war, he would have shaped a country far more successful than the one wrought by his rivals and successors: an India united, strong and fearless. Bose became a legend in his own lifetime, but his transformation into a myth fit to rank with ancient Hindu classics came after his death, through forces he had himself tried to harness for his cause. They were catalysed through the British decision to hold a symbolic trial of certain I.N.A. men in the Red Fort of Delhi.
The Decision to try the I.N.A....The end of the war saw the I.N.A. (Indian National Army) scattered all over east Asia and in deep depression. As its personnel were finally shipped back to India they found the country ignorant of their existence and firmly under British control. 'Not a dog barked as they flew us back,' was how one officer recalled the journey home.
But within days of Japan's defeat the British had begun to think about the I.N.A. problem. London had left it for Delhi to decide, but Delhi was deeply divided and had yet to be convinced that Bose was in fact dead. On 24 August, the day the Japanese government announced the death, Wavell recorded in his diary:
'I wonder if the Japanese announcement of Subhas Chandra Bose's death in an air-crash is true, I suspect it very much, it is just what would be given out if he meant to go underground.'He asked his Home Member, Sir R. F. Mudie, to prepare a note for the trial of Bose and the I.N.A.
Mudie could find nothing even in the extended definition of 'war criminal' that could be said to include Bose. His advisers were deeply worried about the consequences of a trial and the Home Department note he sent to Wavell acknowledged the difficulties of handling Bose. British interrogation of the I.N.A. and the other Indians in east Asia had established that, contrary to their own propaganda, Bose was regarded not as a puppet of the Japanese but as a great hero. He had dealt with the Japanese as an equal and had succeeded in creating India's first national army. Then there was his undoubted prestige and status in India, particularly in Bengal, where he 'ranks little, if anything, below Gandhi as an all-India figure'.
After listing the various measures that could be taken to deal with Bose, the report went on to discuss their drawbacks. Public pressure would not allow him to be hanged in India; the Burma government was unlikely to want to try him there; trials in Singapore or elsewhere would create just as many problems. A quick military execution was a solution, but that could hardly be defended, and the military might read it as a subterfuge to avoid the independence issue which would figure in a civil trial. Imprisoning him would only lead to agitation for his release. The report concluded:
"In many ways the easiest course would be to leave him where he is and not ask for his release. He might, of course, in certain circumstances be welcomed by the Russians. This course would raise fewest immediate political difficulties but the security authorities consider that in certain circumstances his presence in Russia would be so dangerous as to rule it out altogether."After several investigations, the British had concluded by March 1946 that Bose might still be alive; but there was not much else they could do about it. The 25,000 I.N.A. prisoners being repatriated to India presented very different problems. Senior British Army commanders were convinced that the I.N.A. were traitors, and that, if the integrity and the discipline of the British Indian Army were to be maintained, they should be severely punished. Some would have preferred kangaroo courts and quick executions.
But the higher echelons of the Raj were not entirely convinced that this was the right policy; in any case, it was not possible to execute 25,000 men secretly. A few were executed, but for the great majority a more selective policy was implemented. They were classified into ‘whites’ - those who had joined the I.N.A. with the intention of re-joining the British; ‘greys' - those who had been misled by Bose and the Japanese; and 'blacks'- those who had fervently believed in the cause. The whites were to be restored to their former positions in the army, the greys were to be tried, dismissed and released; only the blacks were to bear the full brunt of British revenge. They were beyond redemption, and Auchinleck was convinced that when their full story emerged the Indian public would be horrified.
The I.N.A. was already housed in camps set up in Delhi's lied Fort, and this, it was decided, would be an excellent place for a trial. The Fort was ideally situated for press and media coverage. On 5 November 1945 the trial of Shah Nawaz Khan, Prem Kumar Salgal and Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon began. Dhillon was charged with murder, Shah Nawaz and Sahgal with abetting murder. All three were charged with 'waging war against His Majesty the King Emperor of India'. The trials lasted till 31 December, and proved to be a sensation - though not in the way Claude Auchinleck wished.
The Trial & the Revolutionary
Response of the Indian People....The war had not brought Indian independence any nearer, and the British mistook the political quiet for approval. But almost nine months after the end of the war, when the British in Delhi held their victory celebrations, the Indians went wild with fury: the old Delhi town hall was partly gutted, Indians dressed in European clothes were attacked, parading troops were booed and the police had to open fire in order to restore order.
The I.N.A. and Bose had created a potentially revolutionary situation: one on which the political parties were eager to build for their own ends - none more so than the Congress.The Congress had suffered a double defeat during the war: it had gained little through either negotiations or mass struggle, and now it was a case of 'the Congress proposes, the Muslim League disposes’. In these circumstances the Congress soon realised the potential of the fervour behind the I.N.A., and it quickly adopted resolutions both approving of their actions and pledging itself to defend them at the trial.
A party dedicated to non-violence was at last beginning to realise the usefulness of violence.Even Jinnah urged the government to treat the I.N.A. prisoners with 'leniency'. By now the Indian press - freed from wartime censorship - was full of stories and legends of the I.N.A. and Bose. 'Jai Hind' had replaced all other greetings between Indians, and Bose's photographs - invariably in I.N.A. uniform - now graced a million pan shops.
The defence was led by Bhulabhai Desai, who in the past had been a bitter critic of Bose. By the time of his death, a few months after the trial, he was as great a champion of Netaji as any. The trial became, as Nehru said, a dramatic version of that old contest, England versus India: the legal niceties vanished and even the personalities of defendants were obscured. For Indians it was not only illegal but a slur on Indian nationalism; the victors were disposing of the vanquished in the very place where the latter had planned to hold their victory parade.
Besides, the three accused Shah Nawaz was a Muslim, Sahgal a Hindu and Dhillon a Sikh -represented all the major communities of India. Auchinleck may have hoped that would stress the communal nature of Indian politics - always Britain's strongest point; but for Indians it demonstrated that the I.N.A. was indeed a national army that Bose had indeed succeeded in getting Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs to unite for a common cause.
BHAGAT SINGH
: What was the role of Bhagat Singh in the Indian freedom struggle?
In
fact Bhagat Singh had joined Hindustan Republican Association in
1923-24 at Kanpur, which was lead by Ram Prasad Bismil, Yogesh
Chaterjee, Ashfaq Ullah Khan, and Shachinder Sanyal. He took part in all
the actions of that organisation right till mid 1928. Then after the
arrest of most of the leading figures of HRA the youngesters like Bhagat
Singh, Sukhdev, Shiv Verma, BK Dutt, BK Sinha and others met at Delhi
on 8th-9th Sept 1928 to reorganise themselves as Hindustan Socialist
Republican Association.
It was to be lead by 7 member central committee collectively and all the subsequent decisions were taken by the central committee. To implement its actions Chander Shekhar Azad, was designated as the commander in Chief of Hindustan Socialist Republican Army.
It is essentially wrong to focus exclusively on Bhagat Singh in the light of the above. And all the subsequent decisions were taken collectively. And each individual had to perform the task assigned to him .This applies equally to the killing of Saunders as well as the throwing of bombs in the Central Assembly.
Regarding Saunders murder when Rajguru and Bhagat Singh were escaping into the compound of DAV college after killing Saunders, head constable Chanan Singh, the orderly of Saunders ran behind them, and when he was about to grab Bhagat Singh, after overtaking Rajguru, Chander Shekhar having warned him and Channan Singh not desisting, Azad shot at his groin. But for Azad's vital shot Bhagat Singh would have been grabbed by Channan Singh on the spot itself, resulting in the fiasco of the action.
After the killing of Saunders in the broad daylight before the distt police headquarters it was a much bigger challenge to affect the escape of the killers from Lahore. This was adroitly managed by Sukhdev with the help of Mrs. DurgaVati Vohra wife of Bhagwati Charan Vohra, who was actually been under suspicion of being a CID man those days. Durgavati risked not only her own life but also of their only son, Shachinder whom Bhagat Singh was carrying in his lap while accompanied by Mrs. Vohra in the garb of an Army officer, with Rajguru attired as a servant.
The decision to throw a bomb in the assembly was taken in a prolonged conclave of all the revolutionaries at Agra during the first quarter of 1929, where they perfected the bomb making technique and took a decision for an action which should be bloodless as well as historic. They chose the occasion to throw a bomb in the central assembly when the two most hated bills, namely industrial dispute bill and public safety bill, were about to be passed.
The question as to who should throw the bomb and also whether the protagonist should escape or offer himself for arrest were heatedly debated.
Once it was decided that the comrades who go for the action will offer themselves for the arrest, the central committee meeting was held to nominate the protagonist. In spite of Bhagat Singh's insistance to allow him to do the job, so that he may be able to effectively propound the idea behind the action, the committee did not agree.
Sukhdev who was not present at the meeting and reached Delhi late night from Lahore was upset to learn this because he was of the firm view that without Bhagat Singh this action would be an exercise in futility. So Bhagat Singh who was his dearest friend was compelled to seek another meeting of the central committee w
It was to be lead by 7 member central committee collectively and all the subsequent decisions were taken by the central committee. To implement its actions Chander Shekhar Azad, was designated as the commander in Chief of Hindustan Socialist Republican Army.
It is essentially wrong to focus exclusively on Bhagat Singh in the light of the above. And all the subsequent decisions were taken collectively. And each individual had to perform the task assigned to him .This applies equally to the killing of Saunders as well as the throwing of bombs in the Central Assembly.
Regarding Saunders murder when Rajguru and Bhagat Singh were escaping into the compound of DAV college after killing Saunders, head constable Chanan Singh, the orderly of Saunders ran behind them, and when he was about to grab Bhagat Singh, after overtaking Rajguru, Chander Shekhar having warned him and Channan Singh not desisting, Azad shot at his groin. But for Azad's vital shot Bhagat Singh would have been grabbed by Channan Singh on the spot itself, resulting in the fiasco of the action.
After the killing of Saunders in the broad daylight before the distt police headquarters it was a much bigger challenge to affect the escape of the killers from Lahore. This was adroitly managed by Sukhdev with the help of Mrs. DurgaVati Vohra wife of Bhagwati Charan Vohra, who was actually been under suspicion of being a CID man those days. Durgavati risked not only her own life but also of their only son, Shachinder whom Bhagat Singh was carrying in his lap while accompanied by Mrs. Vohra in the garb of an Army officer, with Rajguru attired as a servant.
The decision to throw a bomb in the assembly was taken in a prolonged conclave of all the revolutionaries at Agra during the first quarter of 1929, where they perfected the bomb making technique and took a decision for an action which should be bloodless as well as historic. They chose the occasion to throw a bomb in the central assembly when the two most hated bills, namely industrial dispute bill and public safety bill, were about to be passed.
The question as to who should throw the bomb and also whether the protagonist should escape or offer himself for arrest were heatedly debated.
Once it was decided that the comrades who go for the action will offer themselves for the arrest, the central committee meeting was held to nominate the protagonist. In spite of Bhagat Singh's insistance to allow him to do the job, so that he may be able to effectively propound the idea behind the action, the committee did not agree.
Sukhdev who was not present at the meeting and reached Delhi late night from Lahore was upset to learn this because he was of the firm view that without Bhagat Singh this action would be an exercise in futility. So Bhagat Singh who was his dearest friend was compelled to seek another meeting of the central committee w
In
fact Bhagat Singh had joined Hindustan Republican Association in
1923-24 at Kanpur, which was lead by Ram Prasad Bismil, Yogesh
Chaterjee, Ashfaq Ullah Khan, and Shachinder Sanyal. He took part in all
the actions of that organisation right till mid 1928. Then after the
arrest of most of the leading figures of HRA the youngesters like Bhagat
Singh, Sukhdev, Shiv Verma, BK Dutt, BK Sinha and others met at Delhi
on 8th-9th Sept 1928 to reorganise themselves as Hindustan Socialist
Republican Association.
It was to be lead by 7 member central committee collectively and all the subsequent decisions were taken by the central committee. To implement its actions Chander Shekhar Azad, was designated as the commander in Chief of Hindustan Socialist Republican Army.
It is essentially wrong to focus exclusively on Bhagat Singh in the light of the above. And all the subsequent decisions were taken collectively. And each individual had to perform the task assigned to him .This applies equally to the killing of Saunders as well as the throwing of bombs in the Central Assembly.
Regarding Saunders murder when Rajguru and Bhagat Singh were escaping into the compound of DAV college after killing Saunders, head constable Chanan Singh, the orderly of Saunders ran behind them, and when he was about to grab Bhagat Singh, after overtaking Rajguru, Chander Shekhar having warned him and Channan Singh not desisting, Azad shot at his groin. But for Azad's vital shot Bhagat Singh would have been grabbed by Channan Singh on the spot itself, resulting in the fiasco of the action.
After the killing of Saunders in the broad daylight before the distt police headquarters it was a much bigger challenge to affect the escape of the killers from Lahore. This was adroitly managed by Sukhdev with the help of Mrs. DurgaVati Vohra wife of Bhagwati Charan Vohra, who was actually been under suspicion of being a CID man those days. Durgavati risked not only her own life but also of their only son, Shachinder whom Bhagat Singh was carrying in his lap while accompanied by Mrs. Vohra in the garb of an Army officer, with Rajguru attired as a servant.
The decision to throw a bomb in the assembly was taken in a prolonged conclave of all the revolutionaries at Agra during the first quarter of 1929, where they perfected the bomb making technique and took a decision for an action which should be bloodless as well as historic. They chose the occasion to throw a bomb in the central assembly when the two most hated bills, namely industrial dispute bill and public safety bill, were about to be passed.
The question as to who should throw the bomb and also whether the protagonist should escape or offer himself for arrest were heatedly debated.
Once it was decided that the comrades who go for the action will offer themselves for the arrest, the central committee meeting was held to nominate the protagonist. In spite of Bhagat Singh's insistance to allow him to do the job, so that he may be able to effectively propound the idea behind the action, the committee did not agree.
The Indian Rebellion of 1857 was also called India's First War of Independence, the Great Rebellion, the Indian Mutiny, or the Sepoy Mutiny. It began on 10 May 1857, as a mutiny of sepoys of the British East India Company's army.[2] Sepoys in the Presidency of Bengal revolted against their British officers.
The Bengal Army recruited higher castes, such as Rajputs and Bhumihar. They cut back the enlistment of lower castes in 1855. In contrast, the Madras Army and Bombay Army were "more localized, caste-neutral armies" that "did not prefer high-caste men".[3] The domination of higher castes in the Bengal Army has been blamed in part for initial mutinies that led to the rebellion.
There were some changes in the terms of their service which may have created resentment. As the the East India Company expanded, soldiers were now expected to serve in less familiar regions, such as in Burma, and also to make do without the "foreign service" remuneration they had got previously.[4] Another financial grievance stemmed from the general service act, which denied retired sepoys a pension. This applied only to new recruits, but older sepoys suspected that it might bied apply to those already in service. Also, the Bengal Army was paid less than the Madras and Bombay Armies, which increased their fears over pensions.[5]
During the 1850s the British rulers continued to forcibly take some regions ruled by Indians and made these regions (for example: the kingdom of Agra and Oudh, part of the present day Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, which was seized in 1856) part of the British kingdom. Lord Dalhousie was the Governor General who decided to do this which was against Hindu customs. They did not give any respect to old royal houses of India like the Mughals (nominally Emperors of India) and the Peshwas (the most powerful of the Maratha rulers, leaders of the Maratha Confederacy).
Rebellion broke out when a soldier called Mangal Pandey attacked a
British sergeant and wounded an adjutant while his regiment was in
Barrackpore. General Hearsey ordered another Indian soldier to arrest
Mangal Pandey but he refused. Later the British arrested Mangal Pandey
and the other Indian soldier. The British killed both by hanging them
because what they had done was thought to be treachery.
All other soldiers of that regiment lost their places in the army. On
May 10th 1857, cavalry troops while doing parade at Meerut broke ranks.
They freed the soldiers of the 3rd regiment, and they moved towards
Delhi. Soon many Indians of north India joined these soldiers. They
entered the Delhi Fort where Bahadur Shah II, the Mughal Emperor, lived,
and asked him to become leader of the rebellion. He agreed unwillingly.
Very soon the revolt spread throughout north India. Important Indian
leaders of royal families joined the rebellion, and started fighting the
British at several places. They included: Ahmed Ullah, an advisor of
the ex-King of Oudh; Nana Saheb, his nephew Rao Saheb, and his retainers, Tantia Topi and Azimullah Khan; the Rani of Jhansi; Kunwar Singh; the Rajput chief of Jagadishpur in Bihar; and Firuz Saha, a relative of the Mughal Emperor, Bahadur Shah.
At the beginning the British were slow to respond. Then they took very quick action with heavy forces. They brought their regiments from the Crimean War to India. They also redirected many regiments that were going to China to India. The British forces reached Delhi, and they surrounded the city from 1st July 1857 until 31st August 1857. Eventually street-to-street fights broke out between the British troops and the Indians. Ultimately, they took control of Delhi. The massacre at Kanpur (July 1857) and the siege of Lucknow (June to November 1857) were also very important. The last important battle was at Gwalior (now in Madhya Pradesh) in June 1858 in which the Rani of Jhansi was killed; a few days later the British retook the fortress of Gwalior. With this, the British had practically suppressed the rebellion. However, some guerrilla fighting in many places continued until early in 1859 and Tantia Tope was not captured and executed until April 1859.
The British sent Bahadur Shah II, the last Mughal Emperor, out of India, and kept him in Yangon (then called Rangoon), Burma where he died in 1862. The Mughal dynasty, which had ruled India for about four hundred years, ended with his death.
The British also took many steps to employ members of Indian higher castes and rulers in the government. They started employing Indians in the civil services but at lower levels. They stopped taking that lands of the remaining princes and rulers of India. They stopped interference in religious matters. They increased the number of British soldiers, and allowed only British soldiers to handle artillery. The Indian troops were tired with the mouth of cannons and was burst out in pieces
It was to be lead by 7 member central committee collectively and all the subsequent decisions were taken by the central committee. To implement its actions Chander Shekhar Azad, was designated as the commander in Chief of Hindustan Socialist Republican Army.
It is essentially wrong to focus exclusively on Bhagat Singh in the light of the above. And all the subsequent decisions were taken collectively. And each individual had to perform the task assigned to him .This applies equally to the killing of Saunders as well as the throwing of bombs in the Central Assembly.
Regarding Saunders murder when Rajguru and Bhagat Singh were escaping into the compound of DAV college after killing Saunders, head constable Chanan Singh, the orderly of Saunders ran behind them, and when he was about to grab Bhagat Singh, after overtaking Rajguru, Chander Shekhar having warned him and Channan Singh not desisting, Azad shot at his groin. But for Azad's vital shot Bhagat Singh would have been grabbed by Channan Singh on the spot itself, resulting in the fiasco of the action.
After the killing of Saunders in the broad daylight before the distt police headquarters it was a much bigger challenge to affect the escape of the killers from Lahore. This was adroitly managed by Sukhdev with the help of Mrs. DurgaVati Vohra wife of Bhagwati Charan Vohra, who was actually been under suspicion of being a CID man those days. Durgavati risked not only her own life but also of their only son, Shachinder whom Bhagat Singh was carrying in his lap while accompanied by Mrs. Vohra in the garb of an Army officer, with Rajguru attired as a servant.
The decision to throw a bomb in the assembly was taken in a prolonged conclave of all the revolutionaries at Agra during the first quarter of 1929, where they perfected the bomb making technique and took a decision for an action which should be bloodless as well as historic. They chose the occasion to throw a bomb in the central assembly when the two most hated bills, namely industrial dispute bill and public safety bill, were about to be passed.
The question as to who should throw the bomb and also whether the protagonist should escape or offer himself for arrest were heatedly debated.
Once it was decided that the comrades who go for the action will offer themselves for the arrest, the central committee meeting was held to nominate the protagonist. In spite of Bhagat Singh's insistance to allow him to do the job, so that he may be able to effectively propound the idea behind the action, the committee did not agree.
SOME IMPORTANT MOVEMENTS LED TO INDEPENDENCE
ndian Rebellion of 1857
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Indian Rebellion of 1857 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 A 1912 map of 'Northern India: the Revolt of 1857-58' showing the centres of rebellion including the principal ones: Meerut, Delhi, Cawnpore (Kanpur), Lucknow, Jhansi, and Gwalior |
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
Contents
Causes
The causes of the mutiny are hard to pin down, and have been much argued about. Before the Rebellion, there were 50,000 British troops, and 300,000 sepoys.Underlying discontent
The forces were divided into three presidency armies: Bombay, Madras, and Bengal. The make-up of these armies varied from region to region.The Bengal Army recruited higher castes, such as Rajputs and Bhumihar. They cut back the enlistment of lower castes in 1855. In contrast, the Madras Army and Bombay Army were "more localized, caste-neutral armies" that "did not prefer high-caste men".[3] The domination of higher castes in the Bengal Army has been blamed in part for initial mutinies that led to the rebellion.
There were some changes in the terms of their service which may have created resentment. As the the East India Company expanded, soldiers were now expected to serve in less familiar regions, such as in Burma, and also to make do without the "foreign service" remuneration they had got previously.[4] Another financial grievance stemmed from the general service act, which denied retired sepoys a pension. This applied only to new recruits, but older sepoys suspected that it might bied apply to those already in service. Also, the Bengal Army was paid less than the Madras and Bombay Armies, which increased their fears over pensions.[5]
Flash point
The immediate event which angered the sepoys was about the ammunition for the new rifles they had to use. The cartridges that were used in the rifles had to be bitten open. The Muslims were angry because they thought that the paper cartridges had pig fat in them. This was because Muslims believe that pigs are unclean. Hindu soldiers were angry because they believed the cartridges had cow fat in them.[6] On January 27, Colonel Richard Birch ordered that no cartridges should have grease on them, and that sepoys could grease them with whatever they wanted.[7] However, this only made the sepoys believe that the stories about the cartridge having pork and beef fat were true.During the 1850s the British rulers continued to forcibly take some regions ruled by Indians and made these regions (for example: the kingdom of Agra and Oudh, part of the present day Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, which was seized in 1856) part of the British kingdom. Lord Dalhousie was the Governor General who decided to do this which was against Hindu customs. They did not give any respect to old royal houses of India like the Mughals (nominally Emperors of India) and the Peshwas (the most powerful of the Maratha rulers, leaders of the Maratha Confederacy).
Events
"Attack of the Mutineers on the Redan Battery at Lucknow, July 30, 1857"
"Tantia Topee's Soldiery"
Mutiny Memorial in Jhansi, 1900
At the beginning the British were slow to respond. Then they took very quick action with heavy forces. They brought their regiments from the Crimean War to India. They also redirected many regiments that were going to China to India. The British forces reached Delhi, and they surrounded the city from 1st July 1857 until 31st August 1857. Eventually street-to-street fights broke out between the British troops and the Indians. Ultimately, they took control of Delhi. The massacre at Kanpur (July 1857) and the siege of Lucknow (June to November 1857) were also very important. The last important battle was at Gwalior (now in Madhya Pradesh) in June 1858 in which the Rani of Jhansi was killed; a few days later the British retook the fortress of Gwalior. With this, the British had practically suppressed the rebellion. However, some guerrilla fighting in many places continued until early in 1859 and Tantia Tope was not captured and executed until April 1859.
British Reaction
The rebellion was an event of great importance in thee front of history of modern India. The Parliament of the United Kingdom withdrew the right of the British East India Company to rule India in November 1858. The United Kingdom started ruling India directly through its representative called the Governor General. It made India a part of the British Empire. It promised "the Princes, Chiefs, and Peoples of India," equal treatment under the British law.[8] In 1877, Queen Victoria took the title of Empress of India and the Viceroy of India ruled India for her.The British sent Bahadur Shah II, the last Mughal Emperor, out of India, and kept him in Yangon (then called Rangoon), Burma where he died in 1862. The Mughal dynasty, which had ruled India for about four hundred years, ended with his death.
The British also took many steps to employ members of Indian higher castes and rulers in the government. They started employing Indians in the civil services but at lower levels. They stopped taking that lands of the remaining princes and rulers of India. They stopped interference in religious matters. They increased the number of British soldiers, and allowed only British soldiers to handle artillery. The Indian troops were tired with the mouth of cannons and was burst out in pieces
Opinions
In England, newspapers focused on the violence of the mutiny.[9] Some of the reports were not true.[10] Charles Dickens, a famous writer at that time, wrote that they should take revenge in his 1857 novella The Perils of Certain English Prisoners .[11]Chronology
- 1857
- 11 May - starting date of the revolt which developed into a widents become mutinous
- May - following the mutiny at Meerut there are outbreaks in Delhi, Ferozepur, Bombay, Aligarh, Mainpuri, Etawah, Bulundshah, Nasirabad, Bareilly, Moradabad, Shahjahanpur and elsewhere; sepoys are disarmed in Lahore, Agra, Lucknow, Peshawar and Mardan; the Delhi Field Force advances to Karnaul; death of General Anson the British commander-in-chief
- June - Mutinies at Sitapur, Hansi, Hissar, Azamgarh, Gorakhpur and Nimach; mutinies at Gwalior, Bharatpur and Jhansi; mutiny at Kanpur, followed by the siege of the Europeans (4-25 June) and a massacre; mutiny in Banaras forestalled; mutinies at Jewanpur, Allahabad, Jullundur, Phillaur, Nowgong, Rhoni, Fatehgarh, Aurangabad (Deccan), Fatehpur and Jubbulpur; Indian units are forcibly disarmed at Nagpur and Barrackpur; mutinies at Faizabad, Sultanpur and Lucknow; order is restored in Lucknow but the district remains disturbed (Europeans take shelter in the Residency); British defeat at Chinhat (30 June) near Lucknow; siege of Lucknow begins
No comments:
Post a Comment