This article was co-authored by Saswati Sarkar, Shanmukh and Dikgaj.
Introduction : The saga of Rashbehari Bose is that of an endless sequence of revolutionary attempts driven by a burning zeal for freedom. It started with dropping a bomb on Viceroy Hardinge in a regal ceremony held for celebrating the coronation of the British emperor. He subsequently led a major attempt to oust the British power from Indian soil, which is now known officially as the Hindu German Conspiracy [24]. It failed. And, Rashbehari Bose was forced to flee the country to Japan in the guise of P N Thakur, a relative of the great poet, Rabindranath Thakur [23]. He attempted to send arms and ammunition to his revolutionary comrades from Singapore, but his plots were unearthed by the British and failed. The British forced the Japanese to issue a deportation order on Rashbehari, yet he managed to dodge the Japanese police with the help of Toyama Mitsuru and the Soma family of Nakamuraya [23]. He married Toshiko, the eldest daughter of the Soma family, and managed to survive the ordeal of several years of constant hide and seek, and got naturalized and could afford the safety of a permanent home for the first time. But, immediately came the great Kanto earthquake of 1923, which destroyed this home. The nation Rashbehari fought for deserted him in the resulting financial woes and desperation, save and except eminent exceptions such as Rashbehari’s childhood friend Srish Ghosh who was an eminent revolutionary, yet then destitute, himself, and the poet laureate Rabindranath Tagore. And, within a year, a personal tragedy struck again. But, Rashbehari was not one to relinquish his mission. He tirelessly built up his contacts in Japan, kept pushing the cause of Indian independence among the Japanese in every fashion he could, and kept himself abreast of the developments in India. He prepared as best as he could for the coming events, including attempting to anticipate the events to occur in India and elsewhere, so that the country would be best poised to strike to win freedom from the British. Eventually, he would go on to lay the foundation stones of the Indian Independence League and hold together the Azad Hind Fauz in its most difficult times before he could hand over its charge to his successor, Subhas, the other eminent Bose, and quietly walk into his sunset. The Azad Hind Fauz played the most significant role in weakening the British administrative hold on India, as was accepted by the erstwhile British Prime Minister Clement Atlee.
Rashbehari’s life was therefore a remarkable tale of dogged single-minded pursuit of mission despite multiple obstacles each of which would have dissuaded ordinary mortals. It is the account of a revolutionary. What is it then that makes such revolutionaries? We delve deep into the psyche of this extraordinary one of his breed, and extract some defining attributes of the man from documentary evidence. The attributes recur fairly regularly across the top echelons of the freedom fighter revolutionaries, and include solidarity, unity of purpose and strength of the bonds among them. The same attributes stand in stark contrast with the backbiting, the betrayal and scheming of the contemporary supposed freedom fighting politicians, who often struck against each other, more than against the British, in their quests of personal power.
Section A: What are the revolutionaries like?
The lives of Revolutionaries were difficult. They were the target of nearly every other political faction of any significance. British, Anglo-Indian, Islamist, Loyalist or Congress – none of them wasted any love on the revolutionaries. Most of their countrymen were scared of offering them protection or shelter against their enemies; their resources were few, as few wealthy men of any consequence joined them, or donated to their cause. Often they won a tactical victory against insufferable odds; more often than not, it was a glorious defeat that few remembered and virtually none sang about. There was nothing in the life of the Revolutionaries – not money, not fame, not power, nor even gratitude of their countrymen. Nevertheless, they sustained their activities in the face of such adversity and survived for a number of years, often inflicting casualties out of all proportion on their enemies. What was the mindset of the Revolutionary like? Why, then, did they take such thankless risks for the country?
Perhaps it is best to summarize the revolutionary psyche in the words of the eminent historian, RC Majumdar, who wrote, “Like the wandering ascetics of old, these young men willingly forsook all that was dear and near to them, to carry on a life-long struggle for their goal. Fear of death and physical sufferings worse than death did not deter them; obstacles and difficulties like Himalayan barriers could not deflect them from their course. Deserted by friends and relatives, ignored, if not derided, by their countrymen, without means or resources to keep their body and soul together, haunted by spies and hunted by police, flying from one shelter to another, these young men carried on a heroic but hopeless struggle, from day to day, from month to month, and from year to year. They chose the life of hardship and privations and consecrated their lives to the service of their country. Many of them rushed headlong to destruction. They died in order that others may live. ” p. 72, [20].
Given this generic mindset of the revolutionaries, we now delve into the mind of Rashbehari Bose, one of the most eminent revolutionaries of the creed. It would clearly be an inordinate level of zeal, conviction and commitment to their purpose that would create such superlatives. On June 10, 1933, Subhas Bose had characterized such conviction: “Our first task will be to gather together a group of men and women who are prepared to undergo the maximum sacrifice and suffering which will be necessary if we are to attain success in our mission. They must be whole time workers – ‘Freedom-intoxicated’ missionaries; who will not be discouraged by failure or deterred by difficulty of any kind and who will vow to work and strive in the service of the great cause till the last day of their lives’’ [18]
What Subhas Bose did not know at that point is that he was in fact enumerating the defining characteristics of the other Bose. Rashbehhari followed his cherished goal, of liberating his country, no matter how tortuous the path, beginning again and again from scratch as his plots were often foiled. The dedication and fervor with which he pursued his mission has been eloquently described by those who knew him closely. Rev. Nikki Kimura has written about Rashbehari: “Although he had been in Japan for more than 30 years as an Indian refugee, he was always thinking of Indian independence. He never forgot of the independence of his mother country……Indeed his activities were wonderful and his affectionate patriotism for his mother country was really something pathetic. We, the Japanese, always paid him our highest respect to find him as the splendid patriot of his mother country.’’ p. 41, [13]
Dr. Bhagawan Singh Gyani (Preetam) who had become the President and Commissioner of the Revolutionary Gadar Party had obtained the following perspicacious classification of the revolutionaries: “Revolutionary individuals are rare and of the following categories:
- There are those who rebel against conditions and environments – personal, social, economic and natural. They complain, whine and grumble and even occasionally protest, refusing to go along with the established order. Under pressure, however, they will compromise, give up the struggle, submit and follow the crowd.
- There are revolutionaries who are made of sterner staff. They are ready and willing to suffer and sacrifice whether for an ideal, for the country or a deep conviction. They seldom, if ever, are discouraged and usually work alone or in small circles.
- There are revolutionaries who are sages in their perceptions and scientific in their attitude and genius in organizing. They construct a clear pattern of a new nation, they possess a unique capacity for fashioning a social order, step by step, as they go along. They work together, coordinate their plans and benefit from each other’s association. They learn in the light of their own mistakes and particularly by the mistakes of others, and they do not hesitate to alter or modify their plans if by so doing they may realise their objective with dignity, efficiency and ease. They possess a volatile personality, adaptable to any condition and always move ahead in spite of obstacles. ( Two rebels meet, Dr. Bhagawan Singh Gyani (Pritam) p. 515, [13])
Dr. Bhagawan Singh was unequivocal that “Our Shri Rash Behari Basu belonged to this (the third) category of revolutionists.’’ p. 515, [13].
Nedyam Raghavan, who headed the All-Malayan Indian Independence League, had known Rashbehari closely during 1942-43. He has written: “He (Rashbehari) was a good friend and a pleasant companion, had a keen sense of humour, and many entertaining stories to tell. He was frank and outspoken. He seemed to like the good things of life – I do not mean the flesh pots – but that he was a bon vivant. Good clothes, good food, a good residence and other material comforts seemed to appeal to him just as much as spiritual objectives. He did not see eye to eye with those who enthroned and glorified poverty in the name of simplicity. Rebel, revolutionary, exile, scholar, writer, teacher, and yet, he had a knack of enjoying life as average man did. Prudery, snobbery or pedantry never came his way. However, I noticed that if need be, he was capable of sacrifices and would subject himself to privations to a greater extent than many who lived poorly. I must say that many of those qualities, though excellent in themselves, were not the ones that attracted Rash Behari Bose to me. It was his intense love of freedom for his country. His one all-absorbing passion was to go back to India – a free man – and set foot on a free soil. He did not seem to nurse any hatred of the British or any one else. Whenever he spoke of them, he spoke without rancor. ‘’ pp. 437-438, [13] Nedyam Raghavan has written about his last interactions with Rashbehari Bose: “Though in failing health, he was full of cheer, full of life. ….With prophetic foresight, he also saw Indian Freedom looming in the distance. He said, before the war ended India would be free. In a feeble voice, not perhaps believing it himself, he added that he would return to a Free India. He did not. …..It was not long before that we heard that he has left us for ever ; but in leaving us, he left behind the cherished memory of a good friend and a great patriot through whose life ran one unbroken purpose – that of winning India’s freedom ” pp-440-441 [16]
S A Ayer, the former Reuters correspondent who became the propaganda minister of the Azad Hind Government has written about Rashbehari Bose (who he had first met at a hotel in Bangkok in May, 1942): “even his worst enemy had no reason to question his burning love for India till the last breath of his life; his only ambition till the last was to lay his tired bones on the soil of liberated India; and, in spite of his frail health, the old man toiled to realise his dream, in the face of heavy odds, gloom and many a crisis.’’ p. 442, [13]
Yet, even the most committed, the most immune to persecution, of the revolutionaries were but human, and subject to their usual frailties limited by human psyche and anatomy. So, even he collapsed, albeit occasionally. To put such natural human fallibility in perspective, we now observe the vulnerable side of Rashbehari. In 1935, in the twentieth year of his exile, he had confided his frustration in his brother-in-law, Yasuo: ““I am near fifty. Nothing has been done till fifty! I do not know when I can realize my dream, now how ? Can I continue this movement for Indian independence ? What can I do ? What have I to do !!!!…. What a miserable fellow !’’
“What is fifty ? Your business must be begun now ! No sentiment ! Time will come – will come without failure, sure! Thus replied Yasuo, brother of Tosiko. ‘’ p. 35, [11]
Then again Rash Behari was once in a remote Northern city to attend a series of conferences in a summer college. “One afternoon Bose and Ohkawa took a small boat and went off the shore into the sea of Japan. In a small boat on the sea, alone they sat ; Prof. Ohkawa, later leader of the “Mutiny of Feb. 26, 1936’’, and the later organizer of the I.N.A. They were gazing at the red sunset in the waves….both silent…Suddenly, Bose cried out madly : “O Lonely !….’’ and he threw himself down in the bottom of the boat and wept,….’’ pp. 35-36, [11]
Though forlorn and downcast often, Rashbehari, however, would never allow his sentiment, however strong, to affect him in his struggle, as he continued with dogged tenacity. He knew that sooner or later the war in Europe would give him a chance to once more intervene effectively in India and work with his compatriots there. In expectation of this coming war, he made every possible preparation that his situation allowed him. The blueprint of the Indian Independence League (IIL) was prepared by him, and he was just waiting for his chance to strike a blow once more for his people. That would come shortly, with the outbreak of the second world war.
The fighter spirit and intense love of his country’s independence animated Rashbehari to his last moments. Seizo Arisue, Ex Lieutenant General, Ex-Chief of the Information Bureau, Staff of the Japanese Ground Self-defence Force has described his last meeting with Rashbehari Bose as follows: “As I remember it, in January 1945 the illness of late Mr. Rashbehari took a critical turn. Hearing of this, H. M. The Emperor decorated him with the Second Order-of-Merit of the Rising Sun, which I was directed to deliver him personally at the hospital. When I went, he was lying in bed in a serious condition. I handed over the Medals of Merit to him, he could not lift his head but with a nod and tears in his eyes he expressed his great appreciation, deeply moved by the Imperial favour. With tears running down, he whispered into my ears very firmly – “Thank you very much for your kindness in the past. I particularly solicit your further co-operation with us to accomplish our nation’s independence.” This he did, grasping my hand firmly. I could not help feeling a great admiration towards him seeing his devotion to the cause of India’s independence.’’ pp. 51-52, [13]
Section B: Rashbehari’s deep attachment to his revolutionary Comrades
It is perhaps pertinent to remark that single-minded lifelong commitments to a mission often lead to deep-rooted bond among pursuants of the same mission, which transcends, by far, their connection with their family and friends. We observe an intense camaraderie between Rashbehari and his revolutionary comrades.
Rashbehari has written in his memoirs: “It was March, 1915. I had then arrived in Benares. The failure of our attempt (Hindu-German conspiracy) had hurt me deeply. But I was not so sad because of that. But, when I heard that all those who were working as my right-hand men, many among them were being arrested, then I deeply grieved. Whenever I read these news, tears roll down my eyes. Although we failed in Lahore, because I had deep faith in “Through failure, we mount to success’’, I was not that disheartened. This experience would be useful for future. In future we would not err like this-this is what I was thinking. But when those who were extremely selfless, courageous, and do not waver from their cause in any danger, were arrested, I was deeply hurt. I am not going to get back those who would sacrifice their lives at the gallow – this thought almost broke my heart. After that when I received news that even Pingle (Vishnu Ganesh Pingle) has been arrested in Meerut, it was almost a deathblow to me. A boy brought me the Pioneer newspaper, when I opened it, I found that there was a telegram from Meerut. Pingle and some Sikh soldiers were arrested with bombs, this was written there. I could not control my tears. Before receiving the newspaper, I had decided that if Pingle could somehow return, I would never let him go again.” p. 1, [9].
After the Lahore conspiracy was unearthed, police started arresting Rashbehari’s men at Lahore. He escaped to Benares. He writes about this period: “Anyway, until then I have not got news of Pingle. So, I was slightly worried. Exactly after two days Pingle arrived. The joy that I felt seeing him back safe is beyond description through words. He had come after consulting with soldiers in Meerut. If I permit, he would start work in Meerut. The man who I love more and am closer to than my brother, whose courage, patriotism and sacrifice has overwhelmed me, san whose help I could not have advanced a single step – I sent for that brother of my heart Sachindranath. …I consulted Sachi. On one hand, there was my affection for Pingle, on the other was the call of duty. I could well understand that Pingle was assuming grave risks, but duty beckoned. In the end, it was decided to send Pingle. It was evening. We were sitting by Ma-Ganga, at the ghat next to Dashashwamedh. Ma Ganga was flowing by. 2-4 boats could be seen. Aratis had started in the temples. After remaining silent for some time, I told Pingle: “The assignment you are going for, the extent of the danger in it you probably know, if there is slight disruption you will have to embrace death, have you thought about it?’’ Pingle smiled endearingly, “Life and death I do not know, when you command, I would abide by, if thereby I have to embrace death, so be it”. That was the response befitting a hero. But I had a foreboding hearing it. I have lost many, will I lose Pingle too? Pingle went to Meerut the next night. That was the last I saw him. Even now his smiling face is embedded in my heart. Pingle was not a man, he was a God. If there were ten thousand men like him, India would have become independent by then.
This is 1924.
Even now when the memories of Amirchand, Abadbihari, Basantakumar, Balmukunda, Pingle, Kartar Singh, Mathur Singh, Jagat Singh, Nidhan Singh, etc. return, I weep uncontrollably (all of these close associates of Rashbehari were hanged to death). What is the reason? They are not my relatives, then why do I still cry for them? For they are my own, more than my relatives, they are the brothers of my heart. That is why I still cry for them. My heart breaks whenever I remember them. There is a deep bond between revolutionaries, which common people cannot comprehend. They love each other more than their parents, siblings and friends. If this love is not there, no one can become a revolutionary or participate in tasks related to revolution….After 2-4 days news arrived that my lifelong friend, outstanding selfless and valorous Shri (Shrish Chandra Ghosh) was arrested in Howrah station. ‘’ pp. 2-3, [9]
The account left by revolutionary Sachindranath Sanyal, who had hid Rashbehari for more than a year in Benares tallies with Rashbehari’s: “The revolutionary wave that had engulfed Bengal in 1906-1907 was not limited to Bengal alone. Some in emulation of Bengal, some in inspiration from Bengal, at this time in several places in India, revolutionary centers were established. I will start the story from after the Delhi bomb case. Before that, the work done by revolutionaries outside Bengal is not known at all among the general public. The names of Lala Har Dayal and Rash Behari Bose became famous through the Delhi conspiracy case. During that time Lala Har Dayal was outside India, but even during the period of grave danger Rash Behari remained in India up to 1915. He was the leader of the revolutionary group outside Bengal. Generally, we used to address him as dada or Rasuda. Rash Behari had already absconded by the time the Delhi conspiracy trial started. Many rewards had been announced for capturing him. His photo was prominently displayed in each big railway station, whoever would capture him would receive a reward of seven thousand five hundred rupees, this announcement was made public too. But despite their best efforts, government could not capture Rash Behari in any way. After a lot of deliberation, based on my counsel, Rash Behari decided to stay in Kashi. He stayed in Kashi with me for about a year., I would never be able to forget the joy that I derived from his company during that time. I never saw him sad despite all his travails. Yes, on the day on which four individuals were sentenced to death in the Delhi Conspiracy Trial Judgment, I saw him shed tears, privately. ‘’ pp. 29-30, [12]. After the failure of the Hindu German conspiracy, we learn from Sachindranath’s memoirs “That time out of acute grief Rash Behari lay on his bed like a dead man. Kartar Singh was also silently lying down on a bed next to Rash Behari’s. His body was lax because of fatigue. Both remained silent. Their pale silence revealed their intense emotional suffering.’’ p. 90 [12].
Rashbehari has narrated about his bond with his fellow revolutionaries in other places too. He writes : “Pashupati is my childhood friend. He was very mischievous from his boyhood. Afterwards he has worked with me all along. The feeling called fear is unknown to him. The word does not exist in his dictionary. He is always ready to embrace trial by fire. If Pashupati were not there I would have been in danger many times. He is as intelligent as he is fearless.’’ p. 6, [9]
“I have not known Girijababu for long. But after making his acquaintance for 2-4 days, I found out that there are not many like him. It is not easy to come across a selfless patriot like him. I got some one like Girijababu (his real name was Nagendranath Chaudhuri) only because I was deeply fortunate. This Girijababu is no more in this mortal world.’’ pp. 7-8, [9]
K. R. Palta, who met Rashbeharii Bose, in 1942, has written: “Mr. Rash Behari talked with animation about the old revolutionary parties. He especially enquired from us of the Anushilan and Yugantar parties. We did not ourselves belong to Bengal, but who is there even slightly acquainted with Indian politics who has not heard of the famous revolutionary deeds of these parties ? The elderly revolutionary and the leader of the 1914 revolutionary parties, Mr. Rash Behari, went on putting our knowledge of the deeds of the old revolutionaries to an exacting test by surprising every moment with one awkward question or another. We talked of the famous Maniktola case, and as his memory glided through his past, he remembered the Bengal of Arbindhoo and Biran Ghosh’s time’’ p. 18 [26]
Rashbehari also maintained a personal memorial to the comrades who fell in the Hardinge bombing and the failed Hindu German conspiracy, and used to meditate near it for long hours. We learn from Uma Mukherjee: “At Tokyo he (Rash Behari) erected a tablet in the pine bush of his house wherein were inscribed the names of those of his colleagues in India who had laid their lives in the cause of the country. Rash Behari used to sit and meditate near this tablet in his leisurely hours. Sri Somendra Nath Roy of Basic Teachers’ Training, Santiniketan, who spent three years in Japan (1934-1937) to learn collotype photography and lived in Asia Lodge, a boarding house founded by Rash Behari in or about 1934 for Asian students, still possesses a number of photos of Rash Behari sitting beside the above-mentioned tablet.’’ p. 146, [10] .
The kinship towards fellow revolutionaries was not by any means specific to Rashbehari. His colleague in arms, Sachin Sanyal, has also described the bond between revolutionaries as follows: “And exactly this time (when Pingle was captured) I fell seriously ill. Helpless, I had to leave Delhi. In this sickness I was bedridden for up to fifteen days. In the second week there were even symptoms of pneumonia. I can never ever forget in this life the tender care by the youngsters who nursed me that time. That time I did not even have the strength to sit in my bed. That time those young men even cleaned my urine and feces.’’ p. 112, [12]
Section C: How fugitive Rashbehari devoted very ounce of his energy to save his comrades from the British
Rashbehari’s acute grief for his fallen comrades can be better comprehended once we learn the super-human efforts he rendered to save them even after the Ghadar mutiny (aka the Hindu German conspiracy) was irretrievably foiled by the British owing to the betrayal perpetrated by his own. Sachindranath Sanyal has written about the period right after Gadar was foiled and the British had launched a massive manhunt in Kashi for the revolutionaries in general and Rashbehari in particular: “Some of us were careful from before. We used to be at our homes for very little time. The places we used to stay for longer were not known to any barring a few in our group. And it was Rasuda who used to move from house to house at night to check on us. Because not many knew Rash Behari in Kashi. We had a very good organization in Kashi, for this reason Rash Behari could easily stay longer than a month in Kashi even under these circumstances. The British government became determined to capture Rash Behari, and Rash Behari also became determined to save the organization in Kashi. The youngsters of Kashi silently waited at the homes and it was Rash Behari who used to go from home to home to enquire after them. Some would be sent outside Kashi through various means. First I went elsewhere leaving Kashi, later another friend also left Kashi. Those from United Province left their towns to stay in different towns, for example, those from Kashi went to Lucknow and vice-versa.
A few days after I escaped to Bengal our home at Kashi was searched, only a few days after this the home of another Kashi youngster was searched, that young man lived at that time at Kashi itself but not at his home. At 3 AM in the morning police surrounded his home, but returned without success in the morning. The young man later heard from Rash Behari that his home was searched. A few days later the home of Binayak Rao Kaple was searched too. At that time Binayak was returning after taking bath in the Ganjes. He used to live at a rented house, but used to have his meals at his own home. While approaching his home, Binayak heard that many Englishmen were waiting near his home. Immediately on hearing this Binayak disappeared. In this manner police could not get any one. Rash Behari was at Kashi at that time.
When the state’s witness, Bibhuti started describing all these in the special tribunal court, then the judge of the court could only stare astonished at Bibhuti’s face and for some time even forgot to take notes. The government counsel and our attorneys and barristers etc, heard the tales of Rash Behari’s amazing deeds in silence, with equal interest and astonishment; in the middle some would face us and utter softly, Oh! Rash Behari was this capable!’’ Even we would be overwhelmed with joy and pride at those times. Once I looked at Bibhuti’s face to try to understand what Bibhuti was thinking. I recall that at that time I felt sad wondering why Bibhuti did not share our pride and joy. Now I do not remember if even Bibhuti felt any pride, or otherwise, after arguing as above.
In this manner many youngsters of Kashi assembled in Bengal. Those who were not directly linked to Punjab, that is, whose antecedents no one knew in Punjab, they remained in Kashi itself. The number of such youngsters was not insignificant, that is why even in the time of such danger Rash Behari could stay safe in Kashi. Those youngsters who no one knew as revolutionaries, those whom no one had any suspicion about, the greater the number of such people in any revolutionary group, the stronger and more effective it is.
We became cautious in Kashi at that time in this manner, but almost every leader from Punjab was caught one after another. Only 2-3 men like Dr. Mathura Sinha could succeed in escaping to Kabul. Even then Pingle was not caught. After the mayhem in Punjab even Pingle came towards Kashi. On the road, like Kartar Singh he entered the Meerut cantonment to incite mutiny. In this manner, in the Meerut cantonment he talked with a Muslim soldier (dafadar). That soldier showed a lot of enthusiasm about revolution in front of Pingle and came with Pingle to Kashi. But Rash Behari tried hard to stop Pingle from engaging in such activities. He told there is no point going now to the soldiers, but Pingle was not dissuaded. In the end even Dada had to agree to this activity. Pingle was sent with ten of the most powerful bombs. These bombs were so powerful that any place where any one of them landed would be untraceable later. If they were dropped on barracks then many barracks would be blown off simultaneously to smithereens. It was written in the Rowlatt report about these bombs – sufficient to annihilate half a regiment, that is these bombs were powerful enough to completely destroy half a regiment – in the end Rash Behari’s suspicion turned exactly right. That soldier took Pingle to his cantonment to get him captured with the bombs. Almost ten to twelve soldiers of Meerut later sacrificed their lives on the gallows.’’ pp. 108-110 [12]
Rashbehari’s comrades similarly gave their all to ensure his safety. For example, Sachindranath Sanyal and Girijababu aka Narendranath Dutta Choudhury, guarded Rashbehari at the peril of their lives, at the onset of his escape out of India to Japan [23].
Section D: Close camaraderie was norm rather than exception among revolutionaries
In the same way as Rashbehari, Chandrasekhar Azad risked everything, including detection, apprehension and death, for the sake of an attempt to commute the death sentence on Bhagat Singh [2]. Manmathnath Gupta, writing of this incident, affirms, “Chandrasekhar Azad, the great revolutionary leader, himself went to Jawaharlal Nehru to press the release or at least the commutation of their sentences.’’ [2], p. 322, [3]. That Chandrasekhar Azad decided to risk something so dangerous as coming into the open to meet Nehru testifies to his affection for his colleagues. Similarly, Manmathnath Gupta narrates the close bonds between Ashfaqullah, Ram Prasad Bismil, and, Thakur Roshan Lal and how Ashfaqullah used to don the sacred thread of the Hindus and pretend to be a Hindu holy man for the purposes of the Revolutionaries. pp. 100-102, [3]. Ashfaqullah, after being caught, rejected all advances of the British to betray his colleagues and died a martyr. Manmathnath Gupta also narrates how Durgadevi Vohra decided to forego the last rites of her husband, Bhagwati Charan Vohra in order to safeguard the location of the revolutionaries from being discovered, and approved of Azad, Dhanwantari and others’ decision to bury the body of her dead husband in a trench, since it was dangerous to cremate him without raising suspicion. p. 388, [3]. The spirit of unity, of self sacrifice for the sake of one’s colleagues, was the norm among the Revolutionaries, not the exception.
Section E: Ideological conflicts and betrayals among the revolutionaries
Revolutionaries did have substantial ideological differences, which precluded their unity, but the differences were mostly on what would constitute the most effective mechanism of liberating India from the British, not on whether India ought to be liberated from the British, a key question that political leaders formally grappled on until 1929 end, and informally until the transfer of power or even after the same [23]. In the words Sachindranath Sanyal, “Revolutionaries had many differences among themselves because of which they could never unite in the same party. The principal difference was in the chosen mode of operation. One group of revolutionaries believed that they could easily attain independence once British declared complete self-rule. British would be forced to declare self-rule, at least progressively, if their top officers are terrorized across the country. Towards that end, they resorted to terrorist activities utilizing their revolvers and bombs. Another group believed that terrorism will not be a lofty enough goal to attract a large number of youth. They sought a total revolution. Rash Behari was in the latter group. The first group believed that only they were rooted in Indian spiritual ideals, and the second was rooted in Western values, which led to their preference for total revolution to terrorist activities. Thus, when Rash Behari’s Lahore Conspiracy which was seeking a complete revolution failed, and Rash Behari’s group sought the refuge of their counterparts believing in the first path, the counterparts mocked them asking them to observe religious practices for some time given their tremendous burst of activity just before (they were given refuge though)” pp. 135-135 [12]. The revolutionaries were also competing on the achievements of each group as to outsmarting the colonial occupiers, rather than on how closely each group cooperated with the British as was the case with political leaders. In Sanyal’s own words “At that time there used to be a competition among different revolutionary parties of Bengal in who could do more work and shame the others. After sending Rasuda abroad we thought that the first effort to get arms from abroad was from our group, but at that time we did not know that Jatin (Bagha Jatin) Babu’s group had exactly at that time sent their man abroad. Although different groups would work separately in the country, but it appears that at that time all groups working in foreign countries had merged” p. 141, [12]
That said, there certainly were traitors among the revolutionary ranks, this is why British could infiltrate every group in toto and foil most of their major efforts as well as capture their best and the bravest. But, was the number of traitors among the revolutionaries, unusual by any standards? Let us hear what Sachindranath Sanyal has to say: “In all big movements it is seen that with noble and virtuous men some evil characters assemble. Its not the fault of the movement, but it is a consequence of human nature. Even Lenin had said for every genuine Bolshevik, there have assembled in his party at least thirty-nine wicked men and sixty fools (Russia’s Ruin by E. Wilcox, p. 249). And I have heard from the respected Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay (renowned Bengali novelist) that even Deshbandhu Das used to say at times that he had been in legal profession for all his life and in it he had to come across hugely fraudulent individuals, but he had never seen in his whole life as many fraudulent individuals as he saw in the non-cooperation agitation.” p. 72 [12]. The most important point here though is that the top echelon of the revolutionaries was never infiltrated, and they opposed the colonial occupier with all the fervor they could command, unlike the political leadership as we reveal next.
Section F: Contrast between Revolutionaries and the Congress
The revolutionaries shared a deeply spiritual bond between them – it was a grouping of like minds and spirits – the best and the bravest India, came from all over, Bengal, Hindi heartland, Madras Presidency, Maharastra, Punjab threw in their lots together to overset the British Indian state against heavy odds. In contrast, we show that the top echelon of Congress constantly engaged in sniping, undermining, backbiting, politicking, upstaging each other through cheap manoeuvres in their quests of personal power, in what almost constituted a time-honoured tradition among them. We cite examples across different time periods:
- During 1905-1915, the moderate faction of Congress, led by Gokhale collaborated with the British to crush the extremist faction of Congress led by Bipin Chandra Pal, Lala Lajpat Rai, and Balgangadhar Tilak (the Lal-Bal-Pal trio), and the revolutionary ideologue and leader Aurobindo Ghosh who was then being supported by Pal. The British Indian State partitioned Bengal in 1905, a move that the revolutionaries supported by the extremist faction of the Congress opposed tooth and nail. The Congress session of 1906 adopted a resolution moved by the extremist faction to boycott foreign goods in protest against the partition. Gokhale entered into a tacit agreement with Morley to crush the extremists p. 123, [20]. In 1910, the British Government of India passed the Indian Press Act, which required a surety of money (ranging between Rs. 500 and Rs. 5000) for any press, new or existing, to be placed with the District Magistrate. The amount could be forfeited, along with the confiscation of the presses in question, and the materials printed on it, if the District Magistrate were to deem the publications of the press `objectionable’ or `seditious’ at any time in the future. The definition of `objectionable’ was so wide as to practically include everything that the British wanted banned p. 107, [20]. The Gokhale led Congress fully supported this repressive measure secure in its knowledge that it would be used against their Extremist political opponents led by Tilak, Pal and Aurobindo, protesting against the Partition of Bengal and other measures. Indeed, from the beginning of 1907, the Moderates practically left the Extremists in the lurch and veered round the Government. RC Majumdar points out that,``So, Minto had every reason to feel exultant, as he informed Morley, when the Moderate leaders including Surendranath joined the landed aristocracy and the Muslims in waiting upon the Viceroy in a deputation and implored his assistance to keep down the evil passions of the Bengalis misled by the ‘extravagances of Bipin-chandra Pal.’’’ p. 124, [20]. On seeing the whole hearted support of the Moderates to the Indian Press Act, the Viceroy wrote delightedly to the Secretary of State, “The members of the enlarged Council, thoroughly representative of Indian interests, have passed what may justly be called a `repressive’ measure, because they believe with the Government of India, that the measure is essential to the welfare of this country. In doing so, they have furnished the proof, which I have always hoped and believe they would furnish, that increased representation of Indian interests and communities would not weaken, but vastly strengthen British administration.” pp. 111-113, [20]. The Congress representation in the Council, which was then the principal legislative body of the British-Indian State, comprised primarily of the Moderates. RC Majumdar notes that when Gokhale agreed to the Morley-Minto reforms in talks with the Secretary of State, Morley, he knew that the British had no intention of giving the `colonial self rule’ demanded by the Congress. Majumdar points out, “It is important to note that when Gokhale agreed to remove the only obstacle to reforms by putting down the Extremists, he could have no illusion on the British policy towards India. In the course of that very talk Morley had already plainly told him in respect of the ultimate hope of India’s attaining the status of a self-governing colony, `that for many a long day to come–long beyond the short space of time that may be left to me-this was a mere dream’’’. Thus, incapacitating the rival Extremist faction, had a greater priority in the scheme of the Moderates than any other national goal, including the Colonial Self-rule. Indeed, utilising the various repressive measures supported by the Gokhale led Congress, the Brits incarcerated Tilak, VO Chidambaram Pillai and many other editors of newspapers to various terms of imprisonment. pp. 115-116, [20]. And utilising the Indian Press Act wholeheartedly supported by the Moderates, the British completely suppressed Bande Mataram and Jugantar, two very popular nationalist publications in which many Extremist Congressmen wrote p.116, [20]. Not content with this betrayal of the Extremist faction of the Congress, the Moderates in the Congress led by Gokhale, induced by the Viceroy Lord Hardinge, voted for even the infamous Defence of India Act, that allowed the British to punish whom they would as they would, with impunity. pp. 189-190, [20]. The Defence of India Act was so draconian that even English judges and the Viceroy himself were often horrified with its application pp. 192-193, [20].
- In due course, Gokhale’s illustrious disciple, Gandhi would nullify all political rivals out of his way through a series of high-handed and unethical (generously put) political maneuvres. For example, in December 1928, in an all India session of INC, Gandhi had moved a resolution demanding dominion status within a year, failing which, INC will launch non-violent non-cooperation, including non-payment of taxes. But, Subhas Chandra Bose moved an amendment to the effect that Congress would be content with nothing short of independence, which implied severance of the British connection. Gandhi opposed the amendment saying that “young Bengal was making a serious blunder, for to call for complete independence was merely to chant a hollow phrase.’’ As he had done in 1920, he also said that “if you will help me and follow the program, honestly and intelligently, I promise that Swaraj will come within a year.’’ pp. 478. [21]. Bose recalled that “the followers of the Mahatma made it a question of confidence and gave out that if the Mahatma was defeated, he would retire from the Congress Many people therefore voted for his resolution not out of conviction, but because they did not want to be a party to forcing the Mahatma out of the Congress.’’ pp. 174-175, [1]. The amendment lost, 973 votes to 1350 – but was no pushover. Then, sensing a groundswell of support for the demand for complete independence, as reflected in the considerable support that Bose’s amendment in 1928 secured, Gandhi changed his stance on independence in December 1929 (it’s a different story that the change lasted for a month or two, at most). Gandhi moved in December 1929, Lahore Congress, the resolution for complete independence which he opposed in 1928 (Bose amendment). But, no longer content with Congress merely accepting complete independence as its objective, Bose wanted to have Congress articulate a plan for reaching that goal as also a program for the coming year. Towards that end, he moved an amendment to Gandhi’s resolution that “Congress should aim at setting up a parallel government in the country and to that end, should take in hand the task of organizing the workers, peasants and youths.’’ p. 193, [1]. His speech: “I take this opportunity of conveying my cordial hearty thanks to Mahatma Gandhi for coming forward to move a resolution to declare Swaraj to mean complete independence. But I move this amendment because I believe that the programme laid down by his resolution is not such as to carry us towards the goal of complete independence. My amendment is consistent with the goal and in keeping with the spirit of the times. I have no doubt it will find favour with the younger generation in this country. Mine is a programme of all-round boycott. ……Let us be for complete boycott or none at all. I am an extremist and my principle is – all or none. ‘’ p. 218, [17]. Gandhi responded in the assembly: “We are not yet prepared for parallel government. We ought not to bite more than we can chew…..Hence I ask you to reject summarily the resolution of Mr. Subhas Chandra Bose……I would like to follow him through and through if I considered a parallel government a present possibility…..But I suggest to you that we have not that ability today.’’ pp.167-172, [6] p. 219, [17]. Bose’s amendment would lose yet again in the Congress session. But, Bose had to be penalized, for moving unfriendly amendments to Gandhi’s proposal, twice in a row. When the new Working committee for 1930 was named, most of the members from the previous year was retained, but Bose and his close ally, Srinivasa Iyengar, who was an ex-President of Congress, were dropped. JM Sengupta, a leader of the Gandhi-wing of the Bengal Congress, whose popularity in Bengal and the rest of India was no match for Bose’s ever, was however retained in the Working Committee. R. C. Majumdar observes, “At the dictate of Gandhi all the left wingers in the Congress, including Subhas Bose and Srinivasa Iyengar, were excluded from the new Working Committee which met on 2 January, 1930.’’ p. 466, [20]. Bose has recorded the incident as follows. p. 174, [1] : “When the time came for electing the Working Committee for the coming year, the Mahatma came up with a list of fifteen names, from which the names of Mr. Srinivasa Iyengar, the writer and other Left Wingers had been deliberately omitted. There was a strong feeling in the All-India Congress Committee that at least the names of Mr. Iyengar and the writer should be retained. But the Mahatma would not listen. He said openly that he wanted a committee that would be of one mind and he wanted its list to be passed in its entirety. Once again, it became a question of confidence in the Mahatma, and as the House did not want to repudiate him, it had no option but to give in to his demand.’’
- Gandhians were no less effective in politicking than Gandhi himself. Sardar Patel, owing to differences with the Prime minister of the central province, NB Khare, over the candidacy of Harkare from Saoner-Katol constituency, tried to foment revolt against Khare via Ravi Shankar Shukla p. 7, [19]. When Khare tried to declare 26th January a public holiday, as a token of the future independence, he was opposed by Nehru and Rajaji, (the former after agreeing to Khare’s proposal) because they made a separate agreement with Linlithgow not to press that point. p. 8-10, [19]. Khare’s refusal to approve the choices of Sardar Patel, Sarojini Naidu in various administrative matters, and the plea of C. F. Andrews on a penal issue, resulted in his being deposed as Prime Minister of the Central Provinces, with Gandhi, Patel and Nehru playing a prominent role in his discomfiture (refer to the influence-mongering letters from Patel, Andrews and Naidu in appendix A.1). pp. 12-17, [19].
- Bhulabhai Desai, the leader of the Congress Party in the Central Legislative Assembly, and Nawabzada Liaqat Ali Khan made the Desai-Liaqat Pact, which ensured equal representation to both the Congress and the Muslim League in the Executive Council. This had the blessings of both Jinnah and Gandhi. RC Majumdar affirms that Gandhi himself admitted that the Pact had his blessings p. 715, [20]. Chimanbhai Setalvad, in his biography of Bhulabhai Desai, points out that Gandhi not only blessed the Desai-Liaqat Pact p. 249, [28], but had himself corrected a draft of it written in Bhulabhai’s hand p. 255, [28]. However, Jinnah disavowed any knowledge of the Pact and Gandhi too, seeing the Congress opposition to it, dropped it as a hot potato, with Gandhi’s secretary Pyarelal suggesting that Desai had exceeded his brief p. 283, [28]. Subsequently, Gandhi denied Bhulabhai Desai a place in the Viceroy’s Executive Council pp. 284-290, [28]. We include in appendix A.2, Gandhi’s letter to Desai that makes it clear that denial of a position to Bhulabhai Desai in both the Executive Council and a Congress ticket in the elections had Gandhi’s `blessings’; the letter constitutes a lesson in political coercion through crafty sugary manipulation. Thus Desai was left facing a hostile Congress for having made a Pact with the Muslim League without the knowledge of his Congress Working Committee colleagues, who were mostly in prison. His political career was ruined, he was essentially forced into political exile, and as he lay dying, after defending the INA prisoners, he told his friend, KM Munshi, bitterly “Munshi Kaka, those people betrayed me.’’ p. 95, [27] KM Munshi laments further stating, “Thus ended the career of a man of unparalleled intelligence and uncanny subtlety.’’ p. 95, [27].
- By 1946, the actions of the Azad Hind Fauj had turned the bulk of the British Indian armed forces against the British in sentiment. What began as a series of service demands exploded into the Naval Mutiny of 1946, where sailors, fired by nationalism, captured many ships and store installations of the Royal Indian Navy. Then the top leaders of the Congress, including Vallabhbhai Patel, Maulana Azad, Gandhi and Nehru colluded with the British to suppress the rebellion, and, even more, shamelessly vied with each other to claim the sole credit for betraying the mutineers.[7]. On February 22, 1946, Patel called upon the naval ratings to surrender, promising them that there would be no victimisation, if they did so. pp. 177-178, [5] Yet, when the naval mutineers did surrender, on 23/02/1946, Patel and the Congress remained indifferent while the British brutally punished the ratings and cashiered them. The main concern of Patel during that time was only party politics and not in the least the welfare of the naval ratings (refer to appendix A.3 for his letter demonstrating the same):
The backbiting and mutual recrimination for credit among the top echelon of the Congress leaders stand in stark contrast to the strong bonds of affection and brotherhood that pervaded the Revolutionaries. Both set of attributes are natural corollaries of the fact that the Congress leaders were driven by personal ambitions for political power, while the revolutionaries, and Rashbehari being the best among them, were guided solely by ideologies, patriotic fervor and passion for freedom.
Appendix
Appendix A.1 – Patel’s, Andrew’s Sarojini Naidu’s referral letters to Khare:
Khare charged the Congress Working Committee with nepotism and favouritism in his speeches. The then Congress President, Subhas Chandra Bose, challenged Khare to produce proofs of the alleged favouritism and nepotism. In reply, Khare published three separate letters, from Patel, CF Andrews and Sarojini Naidu respectively. Sarojini’s and Andrew’s letters were more direct, but Patel’s letter was more crafty. Even if we take on face value Patel’s plea of seeking justice for an Indian businessman, whose family has financially supported the Congress (likely Patel’s activities), it remains that he hardly ever sought similar justices for the revolutionaries who gave their all to India and were at the receiving end of British brutalities in return. Andrew has been a lifelong close friend of Gandhi, and his letter to Khare was carried by Jamanlal Bajaj, a member of the Congress Working Committee and a wealthy sponsor of Gandhi.
My Dear Dr. Khare,
This is to introduce the bearer, Shrijut Ratanchand Hirachand of the Indian Hume Pipe Co. He is a strong nationalist himself. One of his brothers is a member of the Congress Assembly Party in Bombay. His elder brother has given great support to the Congress on many occasions in the past. He wants a fair deal and no favour in connection with his tender to the Nagpur Municipal water supply where he is afraid of his rival’s influence in the affair getting an undue advantage. I shall thank you if you see that justice is done to him. His rival is a European Contractor and the decision in the affair depends, I understand, on the recommendation of a European Engineer of the Government.
Bombay,
21/08/1937 (Sd) Vallabhbhai Patel
Manerville,
Simla,
November 5th 1937
My Dear Jamanlal,
I do hope you have good news about Kamat at Cambridge. I want you to pass on this letter to Mr. Khare, the Prime Minister, with the enclosure. Mr. Garewal is in the P.W.D. and was in C.P. (Central Provinces), where his son Daljit had an accident with a gun, which was loaded and shot a servant. He told a lie over it and his lawyer tried to prove an alibi, but he was convicted of man-slaughter and sentenced for four years at the Jabalpur Reformatory. His father finds, each time he goes, that his character is deteriorating and fears that if he remains all the four years, he will become hardened and ruined for life. He would gladly come and see the Minister and ask that his son, who is about 14 years of age (if I have remembered rightly) might be placed under his own charge on probation.
I have no doubt that the father has told me the truth, and that if it were possible now for him to be responsible for his own son on probation, his character might be saved. Rajkumari offered to write also, but I said that I would write to you myself. I feel sure that the Prime Minister whom I met at your bungalow could take an interest in such an exceptional case – where a son of a big respectable father has come, owing to his own fault in telling a falsehood, into a terrible state.
Your affectionate friend,
(Sd) Charlie Andrews
Zaheer Manzil,
Red Hill,
Hyderabad Dn.
21st June, 1938.
My Dear Dr. Khare,
I hear that you are likely to appoint a new Advocate General, temporarily in the event of the present incumbent filling in an acting place on the Bench. I would like, if I may to put in a word for Mr. Walter Dutt. I think his name was approved by the High Court for a post, but your predecessor in office preferred his own man whom I need not name. I think you will find Mr. Dutt W. B. very able and deserving of this responsible position.
(Sd) Sarojini Naidu
P.S. – There is also, I believe, a post of acting Judge likely to be vacant.
Khare’s successor Ravi Shankar Shukla indeed appointed Walter Dutt as Advocate General.
Appendix A2 – Gandhi’s letter to Bhulabhai Desai:
Bhulabhai Desai, after being denied the Congress ticket, was considering fighting the coming polls on his own, even with his health failing. Gandhi wanted to avoid this embarrassment to the Congress and sought to dissuade Bhulabhai Desai from contesting. Gandhi’s letter to Bhulabhai Desai has been reproduced from pp. 197-198, [29], 288-290, [28].
BHAI BHULABHAI,
As it is difficult to decipher my handwriting, I am dictating this letter so that it can be written in a clear hand.
Sardar and I keep receiving telegrams suggesting that you should be put up as a candidate for the Central Legislative Assembly. I myself have no interest in the elections. A durbar daily assembles round the Sardar, but I know nothing about it. Ordinarily he does not talk to me not do I ask him anything. I attend to my work and he attends to his. The only reason for our being together this time is his nature-care treatment. He does not have much faith in nature care while I have. An operation would be a very risky affair. No doctor except Dr. Deshmukh advises it. That is why he has put faith in me and is undergoing nature-cure treatment. I have, accordingly, brought him to Dr. Mehta for I have faith in him. My own knowledge of nature cure is superficial. I have given this introduction because I thought it necessary.
If Sardar receives any suggestion regarding you, he puts it before me. Since you have accepted my advice, I assume that you yourself are not at all keen o getting into the Central Assembly, and that, therefore, those who send the telegrams do not do so at your instance. Some big people naturally desire your presence in the Assembly. If I were not there, perhaps Sardar would have yielded to the pressure. But I am firm, for I am acting as your well-wisher. I want a big service from you, if you can give it. I wish to see you as a people’s man. I don’t consider you an old man. Why shouldn’t you also live up to 125? If you do not aspire to live that long, as I do, please remember that I try to persuade everybody to have such aspiration for the sake of service. And it is not that there is no strength or effort behind my aspiration. If there is non and my aspiration proves fruitless, I will accept that. I am not, therefore, afraid of death if it should come today. But I will cherish my aspiration till my last breath, for I have to serve —I have not yet finished with service. There is a spirit of competition to serve which all of us should share.
From this standpoint I suggest to you that you yourself should issue a graceful statement, thanking all those who are trying on your behalf, explaining that you do not wish to be a member of the Assembly at the moment and that you have been doing, and will continue to do, whatever service you can from outside, that if you live long enough and feel later that you should also enter the Legislature, you yourself will come forward and seek people’s votes.
I like the work you are doing just now of defending the prisoners. It will bring you credit. I also wish that like Jawaharlal and Sardar, and to a great extent Maulana Azad, you too should come intocontact with the masses. Perhaps I should cite Rajendra Babu’s case as offering the best example. Rajendra Babu is sought after by Bihar, he himself does not go seeking the support of Bihar. I can cite other similar instances, too. But where is the need to do so for you? Even what I have written above seems to me too long, but I cannot restrain my Moha. If desire also could be described as sattvika, I am sure this desire of mine is that and, therefore, I need not hide it. I trust you arewell and succeeding in your efforts.
Blessings from,
BAPU
Appendix A.3 – Vallabhbhai Patel’s letter to Mohandas Gandhi, after the surrender of the naval mutineers on 24/02/1946, pp. 152-153, [22]:
Revered Bapu,
Sushila gave your letter to me.
Aruna [Asaf Ali] has thrown a spark and is fanning the flames. About two hundred and fifty people have succumbed to the bullets. Over a thousand men have been wounded. The police felt helpless, so it was replaced by a heavy military force. She gave an unbecoming retort even to your small statement of yesterday. The Press has released only a small part of it. The Free Press is on their side. Achyut and his men are putting her in the vanguard. She sent a telegram to Jawaharlal and gave out to the Press that, under the circumstances, he was the only leader who could lead them. This she did as she could not find my support. Jawahar wired to me asking if his presence would be necessary, and in that case, he would come setting aside all his preoccupations. I advised him not to come. Yet he is reaching here. He has wired back to me that he was feeling out of sorts and he would come. He will come here tomorrow at 3PM. Well, let him. But the fact that he comes here on account of Aruna’s telegram is sorrowful indeed. This way, she is encouraged, and if we would not resist their rashness, things will go from bad to worse. Shops in the city have been looted, pedestrians have been ransacked, some public buildings have been set on fire, and some railway quarters, even a train, has been burnt. If under such circumstances, they had to call the military, futile it would be to lay blame on them. The atmosphere has much pacified today and peace may be restored tomorrow. But it is unlikely that the military would be called off soon. There is so much poison in the air. The Englishman and his style of dress have fallen to utter disapprobation. It is tragic that they have made ample use of the student community.
All this coincided with a general strike in the Navy and Air Force. They cannot any longer brook inferior treatment to themselves as compared to their English counterparts. Nor can they tolerate insult and humiliation at the hands of their officers. All this has added to the racial bitterness. The upsurge of consciousness among Asiatics may also have prompted it, albeit indirectly.
Ours is a difficult task. These people do not any longer pay heed to your advice. They respect you only as a saint. But indeed they look upon us as worn out leaders, and think it is enough to lend their ears to what we say. But they decry us publicly that ours is a way that has proved its inefficiency and impracticability. How we have to handle this situation is worth considering.
I am finding it hard to carry on with Maulana. He is behaving like a despot. I will speak it all to you when we meet. I have asked him to relieve me (from the CWC and the EB). But he will not agree. But there is no other course open to me unless matters are well cleared up.”
References:
[1] Subhas Chandra Bose “Indian Struggle’’
[2] Saswati Sarkar, Shanmukh, and Dikgaj, “Did Nehru betray Chandrasekhar Azad to the British?”, 26/02/2016, http://www.dailyo.in/politics/chandrasekhar-azad-jawaharlal-nehru-mahatma-gandhi-hinduism-freedom-struggle-sardar-patel-subhas-chandra-bose/story/1/9233.html
[3] Manmathnath Gupta, “They Lived Dangerously”
[4] Legislative Assembly Debates, Vol. 2, No. 8.
[5] B. C. Dutt, “Mutiny of the Innocents”, Sindhu Publications Pvt Ltd, Bombay-1, 1971
[6] Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Gandhi’s speech at the Lahore Congress Session II, 31/12/1929, http://www.gandhiserve.org/cwmg/VOL048.PDF
[7] Saswati Sarkar, Shanmukh, and Dikgaj, “How Gandhi, Nehru and Patel colluded with the British to suppress the Naval Mutiny of 1946”, 10/08/2015 http://www.dailyo.in/politics/how-gandhi-patel-and-nehru-colluded-with-the-british-to-suppress-the-naval-mutiny-of-1946/story/1/5567.html
[8] Saswati Sarkar, Shanmukh, and Dikgaj, “The Mahatma’s War on Indian Revolutionaries”, 31/07/2015 http://www.dailyo.in/politics/mahatma-gandhis-war-on-the-indian-revolutionaries-british-nehru-mountbatten-sardar-patel/story/1/5359.html
[9] Rash Beharir Atma-katha O dushprapya Rachana, edited by Amal Kumar Mitra
[10] Uma Mukherjee, “Two Great Indian Revolutionaries – Rash Behari Bose and Jyotindra Nath Mukherjee’’
[11] J. G. Ohsawa “The Two Great Indians in Japan’’
[12] Sachindranath Sanyal “Bandi Jiban’’
[13] Rash Behari Basu – His Struggle for India’s Independence, Editor in chief, Radhanath Rath, Editor Sabitri Prasanna Chatterjee, Biplabi Mahanayak Rash Behari Basu Smarak Samiti
[14] Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Letter to Darcy Lindsay, 08/05/1931, http://www.gandhiserve.org/cwmg/VOL052.PDF
[15] Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Gandhi’s statement to the Press, 23/02/1946, Poona, http://www.gandhiserve.org/cwmg/VOL089.PDF
[16] The Cult of the Bomb Young India, January 2, 1930, http://www.gandhiserve.org/cwmg/VOL048.PDF
[17] Leonard A. Gordon, Brothers Against the Raj – Biography of Indian Nationalists, Sarat and Subhas Chandra Bose
[18] Subhas Chandra Bose, The Anti-Imperialist Struggle and Samyavada, Presidential Address at the Third Indian Political Conference, London, 10 June, 1933, India’s Spokesman Abroad, Netaji Collected Works, Vol. 8, Letters, Articles, Speeches and Statements, 1933-1937, pp. 240-263
[19] N. B. Khare, “My Political Memoirs’’
[20] “History and Culture of the Indian People, Vol. 11, Struggle for Freedom”, Edited by RC Majumdar
[21] Complete works of Mahatma Gandhi, Speech on Resolution on Nehru Report, Calcutta Congress III, 31/12/1928, http://www.gandhiserve.org/cwmg/VOL043.PDF
[22] Durga Das, Sardar Patel’s Correspondence 1945-50, Ahmedabad, 1971-74
[23] Saswati Sarkar, Jeck Joy, Shanmukh, Dikgaj Rashbehari Bose’s second war from East Asia – battleground Japan and Singapore http://www.dailyo.in/politics/rashbehari-bose-sachindranath-sanyal-japan-revolutionary-china-indian-freedom-struggle-second-world-war/story/1/9745.html
[24] Jeck Joy, Saswati Sarkar, Shanmukh, Dikgaj “The legend of Rashbehari Bose and the forgotten Hindu-German conspiracy’’ http://www.dailyo.in/politics/rashbehari-bose-hindu-muslim-riots-partition-1947-mahatma-gandhi-independence-hindu-german-conspiracy-ina/story/1/8230.html
[25] Revolutionary Colleagues of and sources of information on Rash Behari Bose. https://sringeribelur.wordpress.com/sources-of-information-on-rash-behari-bose/
[26] K. R. Palta “My Adventures with the INA’’
[27] KM Munshi, “Pilgrimage to Freedom’’, Volume 1.
[28] Chimanbhai Setalvad, “Bhulabhai Desai – a biography’’
[29] “Letter to Bhulabhai J Desai’’, 21/10/1945, Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, http://www.gandhiashramsevagram.org/gandhi-literature/mahatma-gandhi-collected-works-volume-88.pdf