The Clemency Effort for Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru A Comment By Anil Nauriya [I] INTRODUCTION

An impression has been sought to be created that Gandhi not only did not do enough to save Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru from the gallows but also sought mere postponement of their execution. In recent years one writer, A G Noorani, has especially furthered this impression. Other writers tend mechanically to repeat this idea. { A recent review by the historian K N Panikkar of two books, (one by S Irfan Habib and another by Kuldip Nayar) refers to Gandhijis reluctance to intercede with the Viceroy to save their life and also to Gandhijis plea at least to postpone the execution (The Hindu, February 5, 2008) . } As is shown below, both statements within quotes are based on a mis-appreciation of the facts. Some of the films on Bhagat Singh and his comrades which appeared in recent years were, in a few aspects, not quite free of the tendencies underlying such writings. Yet a re-examination of this scholarship, rather than its mere repetition, is overdue. Gandhi did not seek postponement of the execution of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru as has been suggested. He sought commutation of the sentence upon them. [ See Gandhis letter dated March 23, 1931 to Viceroy Irwin, Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Volume 45, pp. 333-334 ] In the Gandhi-Irwin talks the Viceroy had been reluctant to commute the sentence. So Gandhi urged in addition that in view of execution being an irretrievable act which would be beyond recall ( both Gandhis expressions), Irwin should suspend for further review the carrying out of this ultimate penalty. In his book on the subject, A G Noorani left out the line in Gandhis March 23, 1931 letter relating to suspend for further review. Other writers have apparently been repeating the error. Asking for postponement of execution would imply ( and that is how it would be commonly understood) that instead of execution on a particular date the execution should take place on another date. Gandhis fallback position, in the face of commutation not being immediately possible, is suspend for further review. This is by no means postpone and then execute, as has been erroneously suggested, but (if one insists on using the word postponement) postpone and reconsider.

The next part contains an outline of some of the issues involved in the clemency debate. The final part contains further details along with some references. For more exhaustive references the reader is referred to my two articles in Mainstream, New Delhi, April 6, 1996 and March 22, 1997 where the matter has been examined at length. [II] AN OUTLINE The clemency power existed both with the Punjab Governor and the Viceroy of India.

A police officer had been shot dead. The then Viceroy Irwin was therefore under pressure from the police and the civil service not to intervene to prevent the execution of Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev. Even while the Privy Council in London was to deal with the matter, there was, in December 1930, a revolutionary attempt on the life of Geoffrey de Montmorency, the then Governor of Punjab. This could not have made the Governor more sympathetic towards the clemency idea. Gandhi was released from prison in the last week of January 1931. He immediately announced that those under death sentence ought not to be hanged. In the following month Gandhi attended Motilal Nehrus funeral at Allahabad. Soon after that Gandhi asked Tej Bahadur Sapru, M R Jayakar and V S Srinivas Sastri, all of whom wielded influence with the Viceroy, to prevent the hanging of Bhagat Singh and his comrades. In a way it is in these efforts of Sapru, Jayakar and Srinivas Sastri that the Gandhi-Irwin Pact had its origin. The Viceroy was already under severe pressure as mentioned above. But the only way to prevent the hanging was to come to an understanding with the Viceroy. After the Privy Council decision in the matter in February 1931, the Secretary of State in London sent a message to the Viceroy in India saying that he would be glad to know of the date of execution. Such pressure from London limited the Viceroys options further. In the effort to get the sentence on Bhagat Singh commuted, Gandhi came into contact with Bhagat Singhs father. Gandhi was in touch also with Asaf Ali who had appeared as a Barrister for Bhagat Singh and his comrades. Asaf Ali in fact brought to Gandhi a draft clemency petition as from Bhagat Singh addressed to the Punjab Government. Gandhi put aside the draft and drew up a fresh draft more in keeping with the self-respect of Bhagat Singh. On March 23, 1931 Gandhi woke up at 1.00 am to write a letter to Irwin in yet another last minute effort to save the life of Bhagat Singh and his comrades. In his letter Gandhi wrote, inter alia : Execution is an irretrievable act. If you think there is the slightest chance of error of judgement, I would urge you to suspend for further review an act that is beyond recall.. Some writers have claimed that when Gandhi uses the word suspend he was asking merely for postponement, because the latter word occurs in some official documents of the time. But the lines in Gandhis letter showed clearly that this was not so as Gandhi was stressing that execution would be an irretrievable act, and an act beyond recall. Anyone can see that the effort here is for non-execution. There is a lesson in this for all aspiring scholars. Never accept something merely on the authority of a writer or publisher. Always check the original sources. Subhas Bose, who was in touch with Gandhi during this period, wrote in his work Indian Struggle that Gandhi tried his very best for Bhagat Singh and his comrades. The Viceroy Irwin admitted in a speech at Maidens Hotel, Delhi three days after the execution of Bhagat Singh that Gandhi had made a forceful request for commutation. The revolutionaries themselves acknowledged Gandhis efforts in the first biography of Bhagat Singh by J N Sanyal which appeared soon after the execution.

[III] THE EVENTS IN MORE DETAIL ALONG WITH SOME REFERENCES I have listed here also some facts which tend to be neglected by writers on the subject.

i.

Gandhi was conscious of the curtailment of rights of those tried by the Tribunal set up under the Lahore Ordinance. On May 4, 1930 Gandhi wrote to the then Viceroy Irwin referring to the abandonment of ordinary criminal procedure in the trial of Shaheed Bhagat Singh, Shaheed Sukhdev and Shaheed Rajguru as a veiled form of martial law (CWMG, Vol 43, p 391).

ii.

May 5, 1930 to January 26, 1931 : Gandhi was himself in prison. This fact is seldom mentioned in accounts on Shaheed Bhagat Singh. The hazards of working with secondary materials are exemplified in the case of one work which, without mentioning Gandhis own incarceration, seems to make a grievance of the fact that Gandhi did not visit Bhagat Singh and his comrades in prison.

iii.

October 1, 1930 : When Gandhi was in prison, the Servants of the People Society was active on behalf of Bhagat Singh and his comrades. It contacted Henry Polak, Gandhis friend from his South Africa days, who was in England. On October 1, 1930 Polak replied to Sir Moti Sagar on legal representation in the Shaheed Bhagat Singh case before the Privy Council. Polak who was now practising as a solicitor in England, offered his legal services free of charge. He suggested that D.N. Pritt and Sydney Smith be engaged in the case. Pritt and Smith were later engaged in accordance with this advice. [For National Archives reference, see my article in Mainstream, March 22, 1997]

iv.

October 7, 1930 : Tribunal sentences Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev to death.

v.

December 23, 1930 : At a time when the appeal to the Privy Council was to be dealt with, the Governor of Punjab Geoffrey de Montmorency was shot and wounded in Lahore. Two police officers and one lady doctor were also

injured. [Indian Annual Register, 1930, Volume 2, p. 45] The Governors opinion was to count in the matter of commutation of sentence. vi. vii. January 26, 1931 : Gandhi released from prison. January 31, 1931 : Speech by Gandhi at Allahabad saying that those under death sentence should not be hanged. (CWMG, Vol 45, p. 133). viii. February 14, 1931 : Gandhi sent Mahadev Desai to Tej Bahadur Sapru to see if they could help prevent hanging of Bhagat Singh. [Mahadev Desai Diary (Gujarati series) Vol. 14, pp 43-44] ix. Also on February 14, 1931 : Gandhi sent Mahadev Desai similarly to V.S. Srinivas Sastri to seek support for the clemency effort. [Mahadev Desai Diary (Gujarati series) Vol. 14, pp 43-44] Gandhi appears similarly to have sent Mahadev Desai to M.R. Jayakar to seek support for the clemency effort. [Mahadev Desai Diary (Gujarati series) Vol. 14, pp 43-44]. (The GandhiIrwin pact in the first week of March 1931 was brought about by mediation of Sapru, Srinivas Sastri and Jayakar). x. February 18, 1931 : In the talks with Viceroy Irwin, Gandhi asks for suspension of sentence as a humanitarian issue. (CWMG Vol 45, p. 200) The reference to humanitarian issue clearly shows that Gandhi was not asking for bare postponement of execution as some writers have erroneously suggested. Suspension of sentence is a term of law and under S 401 of the old Criminal Procedure Code of 1898, which was then in existence, the sentence could be indefinitely suspended. Faced with resistance to the commutation idea, Gandhi had suggested this course. This has been loosely referred to as postponement. In fact Gandhis fallback position was not postpone and execute but suspend in order to reconsider

xi.

February 27, 1931 : The Privy Council in London having meanwhile rejected the case filed on behalf of Bhagat Singh, a telegram was sent by the Secretary

of State, London to the Home Department, Government of India, New Delhi, summarising the Privy Council judgment. In the telegram the Secretary of State indicated that he would be glad to know of the date of execution. [This telegram is in the National Archives and I have given the complete reference in my article in Mainstream on March 22, 1997.] Such pressure from London, clearly served to restrict the Viceroys room for maneuver. xii. March 7, 1931 : Gandhis speech at Delhi saying, inter alia, I cannot in all conscience agree to anyone being sent to the gallows, much less a brave man like Bhagat Singh (CWMG, Vol. 45, p. 273).

xiii.

March 8, 1931 : A large meeting was held in Lahore under auspices of Naujawan Bharat Sabha. Gurdas Mal, the father of Hari Kishan who had attempted the assassination of the Punjab Governor, was produced and lionised at this meeting. Such events, which were taking place even as Gandhi was trying to extract a commutation decision from the Viceroy, could not have made Gandhis task easier.

xiv.

March 19, 1931 : Emerson, the Home Secretary of the Government of India, records Gandhis comment that execution of Bhagat Singh would seriously complicate matters concerning the Gandhi-Irwin pact (CWMG, Vol. 45, p.445).

xv.

March 21, 1931 : Gandhi put aside Asaf Alis draft petition as from Bhagat Singh to the Punjab Government and prepared a fresh draft in keeping with the self-respect of Bhagat Singh. Asaf Ali took this draft to Lahore. [Mahadev Desai Diary (Gujarati series) Vol 14, p. 166]

xvi.

Also on March 21, 1931 : Gandhis further plea to Irwin for commutation of sentence. (Internal evidence of Gandhis letter of March 23, 1931 to Irwin).

xvii.

March 23, 1931 : Gandhis letter to Irwin seeking reconsideration of the death sentence on Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru. Gandhi pointed

out that execution is an irretrievable act. He referred to his request for commutation made two days earlier. Gandhi again requested Irwin to at least suspend for further review an act that is beyond recall. [CWMG, Vol 45, pp 333 334] Gandhi offered to go and see Irwin again for this purpose if his presence was necessary. In this letter Gandhi also wrote : In the present case the chances are that, if commutation is granted, internal peace is most likely to be promoted. In the event of execution, peace is undoubtedly in danger. In the face of this, it is erroneous to argue that Gandhi did not try to obtain commutation of the sentence. xviii. March 26, 1931 : Speech by Irwin in Delhi acknowledging Gandhis forceful request for commutation and fact of having listened to Gandhi making such request, thus confirming yet again that such request was made prior to March 23, 1931 (Gandhi and Irwin had not met on March 23). [ Indian Annual Register, 1931, Volume 1, p. 86] xix. Revolutionary acknowledgement of Gandhis efforts. (J.N. Sanyal, Sardar Bhagat Singh : A Short Life Sketch, 1931 at p. 97) J N Sanyal was the brother of the revolutionary Sachindranath Sanyal. xx. Threat of revolt by civil service if Bhagat Singh and comrades not hanged. (Account by Kranti Kumar, one of the earliest members of Naujawan Bharat Sabha and a leader of a demonstration against Gandhi, published in Homage to Martyrs, 1981) [For detailed reference see my article in Mainstream, March 22, 1997] The role of the Civil Service in thwarting clemency efforts also confirmed by J.N. Sanyal, in a subsequent (1983) edition of Sardar Bhagat Singh : A Short Life Sketch, pp 73-74. xxi. Aruna Asaf Ali states in Fragments From the Past: Selected Writings And Speeches of Aruna Asaf Ali, Patriot Publishers, New Delhi, 1989, p. 102 that the Punjab Governor threatened to resign if Bhagat Singh and his comrades were not executed.

xxii. One additional matter requires to be cleared up. Some writers have mentioned a passage from Pattabhi Sitaramayyas History of the Congress, without

understanding or explaining its context.

After recording Gandhis efforts at written that Gandhi told the

commutation of sentence, Sitaramayya had

Viceroy that ..if the boys should be hanged they had better be hanged before the Congress, than after. [Sitaramayya, 1935 edition , p. 745 ( italics added)] Some writers used this to arraign Gandhi. But this reference actually proves the opposite. Gandhi was seeking commutation of sentence. But when the Viceroy said that all he could offer was to postpone the sentence to until after the Karachi session, the passage shows that Gandhi rejected such bare postponement. It is sufficiently clear that Gandhi asked Irwin to commute the sentence, that is to substitute a lesser sentence for the death sentence. Irwin himself on March 26, 1931 confirmed the fact of this request. And Gandhis letter dated March 23, 1931 is also evidence of this. xxiii. Subhas Bose in his Indian Struggle 1920-1934 (Calcutta, 1948, p. 285) admits that Gandhi did try his very best to save the lives of these youngmen. Gandhis efforts were known also to Tej Bahadur Sapru, Srinivas Sastri and M.R. Jayakar who had kept in touch with the Viceroy. They were also known to Bhagat Singhs lawyer, the eminent freedom fighter, Asaf Ali and to Bhagat Singhs father both of whom had kept in touch with Gandhi during this period. xxiv. Since the commutation request did not seem to work in the face of pressure that Irwin was facing from London and also from the British police and civil service in India, Gandhi had suggested a way out. This was to suspend the sentence for further review. This is a power which was specifically provided for in S 401 of the then Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 to the Government of India and Provincial Governments. Such suspension can be indefinite as to time. Every lawyer knows that this does not mean a mere postponement of execution. It means non-enforcement and possibly a further reconsideration of the sentence itself. Pattabhi Sitaramayyas, The History of the Congress, [1935 edition, p. 745 ] shows that when Gandhi was offered bare postponement of the execution until after the Karachi Congress to be held in the last week of March 1931, he rejected the

idea. xxv. Subhas Bose accepts that the spirit of the Gandhi-Irwin Pact required nonexecution of Bhagat Singh and his comrades, although this was not an express condition. Bose records that the execution was against the spirit if not the letter of the Delhi Pact. [Bose, Indian Struggle 1920-34, Calcutta, 1948, p.285]