| Vinayak Damodar Savarkar | |
|---|---|
Savarkar seated on a chair
| |
| Born |
28 May 1883 Bhagur, Nasik, Bombay Presidency, British India (now in Maharashtra, India) |
| Died |
26 February 1966 (aged 82) Bombay, Maharashtra, India |
| Cause of death | Fast unto death |
| Nationality | Indian |
| Alma mater |
University of Mumbai Gray's Inn |
| Known for | Hindutva, Hindu nationalism |
| Political party | Hindu Mahasabha |
| Spouse(s) | Yamunabai (m. 1902; d. 1963) |
| Children | 3 |
| Relatives | Ganesh Damodar Savarkar (brother) |
pronunciation (help·info)) (28 May 1883 – 26 February 1966) was an Indian, Hindutva activist, lawyer, politician, poet, writer and playwright. Savarkar coined the term Hindutva
(Hinduness) to create a collective "Hindu" identity as an essence of
Bharat (India). His political philosophy had the elements of utilitarianism, rationalism and positivism, humanism and universalism, and realism. Savarkar was also an atheist who disapproved of orthodox beliefs in all religions.
Savarkar's revolutionary activities began while studying in India and England, where he was associated with the India House and founded student societies including Abhinav Bharat Society and the Free India Society, as well as publications espousing the cause of complete Indian independence by revolutionary means. Savarkar published The Indian War of Independence about the Indian rebellion of 1857 that was banned by British authorities. He was arrested in 1910 for his connections with the revolutionary group India House. Following a failed attempt to escape while being transported from Marseilles, Savarkar was sentenced to two life terms of imprisonment totaling fifty years and was moved to the Cellular Jail in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, but released in 1921.
While in jail, Savarkar wrote the work describing Hindutva, espousing what it means to be a Hindu, and Hindu pride, in which he defined as all the people descended of Hindu culture as being part of Hindutva, including Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs. In 1921, under restrictions after signing a plea for clemency, he was released on the condition that he renounce revolutionary activities. Traveling widely, Savarkar became a forceful orator and writer, advocating Hindu political and social unity. Serving as the president of the Hindu Mahasabha, Savarkar endorsed the ideal of India as a Hindu Rashtra and opposed the Quit India struggle in 1942, calling it a "Quit India but keep your army" movement. He became a fierce critic of the Indian National Congress and its acceptance of India's partition. He was accused of the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi but acquitted by the court.
The airport at Port Blair, Andaman and Nicobar's capital, has been named Veer Savarkar International Airport.[8] The commemorative blue plaque on India House fixed by the Historic Building and Monuments Commission for England reads "Vinayak Damodar Savarkar 1883-1966 Indian patriot and philosopher lived here".[9] In the recent past, the Shiv Sena party has demanded that the Indian Government posthumously confer upon him India's highest civilian award, the Bharat Ratna.
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was born in the Marathi Chitpavan Brahmin Hindu family of Damodar and Radhabai Savarkar in the village of Bhagur, near the city of Nashik, Maharashtra. He had three other siblings namely Ganesh, Narayan, and a sister named Maina. He earned the nickname "Veer" (Sanskrit:braveheart)when at the age of 12, he led fellow students against a rampaging horde of Muslims that attacked his village. Highly outnumbered, he inspired the boys to fight-on until the last Muslim was driven off. Later, he is known to have stated: "Do not fear them. The Almighty is your strength, so fight, even when facing an enemy stronger than yourself"
After the death of his parents, the eldest sibling Ganesh, known as Babarao, took responsibility of the family. Babarao played a supportive and influential role in Vinayak's teenage life. During this period, Vinayak organised a youth group called Mitra Mela (Band of Friends) and encouraged revolutionary and nationalist views of passion using this group. In 1901, Vinayak Savarkar married Yamunabai, daughter of Ramchandra Triambak Chiplunkar, who supported his university education. Subsequently, in 1902, he enrolled in Fergusson College, in Pune . As a young man, he was inspired by the new generation of radical political leaders namely Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal and Lala Lajpat Rai along with the political struggle against the partition of Bengal and the rising Swadeshi campaign. After completing his degree, nationalist activist Shyamji Krishna Varma helped Vinayak to go to England to study law, on a scholarship. It was during this period that the Garam Dal, literally "Army of the angry," was formed under the leadership of Tilak as a result of a split between the moderate, "constitutionalist" wing on the one part, and of Tilak's extremist or radical wing in the Indian National Congress. The members of the Garam Dal, did not acknowledge the agenda of the majority moderate Indian National Congress leadership which advocated dialogue with the British rulers and incremental steps towards Independence by gaining confidence of the British. Tilak was soon imprisoned for his support of revolutionary activities.
Activities at India House
After joining Gray's Inn law college in London Vinayak took accommodation at India House. Organized by expatriate social and political activist Pandit Shyamji, India House was a thriving centre for student political activities. Savarkar soon founded the Free India Society to help organize fellow Indian students with the goal of fighting for complete independence through a revolution, declaring,
We must stop complaining about this British officer or that officer, this law or that law. There would be no end to that. Our movement must not be limited to being against any particular law, but it must be for acquiring the authority to make laws itself. In other words, we want absolute independence.Savarkar envisioned a guerrilla war for independence along the lines of the famous war for Indian independence of 1857. Studying the history of the revolt, from English as well as Indian sources, Savarkar wrote the book, The History of the War of Indian Independence. He analysed the circumstances of 1857 uprising and assailed British rule in India as unjust and oppressive. It was via this book that Savarkar became one of the first writers to allude the uprising as India's "First War for Independence."
The book was banned throughout the British Empire. Madame Bhikaji Cama, an expatriate Indian revolutionary obtained its publication in the Netherlands, France and Germany. Widely smuggled and circulated, the book attained great popularity and influenced rising young Indians. Savarkar was studying revolutionary methods and he came into contact with a veteran of the Russian Revolution of 1905 who imparted him the knowledge of bomb-making. Savarkar had printed and circulated a manual amongst his friends on bomb-making and other methods of guerrilla warfare.
In 1909, Madan Lal Dhingra, a keen follower and friend of Savarkar, assassinated Sir William Hutt Curzon Wyllie in a public meeting. Dhingra's action provoked controversy across Britain and India, evoking enthusiastic admiration as well as condemnation. Savarkar published an article in which he all but endorsed the murder and worked to organize support, both political and for Dhingra's legal defence.
At a meeting of Indians called for a condemnation of Dhingra's deed, Savarkar protested the intention to condemn and was drawn into a hot debate and angry scuffle with other participants. A secretive and restricted trial and a sentence awarding the death penalty to Dhingra provoked an outcry and protest across the Indian student and political community. Strongly protesting the verdict, Savarkar struggled with British authorities in laying claim to Dhingra's remains following his execution. Savarkar hailed Dhingra as a hero and martyr, and began encouraging revolution with greater intensity.
Arrest in London and Marseille
Case before the Permanent Court of Arbitration
| Savarkar | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Permanent Court of Arbitration |
| Full case name | Arrest and Return of Savarkar (France v. Great Britain) |
| Decided | 24 February 1911 |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting |
M. Beernaert, president, elected by panel Louis Renault Earl of Desart G. Gram Alexander de Savornin Lohman |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Unanimous panel |
The Court held, firstly, that since there was a pattern of collaboration between the two countries regarding the possibility of Savarkar's escape in Marseilles and there was neither force nor fraud in inducing the French authorities to return Savarkar to them, the British authorities did not have to hand him back to the French in order for the latter to hold rendition proceedings. On the other hand, the tribunal also observed that there had been an "irregularity" in Savarkar's arrest and delivery over to the Indian Army Military Police guard.
Trial and Sentence
Prisoner in Cellular Jail in Andaman
A statue of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar at Cellular Jail.
Mercy Petitions
Savarkar applied to the Bombay Government for certain concessions in connection with his sentences. However, by Government letter No. 2022, dated 4 April 1911, his Application was rejected and he was informed that the question of remitting the second sentence of transportation for life would be considered in due course on the expiry of the first sentence of transportation for life.[22]Merely a month after arriving in the Cellular Jail, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Savarkar submitted his first mercy petition on 30 August 1911. This petition was rejected on 3 September 1911 [23]
Savarkar submitted his next mercy petition on November 14, 1913, and presented it personally to the Home Member of the Governor General’s council, Sir Reginald Craddock.[24] In his letter, asking for forgiveness, he described himself as a "prodigal son" longing to return to the "parental doors of the government". He wrote that his release from the jail will recast the faith of many Indians in the British rule. Also he said "Moreover, my conversion to the constitutional line would bring back all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide. I am ready to serve the government in any capacity they like, for as my conversion is conscientious so I hope my future conduct would be. By keeping me in jail, nothing can be got in comparison to what would be otherwise."
In 1917, Savarkar submitted another mercy petition, this time for a general amnesty of all political prisoners. Savarkar was informed on February 1, 1918 that the mercy petition was placed before the British Indian Government.
On 30 March 1920, Savarkar submitted his fourth mercy petition to the British Government,[27] in which he stated that "So far from believing in the militant school of the Bukanin type, I do not contribute even to the peaceful and philosophical anarchism of a Kuropatkin [sic.] or a Tolstoy. And as to my revolutionary tendencies in the past:- it is not only now for the object of sharing the clemency but years before this have I informed of and written to the Government in my petitions (1918, 1914) about my firm intention to abide by the constitution and stand by it as soon as a beginning was made to frame it by Mr. Montagu. Since that the Reforms and then the Proclamation have only confirmed me in my views and recently I have publicly avowed my faith in and readiness to stand by the side of orderly and constitutional development."
In 1920, the Indian National Congress and leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi, Vithalbhai Patel and Bal Gangadhar Tilak demanded his unconditional release. Savarkar signed a statement endorsing his trial, verdict and British law, and renouncing violence, a bargain for freedom.
Jaywant Joglekar, who authored a book euologising Savarkar as 'Father of Hindu Nationalism',considers Savarkar's appeal for clemency a tactical ploy, like Shivaji's letter to Aurangzeb, during his arrest at Agra etc.
However, such claims are disputed by others. The Indian historian Bipan Chandra claimed that post Savarkar's release from jail, he was not an anti-imperialist any longer, and that he accepted the humiliating conditions of his release set forth by the British government, including his non-participation in politics
A portrait of Savarkar was unveiled in the Indian Parliament in 2003.
Restricted Freedom in Ratnagiri
On 2 May 1921, the Savarkar brothers were moved to a jail in Ratnagiri, and later to the Yerwada Central Jail. He was finally released on 6 January 1924 under stringent restrictions – he was not to leave Ratnagiri District and was to refrain from political activities for the next five years. As a political internee in Ratnagiri he demanded an amount of Rs 100 per month. The British Government agreed on a stipend of Rs 60 per month in lieu of his compulsory unemployment. However, police restrictions on his activities would not be dropped until provincial autonomy was granted in 1937.Views
Hindu nationalism
During his incarceration, Savarkar's views began turning increasingly towards Hindu cultural and political nationalism, and the next phase of his life remained dedicated to this cause. In the brief period he spent at the Ratnagiri jail, Savarkar wrote his ideological treatise – Hindutva: Who is a Hindu?. Smuggled out of the prison, it was published by Savarkar's supporters under his alias "Maharatta." In this work, Savarkar promotes a radical new vision of Hindu social and political consciousness. Savarkar began describing a "Hindu" as a patriotic inhabitant of Bharatavarsha, venturing beyond a religious identity.[34][36] While emphasising the need for patriotic and social unity of all Hindu communities, he described Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism and Buddhism as one and the same. He outlined his vision of a "Hindu Rashtra" (Hindu Nation) as "Akhand Bharat" (United India), purportedly stretching across the entire Indian subcontinent. He defined Hindus as being neither Aryan nor Dravidian but as "People who live as children of a common motherland, adoring a common holyland."Scholars, historians and Indian politicians have been divided in their interpretation of Savarkar's ideas. A self-described atheist, Savarkar regards being Hindu as a cultural and political identity. He often stressed social and community unity between Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains, to the exclusion of Muslims and Christians. Savarkar saw Muslims and Christians as "misfits" in the Indian civilization who could not truly be a part of the nation.[39] He argued that the holiest sites of Islam and Christianity are in the Middle East and not India, hence the loyalty of Muslims and Christians to India is divided.
After his release from jail on 6 January 1924. Savarkar helped found the Ratnagiri Hindu Sabha, aiming to work for the social and cultural preservation of Hindu heritage and civilisation.Becoming a frequent and forceful orator, Sarvakar agitated for the use of Hindi as a common national language and against caste discrimination and untouchability.
Another activity he started was to reconvert to Hinduism those who had converted to other faiths. This included the eight members of a Brahmin family named Dhakras who had converted to Christianity. Savarkar re-converted the family at a public function and also bore the marriage expenses of the two daughters in the family.
Focusing his energies on writing, Savarkar authored the Hindu Pad-pada-shahi– a book documenting the Maratha empire – and My Transportation for Life – an account of his early revolutionary days, arrest, trial and incarceration. He also wrote and published a collection of poems, plays and novels. He also wrote a book named Majhi Janmathep ("My Life-term") about his experience in Andaman prison.
WW2, fascism
In many of Savarkar's speeches and writings, he praises Nazi ideology. Savarkar criticized Nehru for opposing Nazism, arguing "Surely Hitler knows better than Pandit Nehru does what suits Germany best". In his 1949 book, Hindu Rashtra Darshan, Savarkar wrote "Nazism proved undeniably the savior of Germany". Savarkar often compared Germany's German majority and Jewish minority as analogous to India's Hindu majority and Muslim minority, though Savarkar never mentions the persecution of Jews in Germany. Savarkar never said that he was a proponent of murder and genocide against minorities, and instead desired peaceful assimilation. Savarkar condemned both German Jews and the Indian Muslims for their supposed inability to assimilate. In 1938, he wrote, "if we Hindus in India grow stronger in time, these Moslem friends of the league type will have to play the part of German Jews." He further added that India "must be a Hindu land, reserved for Hindus".Jews
Savarkar supported the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel, which was not only in the spirit of his nationalism but also what Savarkar saw in the Jewish state as a barricade against the Muslim Arab world.Muslims
Rachel McDermott, Leonard A. Gordon, Ainslie Embree, Frances Pritchett and Dennis Dalton state that Savarkar promoted an anti-Muslim form of Hindu nationalism. Scholar Vinayak Chaturvedi states that Savarkar was known for his anti-Muslim writings. Savarkar saw Muslims in the Indian police and military to be "potential traitors". He advocated that India reduce the number of Muslims in the military, police and public service and ban Muslims from owning or working in munitions factories. Savarkar criticized Gandhi for being concerned about Indian Muslims. Chaturvedi notes that there was a "shift" in Savakar's views: in his earlier writings he argued for "Indian independence from British rule", whereas in later writings he focused on "Hindu independence from Christians and Muslims". In his 1907 Indian War of Independence, Savarkar includes Muslims as heroes. This was omitted in his later writings; his 1925 Hindu-pad-paatshahi included Hindu heroes but not Muslim ones. In his 1963 Six Glorious Epochs, Savarkar says Muslims and Christians wanted to "destroy" Hinduism.Leader of the Hindu Mahasabha
In the wake of the rising popularity of the Muslim League led by Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Savarkar and his party began gaining attraction in the national political environment. Savarkar moved to Bombay and was elected president of the Hindu Mahasabha in 1937, and would serve until 1943. The Congress swept the polls in 1937 but conflicts between the Congress and Jinnah would exacerbate Hindu-Muslim political divisions. Jinnah derided Congress rule as a "Hindu Raj", and hailed 22 December 1939 as a "Day of Deliverance" for Muslims when the Congress resigned en masse in protest when the British India Governor-General declared India's inclusion into World War II for the United Kingdom and its allies against Germany and its allies. Savarkar's message of Hindu unity and empowerment gained increasing popularity amidst the worsening communal climate.Savarkar as president of the Hindu Mahasabha, during the Second World War, advanced the slogan "Hinduize all Politics and Militarize Hindudom", he decided to support the British war effort in India seeking military training for the Hindus. When the Congress launched the Quit India movement in 1942, Savarkar criticised it and asked Hindus to stay active in the war effort and not disobey the government, he urged the Hindus to enlist in the armed forces to learn the "arts of war".[62] Hindu Mahasabha activists protested Gandhi's initiative to hold talks with Jinnah in 1944, which Savarkar denounced as "appeasement." He assailed the British proposals for transfer of power, attacking both the Congress and the British for making concessions to Muslim separatists. Soon after Independence, Dr Shyama Prasad Mookerjee resigned as Vice-President of the Hindu Mahasabha dissociating himself from its Akhand Hindustan plank, which implied undoing partition.
Opposition to Quit India Movement
Under Savarkar, the Hindu Mahasabha openly opposed the call for the Quit India Movement and boycotted it officially. Savarkar even went to the extent of writing a letter titled "Stick to your Posts", in which he instructed Hindu Sabhaites who happened to be "members of municipalities, local bodies, legislatures or those serving in the army...to stick to their posts" across the country, and not to join the Quit India Movement at any cost.Alliance with Muslim League and others
The Indian National Congress won a massive victory in the Indian provincial elections, 1937, decimating the Muslim League and the Hindu Mahasabha. However, in 1939, the Congress ministries resigned in protest against Viceroy Lord Linlithgow's action of declaring India to be a belligerent in the Second World War without consulting the Indian people. This led to the Hindu Mahasabha, under Savarkar's presidency, joining hands with the Muslim League and other parties to form governments, in certain provinces. Such coalition governments were formed in Sindh, NWFP, and Bengal.In Sindh, Hindu Mahasabha members joined Ghulam Hussain Hidayatullah's Muslim League government. In Savarkar's own words,
"Witness the fact that only recently in Sind, the Sind-Hindu-Sabha on invitation had taken the responsibility of joining hands with the League itself in running coalition governmentIn March 1943, Sindh Government became the first Provincial Assembly of the sub-continent to pass an official resolution in favour of the creation of Pakistan. In spite of the Hindu Mahasabha's avowed public opposition to any political division of India, the Mahasabha Ministers of the Sindh government did not resign, rather they simply "contented themselves with a protest"
In the North West Frontier Province, Hindu Mahasabha members joined hands with Sardar Aurangzeb Khan of the Muslim League to form a government in 1943. The Mahasabha member of the cabinet was Finance Minister Mehar Chand Khanna.
In Bengal, Hindu Mahasabha joined the Krishak Praja Party led Progressive Coalition ministry of Fazlul Haq in December, 1941. Savarkar appreciated the successful functioning of the coalition government.
Civil resistance movement
Hindu Mahasabha under the leadership of Savarkar started a civil resistance movement in March 1939. The objective of the Satyagraha was to secure religious and cultural liberty for the Hindus who at that time constituted 86% of total population of Hyderabad State. Many notable people like Senapati Bapat, V. G. Deshpande, Prabhakar Balwant Dani, Madhavrao Mule, took part in it. The Arya Samaj also sent around 10000 civil resisters. At last, on July 19, 1939, the Nizam government announced some political reforms. In the new dispensation, 50% seats were left for non-Muslims.[74] Although Hindus were the majority in the state and Muslims were in minority, Hindu Mahasabha accepted this proposal. They withdrew the movement despite the fact that these reforms for partial reforms. Indian National Congress did not support this movement and called it 'communal' and 'anti-national'.Views on Mahatma Gandhi
Savarkar was an outspoken critic of Mahatma Gandhi. He criticized Gandhi for being a hypocrite as he supported use of violence by the British against Germany during World War II. He also criticized his appeasement of Muslims at the time of Khilafat Movement.In articles from the 1920s to the 1940s Savarkar considered Gandhi as a naive leader who "happens to babble...[about] compassion, forgiveness", yet "notwithstanding his sublime and broad heart, the Mahatma has a very narrow and immature head".
Opposition to the partition of India
The Muslim League adopted the Lahore Resolution in 1940, calling for a separate Muslim state based on the Two-Nation Theory, Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar summaries Savarkar's position, in his Pakistan or The Partition of India as follows,Mr. Savarkar... insists that, although there are two nations in India, India shall not be divided into two parts, one for Muslims and the other for the Hindus; that the two nations shall dwell in one country and shall live under the mantle of one single constitution;.... In the struggle for political power between the two nations the rule of the game which Mr. Savarkar prescribes is to be one man one vote, be the man Hindu or Muslim. In his scheme a Muslim is to have no advantage which a Hindu does not have. Minority is to be no justification for privilege and majority is to be no ground for penalty. The State will guarantee the Muslims any defined measure of political power in the form of Muslim religion and Muslim culture. But the State will not guarantee secured seats in the Legislature or in the Administration and, if such guarantee is insisted upon by the Muslims, such guaranteed quota is not to exceed their proportion to the general population.[76]
Support for Jewish state in Palestine
Savarkar in a statement issued on 19 December 1947, expressed joy at the recognition of the claim of Jewish people to establish an independent Jewish state, and likened the event to the glorious day on which Moses led them out of Egyptian bondage. He considered that justice demanded restoration of entire Palestine to the Jews, their historical holy land and Fatherland. He regretted India's vote at the United Nations against the creation of the Jewish state terming the vote a policy of appeasement of MuslimsWorks
Prime Minister Narendra Modi pays tributes to Savarkar at Parliament of India.
He is also the author of the poems Sagara pran talmalala (O Great Sea, My Heart Aches for the Motherland), and Jayostute (written in praise of freedom). When in the Cellular jail, Savarkar was denied pen and paper. He composed and wrote his poems on the prison walls with thorns and pebbles, memorised thousands lines of his poetry for years till other prisoners returning home brought them to mainland India. Savarkar is credited with several neologisms in Marathi and Hindi, including "Hutatma" (Martyr), "Mahapaur" ( Mayor), Digdarshak (leader or director, one who points in the right direction), Shatkar (a score of six runs in cricket), Saptahik (weekly), Sansad (Parliament), "doordhwani" (telephone), "tanklekhan" (typewriting) among others.[citation needed]
He chaired Marathi Sahitya Sammelan in 1938.
Arrest and acquittal in Mahatma's assassination
A group photo of people accused in the Mahatma Gandhi's murder case. Standing: Shankar Kistaiya, Gopal Godse, Madanlal Pahwa, Digambar Badge. Sitting: Narayan Apte, Vinayak D. Savarkar, Nathuram Godse, Vishnu Karkare
Approver's testimony
Godse claimed full responsibility for planning and carrying out the assassination. However, according to the Approver Badge, on 17 January 1948, Nathuram Godse went to have a last darshan (audience / interview) with Savarkar in Bombay before the assassination. While Badge and Shankar waited outside, Nathuram and Apte went in. On coming out Apte told Badge that Savarkar blessed them "Yashasvi houn ya" ("यशस्वी होऊन या", be successful and return). Apte also said that Savarkar predicted that Gandhi's 100 years were over and there was no doubt that the task would be successfully finished. However Badge's testimony was not accepted as the approver's evidence lacked independent corroboration and hence Savarkar was acquitted.On 12 November 1964, at a religious programme organised in Pune to celebrate the release of Gopal Godse, Madanlal Pahwa and Vishnu Karkare from jail after the expiry of their sentences, Dr. G. V. Ketkar, grandson of Bal Gangadhar Tilak, former editor of Kesari and then editor of "Tarun Bharat", who presided over the function, gave information of a conspiracy to kill Gandhi, about which he professed knowledge six months before the act. Ketkar was arrested. A public furore ensued both outside and inside the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly and both houses of the Indian parliament. Under pressure of 29 members of parliament and public opinion the then Union home minister Gulzarilal Nanda appointed Gopal Swarup Pathak, M. P. and a senior advocate of the Supreme Court of India as a Commission of Inquiry to re-investigate the conspiracy to murder Gandhi. The central government intended on conducting a thorough inquiry with the help of old records in consultation with the government of Maharashtra. Pathak was given three months to conduct his inquiry, subsequently Jevanlal Kapur a retired judge of the Supreme Court of India was appointed chairman of the Commission.
The Kapur Commission was provided with evidence not produced in the court; especially the testimony of two of Savarkar's close aides - Appa Ramachandra Kasar, his bodyguard, and Gajanan Vishnu Damle, his secretary,
Kasar told the Kapur Commission that Godse and Apte visited Savarkar on or about 23 or 24 January, which was when they returned from Delhi after the bomb incident. Damle deposed that Godse and Apte saw Savarkar in the middle of January and sat with him (Savarkar) in his garden.
Justice Kapur concluded: "All these facts taken together were destructive of any theory other than the conspiracy to murder by Savarkar and his group."
Later life and death
Later life and death
After Gandhi's assassination Savarkar's home in Dadar, Mumbai was stoned by angry mobs.[15] After he was acquitted of the allegations related to Gandhi's assassination and released from jail, Savarkar was arrested by the government, for making "militant Hindu nationalist speeches", he was released after agreeing to give up political activities. He continued addressing social and cultural elements of Hindutva. He resumed political activism after the ban on it was lifted, it was however limited until his death in 1966 because of ill health. His followers bestowed upon him honours and financial awards when he was alive. Two thousand RSS workers gave his funeral procession a guard of honour. According to McKean, there was public antipathy between Savarkar and the Congress for most of his political career, yet after independence Congress ministers, Vallabhbhai Patel and C. D. Deshmukh unsuccessfully sought partnership with the Hindu Mahasabha and Savarkar. It was forbidden for Congress party members to participate in public functions honouring Savarkar. Nehru refused to share the stage during the centenary celebrations of the India's First War of Independence held in Delhi. After the independence of India, Jawaharlal Nehru had put forward a proposal to demolish the Cellular Jail in the Andaman and build a hospital in its place.After the death of Nehru, the Congress government, under Prime Minister Shastri, started to pay him a monthly pension.Death
On 8 November 1963, Savarkar's wife, Yamuna, died. On 1 February 1966, Savarkar renounced medicines, food and water which he termed as atmaarpan (fast until death). Before his death he had written an article titled "Atmahatya Nahi Atmaarpan" in which he argued that when one's life mission is over and ability to serve the society is left no more, it is better to end the life at will rather than waiting for death. His condition was described to have become as "extremely serious" before his death on 26 February 1966 at his residence in Bombay (now Mumbai), and that he faced difficulty in breathing; efforts to revive him failed and was declared dead at 11:10 a.m. (IST) that day. Prior to his death, Savarkar had asked his relatives to perform only his funeral and do away with the rituals of the 10th and 13th day of the Hindu faith. Accordingly, his last rites were performed at an electric crematorium in Mumbai's Sonapur locality by his son Vishwas the following day.He was mourned by large crowds that attended his cremation. He left behind a son Vishwas and a daughter Prabha Chiplunkar. His first son, Prabhakar, had died in infancy. His home, possessions and other personal relics have been preserved for public display.There was no official mourning by the then Congress party government of Maharashtra or at the centre.The indifference to Savarkar continued long after his death .
EDITED BY : ASHOK KOUL
SOURCES : WIKIPEDIA & BOOK NAMELY , BHARAT KAY SPAPOOT , AND WAY AMAR HAI BOOKS
No comments:
Post a Comment