ORGANISER played a crucial role in pushing the Congress governments to investigate the mysterious deaths of Lal Bahadur Shastri and Deendayal Upadhyaya. It was investigative journalism par excellence
Governments never answer all the questions with certitude in any political system. Thus, it becomes the duty of journalism to bring forth new facts, and thus, sharpen the analysis of the events. Organiser has played a pivotal role in bringing out alternative facts.
It was done remarkably in the case of mysterious deaths of two important leaders, namely, Lal Bahadur Shastri and Deendayal Upadhyaya. Following a lead left by late Rammanohar Lohia about a suspected “foul play” in the death of Lal Bahadur Shastri, Organiser proceeded in the case. Lohia had examined the available data on Shastriji’s death and he wrote about it in his journal Mankind. Organiser led the investigation further.
In the first report titled ‘Some Unknown Facts about the Mysterious death of Shastri’, the weekly newspaper asked about the whereabouts of some of the people who were present in Tashkent with Shastri. (January 17, 1970) One, Jan Mohammed, a personal bearer of TN Kaul who was then Indian ambassador to Moscow, was missing after the case. Also, R Kapur the security officer in the Tashkent villa where Shastri died in the wee hours of January 11, 1966, namely, was out of the picture soon after the event. The weekly newspaper raised the issue about these individuals’ whereabouts and why they must be examined in front of an enquiry commission.
The Organiser article echoed in the Parliament with members like Raj Narain (SSP), TN Singh (Congress) and Dahyabhai Patel (Swatantra) flagging the issue. Soon the protest gathered with some 50 MPs calling a press conference to demand an enquiry. (April 16, 1970)
One of the closest confidants of Shastri, T N Singh went on the record to say that “I am more than confident that Shastri did not die a natural death”. Shastri’s wife Shrimati Lalita Shastri concurred. In a historic interview she gave to Dharamyug (October 4, 1970) which was reported in Organiser (October 10, 1970), she informed about her suspicion that water in Shastri’s thermos flask had been poisoned.
A series of two crucial reports also came out in Organiser which exposed the anomalies in the medical reports about Shastri’s death. The writer, Dharam Yash Dev, asserted that ‘Refusal to Inquire Shastri’s Death will be Betrayal of Guilty Conscience’. He asked how there were two medical reports and demanded that government must come clean about it. (November 7 & 14, 1971)
These reports in Organiser which were also followed by a few other newspapers pushed for a huge
mobilisation to pressurise the government to come clean on the issue. Finally after a lot of reluctance, a White Paper was brought out that, for its discrepancies Organiser termed as ‘A Black White Paper on Shastriji’s Death’. (December 26, 1970)
Similarly, Organiser played the crucial role of a
whistleblower in the case of mysterious Deendayal
murder. Reports about new evidences and witnesses were persistently printed and new questions were raised. The weekly newspaper also kept a close eye on the functioning of Justice YV Chandrachud Commission and engaged critically with its findings in multiple reports. n
Comments