Unvarnished Truth

Kalyan Kumar De has done signal service to Bharat by reproducing irrefutable documents from British archives that establish some historical truths. This book is nothing but facts, facts and facts. There is no heresy. These are internal notes, correspondence of British police and military officers and political leaders who were controlling India during the 1940s. It is not a big book; the major reason is that the author has refrained from the urge to express his opinion as a writer and colour reader’s own judgement about the historic days from 1944 to 1947 when the decision to give Independence to India was taken by the British Prime Minister on the orders of the King of United Kingdom.

The exciting part of the book begins with Mahatma Gandhi’s public meeting in 1944 in Pune after he withdrew the ‘Quit India’ agitation in August 1942, and other meetings and interviews during that period. You feel that Congress in 1944 was trying to find a way out of the unsung end of Quit India movement. Gandhi ji too, was trying to figure out his next move.

By November 1945, there is a deep sense of disquiet about the trial of INA (Azad Hind Fauj) soldiers in Red Fort. The British officers are now not sure if it was a good idea to have an open trial of their war criminals. They can sense that people in India are highly disturbed and agitated with this trial. Cracknell in his letter to the Home Department of British GOI notes, “One thing seems clear and that is that sympathy for the INA is not the monopoly of those who are ordinarily against Government. It is equally clear that this particular brand of sympathy cuts across communal barriers.” This letter also talks of Congress taking advantage of this unease and fanning public anger.

On November 26, another officer writes to Field Marshall Wavell, “I am bound to say that I do feel some uneasiness as to the attitude which Indian troops may adopt if called upon to fire on mobs.” On November 27, in another letter where Cunningham writes, “I dislike saying this intensely… that the worse of INA leaders ought to have been shot out of hand. Congressmen—Dr Khan Sahib among them—have said to me, ‘If only they had been shot in Rangoon or Singapore, everyone would have been pleased.” But that feeling has gone and cannot now be revived.” The letters of those times clearly indicate that the unrest was spreading along the length and breadth of India and small agitations and demonstrations were also taking place all over, significantly even in small towns.

A letter of January 1946 mentions the goon behaviour of Muslim League who threatened to ex-communicate Muslims who didn’t vote for Muslims League, not allowing them to marry within the community or buried in community burial grounds. There is mention of Congress exploiting this unrest. This is interesting. Though Congress was exploiting the sentiments arising out of INA trials, it did not wish well for Netaji as subsequent developments have shown. This was being done to use national sentiments for the forthcoming elections of the provincial assemblies. Another British letter says, “Anti-government disorder on a large scale is unlikely until after elections, that is before April since it would not be of interest to Congress.”

By this time, the British were convinced that any harsh punishment to INA officers would result in mass agitations and possible riots. They were talking of commuting the death sentences and reducing penal terms. A February 1946 letter says, “It is no use shutting one’s eyes to the fact that every Indian officer worth his salt is a Nationalist, though this does not mean, as I have said before, that he is necessarily anti-British.” The desperate attempt to keep a balance is seen. Auchinleck’s report of December 1945 is already taking count of a number of British troops available, Royal Air Force fighter planes and so on if a rebellion happened at the mass level. It suggests to the British Government for more British troops in case things deteriorate. There is a palpable fear, “There are now large quantities of unlicensed arms throughout India, and there will be many ex-INA men to use them. There will also be a considerable number of ordinary demobilised soldiers in towns and villages.” […] “We must be prepared to deal with a well organised revolution next Spring, and the possibility of a serious but less well organised rising at any time during the coming winter. […] The situation in India is, therefore, extremely delicate.”

1946 saw the rise of personnel of the Royal Indian Navy rise in rebellion. Bombay (at that time) and Karachi were the major trouble spots. Scores of people were killed, hundreds injured. By February 1946 they were contained. Masses too, had joined them. The total casualties mentioned in the despatches were—228 killed, 1046 wounded; 3 constables killed and 67 members of police injured. No, it was not non-violent. But, the British were severely shaken.

Finally, on March 4, 1946, the British Raj decided to grant Independence to India and a letter was released on March 5 1946. The author surmises that the trials of INA officers eventually brought an end of the British Raj. However, the British also began the process of partitioning India before declaring its intent.

In the epilogue, the Secretary-General of Netaji Subhash Bose—INA trust, Shri Sanjay Choudhry says about Netaji, “His scheme was anchored in the imperative need of education anchored to India’s historical, civilisational and cultural ethos, aimed at producing Indian citizens working towards harmony with other civilisations but dedicated to the best interest of India and service to its people.” It, thus, explodes the myth that Netaji was Left oriented. His own political party’s leftward move into Communist group, thus, goes against Netaji’s philosophy.

It is not easy for any writer, who is witnessing history through historical documents not to get that uplifting or disturbing feeling, and to stop himself from expressing his opinion. But, that is the greatness of Kalyan Kumar De. This is one of the reasons why the reader will find himself glued to these pages and form his/her own opinion. Garuda Publication needs to be lauded for encouraging this kind of literature that helps us decide the truth about history based on facts and not as propagated by pamphleteers masquerading as historians.