Tuesday, July 2, 2013

Numbers about Juveniles

National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) has released some important statistics wrt crimes committed by juveniles. Could be useful for essay as well as GS paper 1.

  • Juveniles were involved in 1.2%of the total crimes under IPC.
  • The crime rate among juveniles is 2.3 for every one lakh juveniles and that is the highest since 2002
  • The number of crimes committed by juveniles also rose by 11.2% over 2011 levels.
  • The sexual offences in which juvenile boys are involved has been on the rise since 2002.
  • The number of boys arrested for rape is also the highest since 2002.

Monday, July 1, 2013

Useful numbers about Women

Since Indian Society has been made a part of GS paper 1, it is imperative for the aspirants to keep tab on important reports about elements of society.

 A recent report by WHO has the following important insights:

  • The worst perpetrators of violence against women are those closely related to women.
  • 38% of women who are murdered are killed by their intimate partners; 30% of women worldwide are victims of brutalities perpetrated by their close partners.
  • 35% of all women experience abuse of some form or the other and 42% sustain injuries during their lifetime.
 A shift in the age-old cultural attitudes that entrench power relations between sexes is need of the hour.

Friday, December 7, 2012

South China Sea and India

South China Sea is a part of Pacific Ocean located to the south of the China. Several countries, principally, China, Vietnam claim rights over South China Sea. China has been very vocal and claims the entire South China Sea. This claim has been vehemently opposed by the United States. South China Sea’s strategic importance lies in the fact that it acts as a principal shipping passage connecting Pacific Ocean and Indian Ocean. China’s gaining control over SCS could disrupt this trade route. About 55% of India’s trade with Asia-Pacific transits via SCS. India imports oil from Sakhlin to Mangalore refinery via SCS. The ASEAN nations are wary of the China’s aggression in SCS that could hamper their interests as well.
The attempt of OVL to explore oil in the waters belonging to Vietnam was put to hold, thanks to the pressure imposed and belligerent attitude by the bully China. India has always been a supporter of SCS’s autonomy. To secure its interests, India should build cordial maritime relations with ASEAN countries. India should share its expertise in missile and radar technology with ASEAN countries, most of whom have geared up for modernization of their defence forces.

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Constitution (117th Amendment) Bill



Given the increased focus on current developments in General Studies Mains paper, the conventional information which we go through from books serves just as a background to understand the current developments and questions shall be mostly on the current developments. With this object in mind, I do here present a small write-up on Constitution (117th Amendment) Bill which was introduced in Rajya Sabha on September 5, 2012.
Background
Our constitution has provided for Right to Equality. Article 16(1) says, “There shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the state”. An exception to this is given in article 16(4) which states “the state may reserve any post or appointment in favor of any backward class of citizens who, in the opinion of the State, are not adequately represented in the services under that State. Accordingly, members from scheduled castes and Scheduled Tribes had been provided reservation, including reservation in promotion, in public employment since 1955. However, the Supreme Court, in Indra Sawhney’s case repealed reservation in promotion to SCs/STs (this case also laid down many other important points with regard to reservation in public employment. The other points are beyond the scope of this article). To override this judicial pronouncement, the Government of India brought about “Constitution (77th amendment) Act, 1995” inserting article 16(4A) which read , “nothing in this article shall prevent the state from making provisions of reservation in matters of promotion to any class or classes of posts in the service under the state in favor of scheduled castes or scheduled tribes, which, in the opinion of state, are not adequately represented”. The validity of this amendment along with two other constitutional amendments was challenged in Supreme Court in Nagaraja case. The SC upheld these constitutional amendments but laid down three conditions in the grant of reservation in promotion – ‘backwardness’, ‘inadequacy of representation’ and maintenance of efficiency’.
The contents of the bill
The HCs of Rajasthan and Allahabad struck down the provision of reservation in promotion in these two states by virtue of SC’s judgment in Nagaraja’s case. To override this judicial pronouncement, “Constitution (117th amendment) bill” was introduced. This bill provides that all the SCs/STs notified in the Constitution shall be deemed ‘backward’ and nothing in article 335 (which lays down for balancing reservation with the maintenance of efficiency) shall prevent the state in providing reservation in promotion. The bill also seeks to delete the reference to ‘adequacy of representation’ from article 16(4).
Other Issues
·         The criteria laid down by the SC in Nagaraja’s case seems to be problematic: the establishment of “backwardness” to any community while granting reservation in promotion would introduce indirectly the ‘test of creamy layer’ which is laid down as test of backwardness only to OBCs, but not to SCs/STs by the SC only in Indra Sawhney’s case. The proposed bill seeks to remedy this error by explicitly laying down that all the SCs/STs specified in Constitution shall be deemed ‘backward’.
·         The SC is not clear as to what ‘inadequacy of representation’ mean. According to the text of article 16, it is the duty of state to determine inadequacy of representation. However, the basis to determine this inadequacy has not been laid down in the constitution. Thus, the determination of the basis for determining the inadequacy of representation hinges upon the judicial pronouncements. The SC is also not clear on this aspect. There is no clarity as to if proportional representation would mean adequate representation or is the former irrelevant in arriving at the latter. The proposed amendment seeks to call a halt to this confusion by doing away with the need to determine the adequacy of representation.
·         The need to ‘maintain efficiency’ has been done away with by stating that article 335 is not an impediment.
Arguments
Any attempt to provide reservation in public employment is bound to be welcomed with the cries of ‘loss of efficiency’. One school argues that reservation has nothing to do with the loss of efficiency since it is based on conservative understanding of ‘merit’. The other school argues that the reservation is meant to make ‘unequals equals’ but by providing reservation in promotion, this amendment does the reverse – ‘it treats equals unequally’. Thus, it seeks to bring about ‘equality of outcomes’ in place of ‘equality of opportunity’ as envisaged by the constitution.
Instead of completely doing away with the clause pertaining to maintenance of efficiency, it would have been far more legitimate to argue for a far more meaningful understanding of efficiency before the SC. Removal of test of backwardness could lead to garnering the fruits of reservation by progressive sections of SCs/STs while the sections to whom these fruits are directed are excluded from them. So it would have been more rational had the government sought to formulate the mechanism to reach the most deserving sections of SCs/STs

Friday, September 7, 2012

Nature of Tribal Uprising



Direct questions on tribal uprisings are not likely to be asked in GS. The questions, as you well know, shall mostly be roundabout and expect the candidate to apply his commonsense and analyze the events and present them systematically. This article is an attempt to give the nature of all the tribal uprisings as a whole by identifying the elements common and different among individual uprisings.
By nature of tribal revolts is meant why the tribesmen revolted, against whom they revolted and how they fought. Thus, the nature of the tribal uprisings can be analyzed from the stand-points of reasons, their targets, and the nature of fight engendered.
The most important reason for tribal uprising was the intrusion of outsiders. By intrusion of outsiders is meant the encroachment of outsiders on their lands, their habitats and even to the culture. Santhal rebellion was because of claiming of rights by the colonial government over the habitats of Santhals. Rama revolt of Andhra was also against the forest regulations which led to the loss of their livelihood and habitat. Needless to say the adverse impact of exorbitant land revenues leading to economic distress and consequently Chuar uprising, Munda revolt, Poligars revolt occurred. The intrusion of British into the culture leading to the uprising was testified by the Kandh uprising who rose in revolt against the British efforts to put an end to their practice of human sacrifices. The tribes found it difficult to reconcile with the new way of administration of British and the resulting revolts were of Cutch, Wagheras, Kolis, Ramosis. The exploitation of zamindars and moneylenders as in the case of Santhal uprising, Ahoma uprising (where british tried to capture their land invidiously) and the misconception of development works as in the khasi uprising where the tribesmen opposed construction of a road linking Brahmaputra valley and Sylhet. There were uprisings for the safeguard of religions also – Wahabi movement, Kuka revolt, Farizi revolt, Pagal Panthies.
The uprisings were mostly targeted against British. Santhals and Mundas claimed to set up Santhal Raj and Munda Raj respectively. Even Faraizis set up a parallel government. The rebellion of Raja of Vizianagaram and Diwan Velu Tampi were also against British. But Santhal rebellion was equally against zamindars who invidiously made Santhals their slaves by charging exorbitant interests for the loans borrowed. They disgraced Santhal women as well.
The nature of fight was mostly with traditional weapons like Bows & arrows, axes, swords etc. They were no match to the sophisticated weaponry of British Raj. However, their ferocity deserves appreciation.
To summarize, tribal uprisings were revolts of tribesmen who fought mostly against British to counter the latter’s invasion into former’s habitat and these revolts were quelled by the British using sophisticated arms.

Thursday, September 6, 2012

Constitutional Development


Constitutional Development during British India is an important component of both Polity and History. However, this section poses constant challenge to the readers since it involves so many provisions to memorize. This write-up seeks to overcome this problem by attempting to explain the various acts in the light of trends inherent in their provisions. First- provisions, then trends. Focus more on the latter section.
Regulating Act (1773)
Regulating Act was passed in 1773 on the basis of recommendations of a select committee appointed by the British Government to look into the Indian affairs of East India Company in the light of raising public opinion in England questioning the moral right of East India Company (EIC), a commercial enterprise to govern people. The grant of increase in dividend (12.5%) to the shareholders of EIC when the latter was reeling under debts and the application of loan by EIC to the British Government were two immediate causes for the appointment of committee.
This act sought to restrict the franchise to elect the directors of EIC only to those shareholders with £1000 for the preceding 12 months and the tenure of the directors was increased form one year to four years with 25% of the directors retiring each year. The EIC was mandated to submit a copy of all correspondence from India to the government. The Governor-general of Bengal was provided with a council of 4 members and the former could not overrule the majority view of the latter except when the opinion would be divided. The governors of Bombay and madras were required to offer due obedience to the Governor of Bengal except during Emergency and with respect to the orders directly received by them from the company. A supreme court was set up in Calcutta to try the British residents in India. The jurisdiction of court was also extended to the servants of the company employed in India. The employees of EIC were barred from accepting gifts from anyone.
The Regulating Act attracted criticisms from many corners. It was criticized for imprecise demarcation of power among the Governor-General, his council and SC. Not surprisingly, this act provided a fertile ground of conflict between Governor-General and SC. The Governor General was placed at the mercy of his council members since the latter’s majority view always prevailed. The jurisdiction of the SC with respect to servants of the company was confusing. Who constituted the ‘servant of company’ was unclear.
However, it is to be noted that these shortcomings pertain to the contents of the Act; but not to its spirit. The spirit of the act was noble and it marked the beginning of the constitutional system in British India. It is also a landmark in the transition of power from the company to the British Government.
Judicature Act (1781)
This Act sought to remove the defects of Regulating Act specifically with respect to the jurisdiction of SC. The Public Servants, Revenue Collectors, judicial officers Governor-General and his executive council were exempted from the jurisdiction the SC with respect to the discharge of responsibilities in their official capacity. It was also decided, to apply the law applicable to the defendant, which was not specified in the previous act. Governor-General was empowered to make rules and regulations applicable to the provincial courts without registering with the SC.
Since this Act does not deal with any of the administrative manners, it is not very important for us.
Pitts India Act (1784)
The Pitts India Act sought to increase the control of the government over the Indian affairs of EIC. A Board of Control was appointed with six members – Chancellor of Exchequer and Secretary of State (British Cabinet ministers) and four members of Privy Council. A committee of secrecy consisting of three directors was appointed to replace the court of directors in political and military matters. However, the directors were to retain control over the appointments made by the company. The Governor-General’s Council was reduced to three members to strengthen the position of Governor-General. The appointment of Governor-general by the directors was to be made with the approval of Crown.
Charter Act of 1793
This Act sought to consolidate all the previous laws passed by the British Parliament with respect to EIC’s Indian affairs. This Act renewed the right of the EIC to do business in India was renewed for next 20 years. The Governor-General’s veto power, control over Bombay and Madras presidencies was reaffirmed. The EIC was mandated to pay Rs. 5 lakhs towards the liquidation of its debts and a similar amount towards increasing dividend from 8 to 10%. And the payment of the staff and paid members of the Board of Control was to be made out of Indian revenues.
Charter Act of 1813
This act suspended the monopoly of Company over trade in India. However, its monopoly over traded in China was extended to 20 more years. Thus, trade in India was thrown open to all merchants in England. The EIC was mandated to charge expenses relating to maintenance of troops in India, payment of interest and the expenses relating to civil administration, upon the revenues from India in the same order as mentioned here. The Company was authorized to make rules for Indian troops and to hold court-martials. The striking features of this Act were the provision of Rs. 100000 p.a. towards the promotion of religious learning and education among Indians and the training of civil and military servants.
Charter Act of 1833
The monopoly of EIC in any form was repealed. The Indian Government was to service the debts of the EIC out of Indian revenues and the shareholders were promised 10.5% dividend for the next 40 years. Board of Control was dissolved but its President was made the Minister for Indian Affairs. The Governor-General of Bengal was made the Governor-General of India and the presidencies of Bombay, Bengal and Madras and other possessions were placed under the control of Governor-General. The Central Government was made responsible both for raising revenue and making expenditure. The Central Government was empowered to promulgate laws for the entire India and a law commission was set up to undertake codification of laws. A law member was inducted to the Governor-General’s Council for legislative purposes. The Indians were permitted to be appointed in the Government.
Charter Act, 1853
The Governor-General of India was divested of is responsibilities as Governor of Bengal. The Law member of the Governor-General council was made a full-time member. Each province in the central legislature was represented by an official. Competitive exams were introduced to fill up vacancies.

 TRENDS
The Constitutional development between 1773 and 1853 can be analyzed in the light of two variables – degree of control of East India Company over the affairs of India and the degree of centralization in the Indian administration.
·         A trend towards phase by phase transfer of control over Indian affairs from the EIC to the British Government can be observed. In Regulating Act, only the correspondence from India was to be submitted to the government. Then was enacted Pitts India Act which introduced board of control nominated by the government was assigned the superintendence, control and direction of Indian affairs of EIC in addition to the board of directors of the latter. The Charter Act of 1793 increased the financial control of the Government over company since the latter was mandated to set aside Rs. 5 lakh out of its surplus towards servicing its debts and a similar amount to increase the dividend from 8% to 10%. The Charter Act of 1813 further tightened the financial control over the company’s Indian affairs. The charges on the company’s Indian revenue were laid down in the order of priority – military expenses, interest payments and civil administration expenses. The powers of Board of Control were also widened. This act, to some extent, increased the power of EIC in that the latter was allowed to make rules of rules for Indian troops and to hold court-martials. The monopoly of EIC to trade in India was ended. The commercial functions of EIC were totally ended by the Charter Act of 1833.The patronage of Directors in appointments was restricted. Prospective employees to the extent of two times the vacancies are to be nominated by the Directors to the Hailey-bury College and the top performers shall be appointed. The patronage of the directors was completely taken away since all the appointments were to be made by competitive exams. Thus, EIC which was once supreme controller of its Indian affairs prior to 1773 was rendered virtually powerless by 1853-Charter Act.
·         The degree of centralization also proceeded phase by phase. The Regulating Act made the governors of presidencies subordinate to Governor-General of Bengal who was to act according to the majority view of the council. The Pitts India Act empowered the Governor-General to overrule the majority view of council. The Charter Act of 1833 did away with Governor-General of Bengal and he was made the Governor-General of India. All possessions of company in India and all presidencies were placed under him. The Central government was authorized to raise revenues and monitor the expenditure. The Central Government was also vested with power to make laws for the entire country. Thus, the decentralization of powers across three presidencies were centralized as time went by.






Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Indian National Movement – A panorama



Indian national movement is a crucial part in General Studies. Enough material on the subject is available. However, given the quantum of material, it is very hard for any aspirant to read everything at one-go. But, the twist lies in the fact that reading the whole movement at one stretch is required to clearly understand the conditions and changing circumstances that guided the course of the freedom struggle. This article gives you the entire national movement in just a few pages driving a wedge between brevity and adequacy of the content.
Any national movement is a struggle to liberate the nation from foreign yoke. As you know, Indian national movement is a struggle to drive British out of India. The genesis of national movement lies in the emergence of Indian nationalism. The emergence of nationalism was two-pronged. On the one hand, it was due to discontentment over the exploitative nature of British rule which ruined the lives of peasants, artisans and others and thereby draining Indian of her wealth and putting Indian economy in tatters. Lytton’s enactment of two infamous acts – Vernacular Press Act and Arms Act and the repeal of Ilbert Bill at the instance of British disillusioned Indian to the fact that their interests shall not be safeguarded where English interests are involved. On the other hand, it was due to the exposure of Indian youth to the western principles of liberty, constitutionalism, parliamentary democracy and the propagation of the same to masses via the development of press. The contribution of socio religious reform movements can be hardly overemphasized.
The growth of Indian nationalism resulted in the formation of an all-India level organization Indian national Congress (INC) in 1885 to further Indian interests. The INC was set up a retired ICS officer AO Hume. Many theories revolve around the formation of INC. While one theory contends that it was set up by Hume to give a ‘safe valve’ to the expression of Indian discontentment, the other its origin to the efforts made by theosophists to engender a national level organization. However, present historians tend to view the formation of INC as a logical culmination of the nationalism that grew in the aftermath of 1857-revolt.
The INC was dominated by leaders, popularly called Moderates, for the first two decades. The moderates nursed a sense of loyalty to the British crown and regarded it to be boon to India. Their assumption was British wanted to be just to Indians but were not aware of realities. So they believed that creation of public opinion about issues and lucid presentation of the same to British could bring about reforms. Their main demands were ‘dominion status to India’ and ‘inclusion of more and more Indians in administration’. Their approach to struggle was epitomized in “three P’s – Prayer, petition and protest”. However they did not taste much success and the British paid no heed to their prayers. Their approach was criticized as “Political Mendicancy”. However, it is to be noted that moderates laid a solid foundation for national movement. As rightly, they sowed the seeds of nationalism well and deep. They educated the people in political agitation and exposed the economic exploitation of British rule. The important moderate leaders include Dadbhai Naoroji, Surendernath banerjea, Badruddin Tyabji, Pherozshah Mehta etc.
The methods adopted by Moderates did not go well with younger leaders with INC. The non-inclusion of demands of Moderates in Indian Councils Act, 1892 coupled with the reactionary policies of Curzon (Calcutta Corporation Act of 1899, Indian Universities Act of 1904 and Official Secrets Act of 1904) had disillusioned the people of workability of moderates’ methods. Then came the issue of Partition of Bengal. Lord Curzon announced the partition of Bengal in 1903 under the pretext of administrative convenience. However the real motive was to break Hindu-Muslim unity in Bengal. Moderates launched campaign against the partition of Bengal but failed to prevent the proposal. Finally, the partition was notified in early 1905. A resolution to boycott the British goods to protest the partition was taken in August 1905. The partition of Bengal was effected on 16-Oct-1905. That day was observed as a day of mourning in Bengal. Hindus and muslims tied Rakhi to each other to signal the bond of solidarity. Bande Mataram became the theme song. At the Benaras Congress Session, the young leaders of INC led by LAL-BAL-PAL and Aurbindo Gosh, popularly called Extremists, got the resolution of Swadeshi passed despite the opposition from Moderates. Swadeshi program include the boycott of foreign goods and usage of Indian goods instead. It also involved the boycott of foreign institutions like schools, colleges, courts. National colleges sprang up. Arrangement to deliver technical, literary education in Bengali was made. Many traditional imaginative festivals like durga pooja in Bengal, Ganesha Chaturthi in Maharastra were revived. With the progress of the swadeshi movement, the differences between extremists and moderates also widened. This discordance culminated in the split of INC which is popularly known as “Surat Split” in 1907. Later, the swadeshi movement became leaderless when TILAK was arrested and transported to Mandaley, Aurbindo Gosh and B.C.Pal retired from active politics. The Swadeshi movement saw a natural end. But, it had introduced a new form of struggle –Passive Resistance.
This period contemporarily witnessed the raise of revolutionary terrorism. In Maharastra, Vasudeva Balwant Phadke resorted to dacoits of zamindars and for some time created terror in the hearts of zamindars of Maharastra. He started off a movement called Ramoshis. The Chapekar brothers – Balakrishna and Damodar- killed the then plague commissioner W.C.Rand and his assistant Ayerest. Savarkar brothers set up ‘Mitra Mela’ which was later to be rechristened as ‘Abhinav bharat’. V.D.Savarkar went to London and became active in ‘India House’ set up by Shyamji Krishnaverma. Savarkar started revolutionary activities from there. His brother Ganesh Savarkar was arrested on petty charge of sedition by the then District-Collector of Nasik Jackson at the instance of Sir Curzon-Waillie. VD savarkar resolved to avenge bothe the officers. Madhan Lal Dhingra shot Curzon-Waillie dead iin London and was hanged there only. One of the members of Abhinav Bharat in India, Ananth Lakshman Karkare shot Jackson dead. VD Savarkar was sentenced to 50 years imprisonment. The revolutionary activities in Bengal revolve around Anushilan Samithi established by Barin Gosh, brother of Aurbindo Gosh and an inner circle of Anushilan Samithi ‘Yuganthar’. Barin Gosh had set up bomb manufacturing unit at Maniktala in Kolkata. This group planned to execute the infamous magistrate Kingsford and the task was entrusted to Khudiram Bose and Prafulla Chaki. They hurled a bomb at horse carriage believed to carry Kingsford, but two ladies were killed instead. Chaki shot himself dead. Khudiram Bose was hanged at barely 18. The police raided the maniktala bomb factory, thanks to a traitor and arrested 37 revolutionaries who were sentenced to varying punishments ranging from ten years’ imprisonment to Death sentence. This episode came to be called Alipore Bomb Conspiracy. The revolutionaries killed Narain Gosain who had turned approver in this case. They also killed a public prosecutor, Deputy Superintendent of police and a police officer connected with the Alipore Bomb conspiracy. Bagha Jatin who was not arrested in the alipore bomb conspiracy took over the reins of ‘Yuganthar’ and planned to conduct pan-India revolt in 1915 with the help of Germany. This came to be called Indo-German Conspiracy. However, this plan was also foiled and Bagha Jatin died in September 1915. The members of ‘Bengal Volunteers’, Benoy Basu, Badal Gupta, Dinesh Chandra Gupta killed a prisons officer named Simpson. Benoy shot himself dead, Badal took cyanide and Dinesh was hanged. This came to be known as Benoy-Badal-Dinesh martyrdom. The revolutionary activity was not confined to India but extended beyond India. In London, Shyamji Krishnavarma set up ‘India House’ as a hub of revolutionary activities and he ran a newspaper ‘Indian Sociologist’. In Paris, Madam Bhikaji Cama ran a revolutionary newspaper ‘Bande mataram’. She attended socialist conference as Indian representative along with Sardar Rana. She had the credit of unfurling Indian flag for the first time outside India. In Berlin, Veerendranatha Chattopadhyaya took the lead of revolutionary activities and he ran a newspaper “Talwar”. In san Francisco, “Hind Association of Asia Pacific”, popularly known as “Ghadr Party” was established. It was an organization of Sikhs who had migrated to US and Canada. The Ghadr party had planned for an all India uprising on 21-Feb-1915 but the attempt was foiled.
In 1916, Lucknow pact was signed which brought together moderates and extremists on the one hand and INC and Muslim League on the other.
Political activity halted for quite some time before it was revived by Tilak and Annie Besant in Home rule movement. The home rule movement was about demanding self-rule for India. Two leagues were set up – one at Poona by Tilak which spread across Central Province, Bombay presidency except Bombay and Karnatka. Annie Besant’s League was head quartered in Adyar, madras which spread throughout the India. Tilak toured India and urged people to be a part of home rule movement. Annie Besant also toured India and spread the message through ‘Commonweal’ and ‘Free India’. The government came down heavily and imposed about Rs. 20000 penalty on both of them. The government spoke of reforms and the movement lost its strength in the light of the anticipation of reforms.
The Montagu-Chelmsford reforms were eyewash. The INC declared these reforms to be disappointing and unsatisfactory. In order to curb any dissenting over reforms, the government enacted Rowlatt Act which empowered the government to detain and sentence the people without trial. By this time, Gandhiji had emerged on the national scene and was successful in Champaran and Kheda. Gandhiji called for a nationwide bandh opposing the Rowlatt Act and the bandh was observed on April 6, 1919. An unfortunate event in Amritsar happened in the meanwhile. The Government of Punjab arrested the popular leaders of Punjab – Satyapal and Saifuddin Kitchlew. People protested for their release and violence erupted and a few were killed. Curfew was imposed in Amritsar. Unaware of the curfew, people planned for a meeting at Jalianwall Bagh in Amritsar to condole the deaths on April 13, 1919. About 20000 people had gathered. General O’Dyer came with the army and opened fire on the unarmed crowd without warning. This heinous incident came to be known as ‘Jallianwall Bagh massacre’ in the history of India. Rabindranath Tagore renounced his Knighthood in protest. British government appointed Hunter commission to investigate into the excesses and it was merely eyewash. Gandhi demanded strict action against the perpetrators of violence.
At the same time, Khilfat issue also cropped up. Khilfat movement was the resentment of the Indian muslims to the stripping off the sultan of Turkey, Caliphate, the politico-religious leader of Islam, of the control over religious places by the Britain as a result of Britain’s victory over the Axis powers of which Turkey was a part. Mohammad Ali and Shaukat Ali launched Khilafat movement and demanded British to restore the control over religious places to sultan of turkey. Gandhiji supported the movement with the view of cementing Hindu-Muslim unity. The congress also supported Khilafat movment. Gandhiji placed two demands before the British – to punish the perpetrators of Jallianwalla bagh tragedy and to resolve the Khilafat issue. Non-cooperation movement was launched when the British government did not heed the Gandhiji’s demand. Non-cooperation movement involved the boycott of foreign goods and usage of swadeshi and boycott government institutions. Charaka was popularized. National schools came up. Gandhiji renounced “Kaiser-i-Hind”. Gandhiji also announced to launch civil disobedience since the government refused to release political prisoners held during the movement. But the movement was brought to an abrupt end when about 22 policemen were torched in police station at Chauri Chaura. Gandhiji was pained by violence and dismissed the movement. Gandhiji was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment.
Now, a new controversy erupted in congress about contesting 1923-elections. A group led by CR Das and Motilal Nehru urged to contest election and to wreck the functioning of council from within. But another group led by Sardar Patel and Rajendra Prasad and others wanted the congress to focus on constructive work and not to contest elections. Group led by CR Das and Motilal Nehru went ahead and established a separate party called “Swaraj” party. Swaraj party contested in elections and won 42 out of 141 seats in central legislature. It fared well in Central Provinces, Bombay Presidency and Bengal. The party legislators did remarkable work and outvoted a few budget proposals. It also stalled the ill Public Safety. However, the Swaraj could not fare well in 1926 elections, thanks to the split within the party and the sad demise of CR Das.
The Simon Commission visited India 1927 to assess the working of Government of India Act, 1919. The Commission was to decide the political future of India since it was to recommend further constitutional reforms to India in the light of the working 1919 act. The commission was boycotted since it consisted of only Englishmen, no Indian. The Simon commission was greeted with black flags wherever it went. Lala Laj Pat Rai succumbed to the injuries which he sustained during lathicharge at anti-simon protest.
Responding to wide spread campaign against Simon commission, Lord Birkenhood justified the government stand of excluding Indians from the commission and openly challenged Indian to come up with a constitution agreeable to all. All Parties Conference was convened and a committee headed by Motilal Nehru was constituted to draft a constitution agreeable to all. The Nehru report proposed for Dominion Status, reservation for Muslims in provinces where they were in minority, a federation with residuary powers vested in Union Government and provision of fundamental rights. Consensus could not be evolved on Nehru report since Md. Ali Jinnah proposed three amendments – residuary powers to provinces, one-third reservation to Muslims in Central Legislature and reservation to Muslims in all provincial legislatures. These amendments were not agreed by Hindu Mahasabha and Nehru report failed to meet the challenge of Birkenhood.
During the second half of 1920s, revolutionary activities were revived. In Punjab, Hindustan Socialist Republican Association was formed. It carried out Kakori robbery and Ramprasad Bismil was hanged. Then Bhagat Singh shot dead Saunders responsible for the death of Lala Lajpat Rai. Bhagat Singh and Bathukeshwar Dutta threw bomb at Central legislature when ‘Public Safety bill’ was being discussed. They were arrested. In the jail, the revolutionaries went on hunger strike condemning the inhumane conditions at the prison. Jatin Das died on the 64th day of fast. In Bengal, Surya Sen carried out Chittagong Armoury raid. There were two brave women in his camp- Kalpana Dutta and Preetilata Waddedar. Surya Sen was hanged.
In 1930-Lahore Congress Session, article 1 of INC constitution was amended to widen the meaning of SWARAJ to mean complete independence. On Dec 31, 1929 midnight, tricolor flag was hoisted on the banks of R.Ravi. Jan 26,1930 was observed as Independence Day throughout the country. People took pledge to sever ties with British since they considered to be a crime against man and god to submit to British rule any longer. At Lahore session, a resolution to launch Civil Disobedience movement was adopted and Gandhiji was made in-charge of this movement.
Gandhiji placed 11 demands before Lord Irwin. When the latter, refused to accede to these demands, he launched Civil Disobedience movement. Gandhiji marched from his Sabarmati Ashram to Dandi with 78 satyagrahis and broke salt law on April 12, 1930. Civil Disobedience movement spread to nook and corner of the country. In the meantime, first Round Table Conference (RTC) was held. And INC did not participate. Any political settlement for India without INC would lack moral authority. Then, Gandhi-Irwin pact was signed to persuade Gandhiji to attend second RTC. The government agreed to release all political prisoners not convicted of violence, restore the confiscated property, remit the fines due, permit the production of salt for domestic consumption by coastal people etc. On the other hand, Gandhiji agreed to suspend CDM and attend second RTC. Second RTC talks also failed. The government had failed to keep up its terms of Gandhi-Irwin pact. Gandhiji revived the CDM which was not as successful as the first phase.
Gandhiji was pained by grant of communal award to depressed classes. Gandhiji started fast unto death demanding the repeal of Communal award to depressed classes. Poona Pact was signed between Gandhiji and Ambedkar whereby the joint electorate with reservation of seats to depressed classes to the extent of 18% was agreed.
Then came the passage of Government of India Act, 1935. Its main provisions were abolition of Dyarchy at provinces and institution of the same at the center. The Act disappointed the INC. Nehru went to the extent of calling the act a car without engine but only brakes. However, the INC decided to contest 1937 provincial elections. It witnessed the resounding victory in the majority of provinces and Congress ministries were formed.
However, World War 2 broke out in 1939. On the question of Indian support to Britain in the war, the opinion was divided among congressmen. Gandhiji advocated full support to Britain. Subash Chandra Bose and other radicals saw was as an opportunity to wrest independence from the British and thus recommended an immediate mass movement. Nehru favored no support to the Britain. He also disfavored launching an immediate movement. The British made India, party to the war without consulting the latter. Congress ministries in seven provinces resigned.
In 1940, Muslim League passed a resolution for a separate state- Pakistan. This was to complicate the matters relating to the transfer of power to Indians in the days to come.
With the victorious march of Hitler and Japan taking possession of South-Eastern colonies of Britain, Indian help in war became crucial. The British government sent Cripps mission to break constitutional deadlock and seek India’s support to Britain. Cripps mission offered dominion status to India. The INC rejected the offer. Gandhiji termed it “post-dated cheque drawn on sinking bank”.
With the failure of Cripps mission, Quit India movement was spelt out on August 8, 1942 exhorting the British transferring power to Indians immediately and quit. Gandhiji called upon the people to do or die. All leaders were arrested in the wee hours of August 9, 1942. People were left leaderless. People ran amuck. Railway stations, Police stations, Post Offices were attacked, telegraph lines were cut. The movement witnessed the most serious revolt since 1857 revolt.
Simultaneously, SC Bose took charge of INA (an army of Indian Prisoners of war conceived by Mohan Singh). With the British Support, INA took control of Andaman and Nicobar Island and marched to occupy the Manipur. However, the army ran shortage of food and ammunition. The setbacks faced by Japan in the great war upset the prospects of INA. About 7000 INA soldiers were taken as war prisoners. SC Bose mysteriously died in an air crash (the death of SC Bose is a matter of controversy). The INC came to the help of INA soldiers and many of them were finally released.
The proposals of Rajagopalachari formula, Desai-Liaqat plan and Wavell plan to resolve constitutional deadlock in India failed. Then came the Cabinet Mission plan. Accordingly, the idea of Pakistan was rejected. Indian provinces were grouped into three ‘sections’. A three-tier executive – at provincial, sectional and union level was proposed. The constituent assembly was to be formed by the members of provisional legislative assemblies by means of proportional representation. The members of each group were to sit separately to draft constitution to their provinces and if possible to their groups. Then all the members were to sit together to draft constitution for the union. The Union government was to be in charge of defence, communication and external affairs. The provinces will have the right to secede from a group after first general election and to call for a reconsideration of provincial or even national constitution after 10 years. Bothe League and INC accepted the plan. However, a controversial press statement by Nehru made Jinnah to withdraw his acceptance. Muslim League called for Direct Action and about 5000 Hindus were killed on a single day (Aug 16, 1945). Nehru formed Interim Government. Even Muslim League joined the government but continued direct action. It made the working of Government impossible and it also boycotted the first meeting of constituent assembly.
On Feb 20, 1947, Clement Atlee, then PM of Britain announced the withdrawal of British for India on or before June, 1948. He appointed Lord Mountbatten the new Viceroy of India and assigned him the responsibility of bringing consensus between INC and Muslim League. Mountbatten plan includes – the Muslim and Hindu members of Bengal and Punjab would separately vote for partition and if either of the two groups favored partition with simple majority, then these two provinces would be partitioned. The Sindh will take its own decision. Referendum will be held in Sylhet and NWFP. In case the partition was to be effected, two constituent assembles would be formed and a boundary commission be set up to demarcate the border. This plan also ruled out the independence of princely states. They must either join India or Pakistan. This plan also ruled out Hyderabad joining Pakistan. This plan was accepted by both INC and Muslim League. It was incorporated in India Independence Act, 1947. Pakistan was created on August 14, 1947 and India on August 15, 1947.