Veer Savarkar - The loyal son

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Why Savarkar?

The first person to burn down the first lot of foreign made clothes against the Bengal partition movement on the October 1905 Pune. Bal Gangadhar Tilak offered full support to Savarkar here.

Ironically approx 16 years later July 1921, Gandhi called for a boycott of foreign clothes in Mumbai.

The only Patriot who called for a boycott of the coronation festival of edward the seventh.

The first Patriot known for his opposition to the condolence proposal for queen victoria at Nasik.

The first Indian who was rusticated from ferguson College in Pune and fined ₹ 10 later in Kesri Bal Gangadhar Tilak wrote editorial in Savarkar's support.

Savarkar the only barrister who after clearing exam refused reading the oath of being faithful to britfags and for this reason was not awarded the title of a barrister.

Savarkar was the first author whose work, "1857, the first war of independence," was banned before it was even published! Bhagat Singh was the first person to get the book printed in India at his own payment. Each copy was sold at ₹ 300 very high price at that time.

Savarkar was the first revolutionary whose litigation had gone to the International Court but due to the combined conspiracy of the britfags french was unable to get Justice.

Savarkar was born leader and extremly influential that even the son of marx agreed to fight his case.

Savarkar who after suffering imprisonment from the britfags for 30 years pre independence. He was again imprisoned by nehru in 1948 on the false charge of Gandhi's murder but was forced to free him when the Court found out he was falsely implicated.

Some fake claims about Savarkar. We will demolish those one by one.

1) Wrong claim about the Savarkar giving the title of Veer to himself?

Savarkar faces from the noobs this ridiculous claim is that he wrote a biography of himself in 1926 posing as someone by the name of Chitragupta and glorified himself in it to no end. It wasn’t known until 1987 when the publisher revealed that Chitragupta was infact Savarkar himself. We will check the reality of this.


‘Life of Barrister Savarkar’ was published from Madras by G. Paul & Co publishers. There is no mention about author’s identity in that book & it’s preface is given below.

There in no mention of word ‘ Veer’ in this book. So the allegation that Savarkar was hailed as veer for the first time in this book is false irrespective of whoever had written this book.

The 2 nd edition is published in 1986 and it is not published by it’s first original publishers. The claim that it was written by Savarkar himself comes from the second publisher of the book, Dr. Ravindra Ramdas. No references were provided by him in preface to support the statement. It was definitely a very unusual statement to make 60 years after 1st edition published.

Source :

https://archive.org/details/life_of_barrister_savarkar_by_chitragupta/page/n5/mode/2up

The 1st edition which was published by G. Paul & co publication, it’s preface was different & the 2nd edition in 1986 which is published by Ramdas has different preface which without any reference claims that chitragupta was Savarkar.

The title ‘Veer’ was famous even in 1924’s. Savarkar biography SwatantryaVeer’ Vinayakrao Savarkar is from 1924 by Sadashiv Rajaram Ranade, preface by N.C. Kelkar in which he is referred by this title ‘Veer’ two years before the book ‘Life of Barrister Savarkar’.

Source

https://archive.org/details/swatantraveersavarkarsadashivarajaramranade/page/n1/mode/2up

And even revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh praised Savarkar by calling him by that title..



See the post for more details


https://rediscoveringsavarkar.wordpress.com/2022/11/24/savarkar-and-bhagat-singh/



Next, We then found an Advertisement for the following book in the Bombay Chronicles of July 1927. The ad was asking people to order the book. Now upon reading the ad carefully you gonna come across the term, “The story of the life of this famous patriot written by a close friend…”

The ad in this newspaper clearly states that the Life of Barrister Savarkar was not the work of Savarkar himself but rather one of his associates. The ad was published by B.G Paul and Co, who had an extensive publishing service in Madras, from books related to religion and philosophy they covered many genres. Since Savarkar was not allowed to leave Ratnagiri because of his house arrest. It was totally impossible for him to get a book published that far away. So who was his close friend who could have been in madras?

It could be VVS Aiyyer or Rajagopalachari from Madras presidency who published this book. Moreover Savarkar was in house arrest in Ratnagiri that time.

So the conclusion is

1. ‘Life of Barrister Savarkar’ was not written by V D Savarkar

2. It is not in that book Savarkar was praised by Veer title for the first time

3. Infact there is no word like ‘Veer’ in that book.


To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

2) So called historians desperately try to make a narrative which places Bhagat Singh against Savarkar. Let’s check the reality.

The claim is that Bhagat singh never written any petition but Savarkar has..Bhagat singh has given death penalty but Savarkar was given 50 year imprisonment.. It is illogical to rot inside a place like Kalapaani infinitely. So the only way was to write petitions, which was a legally available rights for a prisoner..


Bhagat Singh considered Savarkar as hero and he has written eulogizing articled in ‘Mattwala’ and ‘Kriti’ magazine.


In 1924 he has written an article known as ‘Vishwaprem’ in ‘ mattwala’ magazine in which he praises Savarkar by calling ‘veer’ (Brave)


Source :


Complete available documents of Bhagat Singh and his associates


https://archive.org/details/bhagat-singhs-writings-in-hindi-pdfdrive.com


‘World-lover
is the hero whom we do not hesitate a little to call a fierce insurgent, staunch
anarchist—the same heroic Savarkar. Coming in the wave of world-love, he used
to stop walking on the grass thinking that the soft grass would be mowed under
the feet.’

And again in 1928 Bhagat singh has written an article in kirti magazine im which he describes the bond between Madan Lal Dhingra and Savarkar.


In that also Bhagat singh praised Savarkar by calling ‘Veer’..


“The impact of the Swadeshi movement reached England as well and Mr. Savarkar opened a house called ‘Indian House’. Madanlal also became its member. …. One day, Mr. Savarkar and Madanlal Dhingra were talking for a long time. In a test of daring to give up his life, Savarkar pierced a big needle inn his hand by asking Madanlal to lay his hands on the ground, but Punjabi Veer did not even say ah. Tears filled the eyes of both. The two hugged each other. Ouch, how beautiful that time was. How invaluable and indelible that teardrop was! How beautiful that match was ! so glorious! What should we know about that emotion, what cowardly people who are afraid of even the thought of death, know how high, how holy and how revered are those who die for the sake of the nation!


From the next day, Dhingra did not go to the Indian House of Savarkar and attended the Indian students’ meeting organized by Sir Col. Wylie. Seeing this, the boys of the Indian house got very agitated and started calling him traitors, even traitor, but their anger was reduced by Savarkar saying that after all he had tried to even break his head to run our house. And due to his hard work, our movemet is going on, so we should thank him! Well, some days passed quietly.


On July 1, 1909, there was a meeting at the Jahangir Hall of the Imperial Institute. Sir Curzon Wylie also went there. He was talking to two other people that Dhingra suddenly pulled out a pistol. He was put to sleep forever. Then after some struggle Dhingra was caught. What to say after that, there was a worldwide cry!. Everyone started abusing Dhingra wholeheartedly. His father sent a telegram from Punjab and said that I refuse to accept such rebel, rebellious and murderous man as my son. The Indians held large meetings. There were big speeches, big proposals moved. All in blasphemy. But even at that time Savarkar was the hero who favored him openly. At first, he offered an excuse for not letting the motion pass against him that he is still on trial and we cannot call him guilty. Finally, when the vote was taken on this proposal, the Speaker of the House, Mr. Bipinchandra Pal, was saying that if it is deemed to be unanimously passed by everyone, then Savarkar Sahib stood up and started the lecture. Just then, an Englishman punched him in the mouth and said, “Look, how straight the English fist goes!” A Hindustani young man put a stick on the head of the Englishman, and said, “See, how straight the Indian club goes!” There was a noise. The meeting was left in between. The proposal remained unpassed. Well!”

Savarkar’s book ‘1857, first war pf Independence ‘ was published by Bhagat Singh (4th edition )


Source :


https://archive.org/details/indianwarofindep00vina/page/n29/mode/2up

Bhagat singh has quoted verses from Savarkar’s book Hindu Padpadshahi, which today would be considered as communal.


Source :

Bhagat Singh were hence staunch follower of Savarkar.

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

3) Savarkar – The Mercy petitions.

We hear allegations that many freedom fighters have been jailed in Antaman but only Savarkar has written an apology…. Let’s check the reality of this..


Most of those in Kalapani Jail have filed such mercy petitions. Bharindra Kumar Ghosh, Rishikesh, Nand Gopal, Sudhir Kumar Sarkar etc will be among those who filed such petitions.
Many such petitions can be found in the National Archives

S a Dange, co founder of the Communist Party, was one such amnesty petitioner, and the archive documents state that he agreed upon not to engage in revolutionary activities in future

Source :


https://www.abhilekh-patal.in/jspui/handle/123456789/2700408?query=[]


Can we call communists as boot lickers because their ancestors were mercy petitioners??


Many of the workers who participated in the 1923 Congress Flag Satyagraha have apologized and come out… So can we call Congressmen as boot lickers??

Sources:


Patel: A Life by Rajmohan Gandhi
https://archive.org/details/patellife00rajm/page/532/mode/2up?q=funeral


https://www.abhilekh-patal.in/jspui/handle/123456789/2700242?searchWord=Nehru&backquery=[location=123456789%2F1&query=Nehru&filter_field_1=dateIssued&filter_type_1=equals&filter_value_1=[1923-01-01%20TO%201923] 31]&filter_field_2=dateIssuedTo&filter_type_2=equals&filter_value_2=[1923-01-01%20TO%201923-12-31]&rpp=20&sort_by=dc.date.accessioned_dt&order=desc&originalquery=] Feedback


Also petitions have been filed by Sachindranath Sanyal, founder of HSRA (Hindustan Socialist Republican Army) of which Bhagat Singh, Azad and others are members…
From his autobiography ‘Bandhijeevan’…

Even the ambedkar also begged.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Continued from the previous post.

Now see this "jyotiphule" also begged.

So did the nehru daddy to realise him from nabha. So did the gandhi. Go read his letters.

Meanwhile nehru did spend whole 9 days in Nabha jail and his father begged Viceroy to get him released.

200 congressmen released from jail after begging.

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Continued from..

Petitions have been filed by Sachindranath Sanyal, founder of HSRA (Hindustan Socialist Republican Army) of which Bhagat Singh, Azad and others are members…
From his autobiography ‘Bandhijeevan’…

“मैने जवाब में यह कहा था कि “विनायक दामोदर सावरकर ने भी तो अपनी चिट्ठी मे ऐसी ही भावना प्रकट की थी जैसे कि मैंने की है तो फिर सावरकर को क्यों नही छोड़ा गया और मुझी को क्यों छोड़ा गया?” (I said in response, “Why was Vinayak Damodar Savarkar not released but I was, although I wrote almost the same petition as him?”)


Sanyal adds:


“दुसरी बात सावरकर के न छूटने मे यह थी कि सावरकरजी और उनके दो-चार साथियों की गिरफ्तारी के बाद महाराष्ट्र में क्रांतिकारी आंदोलन समाप्त-सा हो गया था इसलिये सरकार को यह डर था कि यदि सावरकर इत्यादि को छोड दिया जय तो ऐसा ना हो की फिर महाराष्ट्र में क्रांतिकारी आंदोलन प्रारंभ हो जाए” (“Another reason that Savarkar was not released was that the revolutionary movement in Maharashtra had been subdued following the arrest of Savarkar and his companions. And the government feared that if Savarkar and others were released, the revolutionary movement in Maharashtra would revitalise.”)


Source : Bandi Jeevan by Sachindra Nath Sanyal
https://archive.org/details/bandi-jeevan/page/n229/mode/2up


Sanyal was later re-arrested in 1937 and again submitted a mercy petition in 1941

Source :


https://www.abhilekh-patal.in/jspui...essioned_dt&order=desc&rpp=20&etal=0&start=20


Revolutionaries like Ram Prasad Bismil also have written such petitions

Sushil Kumar Badra

Source :


https://www.abhilekh-patal.in/jspui...by =score&order=desc&rpp=50&etal=0&start=300]

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Mercy petition of "baghalikhan".

Source :


https://www.abhilekh-patal.in/jspui/handle/123456789/2714284?searchWord=&backquery=[query=&filter_field_1=subjectCollection&filter_type_1=equals&filter_value_1=Home+Political&filter_field_2=department&filter_value_2=Home+Political%3A%3AI&originalquery =&sort_by=dc.date.accessioned_dt&order=desc&rpp=100&etal=0&start=600]


Gandhi wrote a letter to Narayan Savarkar (Younger brother of Savarkar ) in 1920 and asking him to submit a petition…and also wrote an article in Young India asking the British government to release the Savarkar brothers.

Source : Collected works of M K Gandhi Vol 19, 20


http://www.gandhiashramsevagram.org/gandhi-literature/mahatma-gandhi-collected-works-volume-19.pdf


http://www.gandhiashramsevagram.org/gandhi-literature/mahatma-gandhi-collected-works-volume-20.pdf


It was a legal right for prisoners to file such mercy petitions at that time. It was a natural practice for those who are sentenced with death penalty or life time imprisonment to file such mercy petitions.

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Savarkar's goal was not to be in jail to secure a certificate to become a member of parliament or minister or prime minister after freedom.

Gandhi writes.

Savarkar kept fighting all the time. Gandhi writes. But gandhi himself disowned quit India and threw whole congress under the bus.

Gandhi throwing whole congress under the bus after his quit India movement failed.

4)Savarkar – Pension – Stipend

It is often heard that Savarkar was given a pension or stipend by the British. Let’s know what the truth is. When Savarkar was released from prison in 1924, the British government imposed many restrictions on him…


Not to leave Ratnagiri district or to interfere in politics without the permission of the Government..These restrictions are for five years, if breached, this period is likely to be extended….Not only that, if he violates these restrictions at any time during this period government will be liable to arrest him without a warrant and to undergo the remaining 50 years of life long imprisonment.


In short, the situation is almost similar to house arrest… it can be called as restrictive detention in other way

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Two nation theory fraud.

Popular politicians like Shahshi Tharoor have seen making statements like Savarkar was the proponent of 2 nation theory. Fraud lies that the Savarkar was collaborating muslim league. Let’s check reality of this..

That was this "syedahmedkhan" who was the founder of Aligarh muslim university..He is regarded as the principal architect of the Two-Nation theory as he provided a modern idiom in which to express the quest for Islamic identity. During his addresses in 1887-1888 he announced that Hindus and Muslims are 2 nations.

At that time Savarkar was barely 4 or 5 years old. And then who demanded seperate electorials and Bengal partition in 1905?? Savarkar?? Hindu Mahasabha ?? NO!!!It was muslim league incorporating with British demanded these.


Then again in 1931 then president of muslim league Muhammed Iqbal in his presidential address demanded North western frontier provinces to be seperated from other part of British India to form a separate nation.

Actually the 2 nation theory started to appear in horizon in 19th century and the events like Demand for seperate electorial, Bengal partition and Khilafat movement added fuel to it… It was clearly visible in main stream politics of India after 1920, after Khilafat, the religious riots become very frequent. And at last congress leaders also had left with no option, to agree with muslim league..


Savarkar has said that Hindus and muslims are 2 different nations. According to his view a nation is a unit based on cultural & history & religious values, where country is based on geographic limits, & control by common a law for all the people, so when he said nation it means rashtra…hindu & Muslim rashtra, but he never supported partitions because he said whoever considers this land as Pitrubhumi(ancestral land)and punyabhumi(holy land) is all Hindu. He wanted 2 nations(communities ) to live under same constitution without partition.


Now look into Ambedkar’s Book ‘Pakistan or partition of India’

Ambedkar disagree with some of Savarkar’s opinions, still he says that Savarkar’s stand towards pakistan has boldness, frankness definiteness while congress apporoach is indefinite, vague and irritating.


He agrees that Hindus muslims live in seperate worlds of their own and complete population exchange is the only solution to this problem. He mentions about "syedahmedkhan". He mentions how muslim canonical law played important role in partition.

But unfortunately people who accuse Savarkar as communal doesn’t have any problem with Ambedkar’s views.. Nobody accuses Ambedkar as Islamophobic or supporter of 2 nation theory.. Strange …


Hindu mahasabha and Savarkar opposed partition with tooth and nail..


You can see lot of Government archive documents of that time in which Anti- paksitan stand has been taken by Savarkar and Hindu Mahasabha.

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Another archival file which mentions anti-pakistan stand taken by Hindu mahasabha and Savarkar

Savarkar and Hindu Mahasabha fought tooth & nail against partition. That is well established.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

HINDU MAHASABHA and "muslimleague".
During the time of second world war Hindu mahasabha and muslim league formed coalition governments in Sindh, NWFP, and Bengal.


According to critics, this decision is an indication that the Hindu Mahasabha supported the creation of Pakistan collaborating with the Muslim League. Let’s check the facts..


For that you have to know about Government of India Act 1935.


The Government of India act was passed by the British Parliament in August 1935. It was the longest act enacted by the British Parliament at that time. It was divided into two separate acts namely, the Government of India Act 1935 and the Government of Burma Act 1935


The most significant aspects of the Act were:


1) The grant of a large measure of autonomy to the provinces of British India (ending the system of diarchy introduced by the Government of India Act 1919)



2) Provision for the establishment of a “Federation of India”, to be made up of both British India and some or all of the “princely states”



3) The introduction of direct elections, thus increasing the franchise from seven million to thirty-five million people



4) A partial reorganization of the provinces:


• Sindh was separated from Bombay
• Bihar and Orissa was split into separate provinces of Bihar and Orissa
• Burma was completely separated from India
• Aden was also detached from India, and established as a separate Crown colony


5) Membership of the provincial assemblies was altered to include any number of elected Indian representatives, who were now able to form majorities and be appointed to form governments


6) The establishment of a Federal Court


Provincial elections were held in British India in the winter of 1936-37 as mandated by the Government of India Act 1935. Elections were held in eleven provinces – Madras, Central Provinces, Bihar, Orissa, United Provinces, Bombay Presidency, Assam, NWFP, Bengal, Punjab and Sindh.


The final results of the elections were declared in February 1937. The Indian National Congress emerged in power in eight of the provinces – the exceptions being Punjab and Sindh. The All-India Muslim League failed to form the government in any province.


Viceroy Linlithgow declared India at war with Britain on 3 September 1939. The Congress objected strongly to the declaration of war without prior consultation with Indians. The Congress Working Committee suggested that it would cooperate if there a central Indian national government were formed, and a commitment were made to India’s independence after the war.The Muslim League promised its support to the British,with Jinnah calling on Muslims to help the Raj by “honourable co-operation” at the “critical and difficult juncture,” while asking the Viceroy for increased protection for Muslims.


The government did not come up with any satisfactory response. Viceroy Linlithgow could only offer to form a ‘consultative committee’ for advisory functions. Thus, Linlithgow refused the demands of the Congress. On 22 October 1939, all Congress ministries were called upon to tender their resignations. Both Viceroy Linlithgow and Muhammad Ali Jinnah were pleased with the resignations. On 2 December 1939, Jinnah put out an appeal, calling for Indian Muslims to celebrate 22 December 1939 as a “Day of Deliverance” from Congress.

Both Btitish and Muslim league were happy with the resignation of congress ministers.. The bargaining power of muslim league thus increased.


Congress would’ve opposed the war efforts of the government without resigning ..The bargaining power of the league is increased due to the absence of Congress members in ministry.


Being the 3rd largest party, the Hindu mahasabha opposed partition without resigning from the ministry.


Simply because such resignation would result in complete autonomy of the traitor "muslimleague". Savarkar being very foresighted knew this.

So, in order to counter this situation, the Hindu Mahasabha formed coalition ministries in Hindu minority areas where the Muslim league ministry seems inevitable. As per Savarkar’s opinion, whatever the situation, the Hindu ahasabha members should oppose the demand for partition & have to stand in favor of the Hindu rights..

Historical statements of the Savarkar.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

See how Savarkar & Hindu Mahasabha opposed partition.

Later, after the failure of the Civil disobedience movement in 1942, Gandhi wanted to compromise with the british by announcing full support for the war if Britain was ready to grant independence to India..

But Congress had already lost their ground support and the demand of the Muslim league for a separate nation attained the stronghold. Gandhi tried several attempts to negotiate with Jinnah, but failed to change his stand. You can see reports of several meetings and exchanges of letters between Gandhi and Jinnah in the national archives.

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

See how Savarkar & Hindu Mahasabha opposed partition. Continued.

So the decision to resign from the ministry was not a wise decision taken by Congress.. They failed to represent the voice of the people who were against the partition.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Savarkar after 1937

Often people make some silly criticism that Savarkar turned British stooge & never engaged in any anti-British activity after his release from prison. Let’s check some facts.


Savarkar was released from prison in 1924, but was not fully released from house arrest until 1937.


There are several evidences that Savarkar communicate with Rash behari Bose.
Rash behari Bose’s letters to Revolutionary Sachindranath Sanyal in 1937, advises him to ask for help from Savarkar and Subhash Chandra Bose. (Documents are given below

Rash behari Bose’s letter to Savarkar after his release from prison

Rash Behari Bose’s letter to Savarkar

The same book also narrates the communication between Savarkar and Rash behari Bose, and later the meeting with Subhash Bose, which led to the formation of the INA in 1943. Savarkar was the bridge between Rash behari Bose and Subhash Chandra Bose

Savarkar, Subhash Bose and Rash Behari Bose
Inspired by Savarkar, Rashbihari Bose establishes Hindu Mahasabha in Japan

Savarkar was the mediator between Netaji and Rash Behari Bose

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Savarkar after 1937. Continued.

In 1940, a meeting between Subhash Bose and Savarkar takes place..In this meeting, Savarkar shows Netaji the letters which was sent by Rash behari Bose as evidence and asks him to form an army outside India with the help of Germany and Japan against brits.

On January 16, 1941, Subhash Chandra Bose, who was under house arrest, disappeared from India.
Netaji’s demise perturbed British intelligence and became one of the hotly debated issues of the time.


As early as 1940, the British Intelligence Bureau reports in the National Archives speak about the pro-Japanese stance of the Hindu Mahasabha.

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Savarkar after 1937. Continued.

The report also states that Rash behari Bose requested the Delhi Hindu Mahasabha Secretary Indu Prakash through a letter to send the writings/literature related to the Hindu Mahasabha to Japan through Savarkar.

Another important thing is the information related to Shankar Lal who was the forward bloc secretary (The party which formed by Subhash Chandra Bose).. He was a confidant of Netaji..This intelligence report of 1940 states that Shankar Lal entered Japan with a fake passport and after that Bose must have entered Japan through the same means..

Shankar Lal & Bose’s disappearance.


In another intelligence report in 1944, the IB reporter also testifies that Savarkar’s name was the most heard from Shankar Lal and his associates. According to the report, Savarkar pressured Bombay Chief Magistrate Mr. Mehta in favor of Shankar Lal in the case related to Shankar Lal’s fake passport.

Shankar Lal’s visit to Japan was the first step in Subhash Bose’s disappearance from India, the report says.

The report has more details on the relations between the Hindu Mahasabha, Netaji, Japan and Rashbehari Bose.

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Savarkar after 1937. Continued.

More archival documents which proves Hindu Mahasabha ‘s pro Japanese stand

According to another intelligence report of 1941, a letter from Delhi forward bloc secretary Mukandalal Sircar to Sarat Chandra Bose included a well-wishing note from Savarkar about Netaji…

It says:

“Wherever he happens to be, I have no doubt, he will continue to give his all, even his health and life, to the cause of Indian freedom.”

All these evidences point to the fact that Savarkar knew Netaji’s disappearance from India in advance.


After 1940, many people accuse Savarkar for recruiting young men into the British Army during World War 2, and that was to help the British against Netaji.. Let’s see what the truth is.
From Savarkar’s own words

The main purpose of militarisation is, to grab the opportunity to acquire training in modern weaponry during World War 2, which will be useful in the case of a future civil war, or armed revolution…


Savarkar later makes a request to recruit people from mahar community into the mahar regiment

Even Ambedkar was supportive for it and he appeals the youth to join the mahar regiment and make use of the opportunity

Japanese author Ohsawa Jg’s book indicates how Savarkar’s militarization policy benefited the INA

INA – Savarkar – HINDU MAHASABHA

It can be seen from the documents in the archives that the Hindu Mahasabha stood in support of the INA trials.
A 1945 intelligence report quoting a Mahasabha speaker in a lecture held as part of the Mahasabha’s INA week celebration says that a large number of people have joined Subhash Bose’s INA following the call of Savarkar and the Hindu Mahasabha, and if Britishers touch them, a bloody revolution will ne the end result.

Also it is said in the same report that it has been decided to send a petition to the uno under the leadership of the Hindu Mahasabha to ensure justice for the INA soldiers and to draw world attention to this issue

Another report also mentions the amount collected by the Hindu Mahasabha for the INA Relief Fund.

To be continued.

 

[asaffronladoftherisingsun]

Savarkar after 1937.

The most important is an archival file about the INA in 1946.


In it, a soldier named K. N. Rao Sirai wrote to the INA Relief Committee headed by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel that he had joined the British Army on Savarkar’s instructions and when the opportunity arose he joined the INA.

From this it can be understood that many soldiers were trained by the British Army and joined the INA on the instructions of Savarkar.


These National Archive documents are also an answer to those who are saying absurdly that Savarkar didn’t involved in any anti-British activities after the release from the prison.




@ezsasa @hit&run thread concluded. If any additions might add as needed.