by Anuj Dhar
Before he was assassinated in 1948, Gandhi—a senior journalist told me—rebuked Nehru and Patel for not being able to reign in the partition madness and wished that his “other son [Subhas] was here!” Reminded by a Congressman, who had witnesses the dressing down, that Bose was dead and he had himself come to hold that belief, Gandhi shot back: “He’s in Russia”.
Forget what he announced after meeting Rahman, in his private conversations Gandhi continued to be confident that Bose was alive. For decades his unpublicised remarks—such as “Rahman gave me a soldier’s statement”—remained unsubstantiated. That held good till the early 1990s when Seeley G Mudd Manuscript Library at the Princeton University revealed a proof. Personal papers of pro-India American journalist and Gandhi’s biographer Louis Fischer yielded a letter, written subsequent to his meeting Gandhi on 20 July 1946. On behalf of Gandhi, his secretary and granddaughter of Dadabhai Naoroji, Khurshed Naoroji, warned Fischer on July 22 that “if Bose comes with the help of Russia neither Gandhiji nor the Congress will be able to reason with the country”. [80]
In November 1946 Louis Fischer visited Moscow and met the Italian Ambassador there. Pietro Quaroni had been a lifesaver for Bose in Kabul in 1941. He remembered Bose over a dinner with Fischer at Hotel Plaza. There Ambassador Quaroni gave out his own assessment that “it is possible that Bose is alive”. Fischer’s note of the meeting, also kept at the library, says that “Q says that B might have been on his way to China and might have got there but did not want the British to look for him so the false rumor of his death was circulated. Q says Bose may be biding his time for a return to India.” [81]
As the 1940s closed, the controversy about Bose’s reported death remained alive as a strong undercurrent. The spectre of Bose’s coming back from the dead still troubled the establishment. Many in India today will deny this fact out of ignorance, prejudice or conceit. “I know it all…I never heard of it...It is completely baseless,” that sort of thing.
To those with an inflated sense of importance, here is something to ponder over. True or false, the whispers of Bose being alive were loud enough to be heard by the Central Intelligence Agency. In November 1950, a highly-placed agent in India reported that “it is now currently rumoured in the Delhi area that the ‘Netaji’, which is Bose’s nickname, is alive and is in Siberia, where he is waiting for a chance to make a big comeback”. [82]
[CIA document obtained under the FOIA]
2. Big brother watching
It was a new day in newly independent India. Two men walked briskly amid a green oasis dotted with magnificent old tombs of certain forgotten Delhi kings. This was Lady Willingdon Park, one of the Raj’s gifts to the capital city, an English-style landscaped garden that is now called the Lodi Gardens. On the curvy walkway the older of the two was panting from exertion, and the younger from excitement. Journalist Harin Shah was getting to share his experience of a lifetime with Home Minister Vallabhbhai Patel. By the time they went around the park, Shah had brought a turnabout in the Government of India’s position on Subhas Bose’s reported death.
From now on, Patel would never revert to those uneasy sounding, cryptic one-liners. Is Bose dead or alive? What does the evidence with the Government say, Ahmed Jaffer asked Patel on 3 October 1946 in the Council of States. “No,” Patel replied. Mangal Singh intervened and asked if the Interim Government had made any inquiry whether Subhas Bose was dead or not. “No,” Patel said, adding unhelpfully, “Government are not in a position to make any authoritative statement on the subject.” Mangal Singh would not let the Sardar go that easily: “A few days ago the hon’ble Leader of the House [Jawaharlal Nehru] made a statement that Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose is dead. Is that the view of the Government of India or his personal view?”
“The Government of India have no view, either way,” Patel yielded.
Thanks to Shah, the Government came to have a clear view. In December 1949 Patel would announce that certain inquiries “pointed to the conclusion that Subhas Bose died in an air crash”. [1]
Harin Shah’s “investigative journalism” had begun on the last day of August 1946 when he landed in Taipei to find out about Bose’s death. After making a breakthrough, Shah flew to Nanking and reported his findings not to his editor but the “friendly and most considerate” Indian ambassador. KPS Menon promptly relayed Shah’s account to New Delhi through the diplomatic channel.
Shah had managed to trace and interview local Taiwanese who knew of the mishap. Most told him only what they had heard of or read in a local Japanese newspaper Taiwan Nichi Nichi Shimbum. But some of them had a direct knowledge of the Indian leader’s death and the disposal of what was said to be his body. Nurse Tsan Pi Sha claimed Bose had died in her presence, and Chu Tsang said he cremated his body.
Shah learnt from Li Chin Qui and Chen Chih Chi, the two clerks at Taipei Municipal Bureau of Health, how they had themselves checked the body at the bureau in order to verify the genuineness of request for permission to cremate the body as per existing rules. They even traced out for him the copies of the cremation permit and two mandatory reports filed by the hospital authorities seeking permission for the cremation of the body they were told was of Bose.
[Doctor’s report and cremation permit said to be issued for Bose]
Harin Shah returned to India a year later. He met Habibur Rahman, went around personally convincing people of the veracity of what he had found. In short, Shah did everything a good journalist should have—except that he did not publish his findings. In a strange coincidence, in late November 1946, a story based on Tsan Pi Sha’s claim came to be circulated through the Chinese Central News Agency. The nurse also said that “the ashes of Subhas Chandra Bose could be found in the army cemetery in the suburbs of Taipeh”. [2]
In India of the early 1950s Subhas Bose’s reported death was officially projected as a foregone conclusion. It would have been established as such had it not been for some spirited contesting of the government line by a handful of Bose’s admirers. Heading the quest for truth in Parliament was Hari Vishnu Kamath, Constituent Assembly member, former Forward Bloc general secretary and the second Indian after Bose to have chosen to serve the people rather than lord over them as an ICS officer. On 19 April 1951 HV Kamath sought to know about “the various communications and reports the Government have received so far about Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose’s death or about his being alive”. [3]
Deputy Minister for External Affairs BV Keskar replied that “after due inquiry and the collection of whatever evidence it was possible to gather, the Prime Minister made a statement on 12 October 1946 to the effect that there was little doubt that Shri Subhas Chandra Bose died on the 18th August 1945”. Keskar referred to INA veteran JK Bhonsle’s March 1951 letter expressing his belief that Bose’s ashes were enshrined in Renkoji temple in Tokyo. “Government are unable to furnish the dates and sources of various communications they have received regarding this matter,” [4] he calmly added.
What Dr Keskar really meant was that the intelligence inquiries and Harin Shah’s report had sabstantaited the news of Bose’s death.
More of the official responses illustrated how far the Government had dug in its heel over the finality of its stand. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru himself spoke out many times in favour of the Taipei air crash theory. Invariably, Kamath would be at the receiving end of his ripostes. “I have no doubt in my mind—I did not have it then and I have no doubt today of the fact of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose’s death” [5] was Nehru’s quote for the day, 5 March 1952 that is.
Such mulish talk was bound to stoke the fire of resentment. On 6 August 1952, legislators in the Congress-dominated West Bengal Assembly exploded with rage while discussing a resolution seeking an inquiry. It had been moved by Dr Kanai Lala Bhattacharya, but the day belonged to former revolutionary Dr Atindra Nath Bose, who called the demand “a very faint echo of the national desire which is surging in the heart of Bengal”.
Dubbing the Taipei death theory a fa
brication “circulated by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose himself to hoodwink his enemies”, Atindra asserted that Bose had flown “to an unknown destination in the USSR”. He fulminated that the only people who believed in Bose’s death were “his erstwhile colleagues who cannot hear his name”. Then he launched into a furious diatribe against New Delhi: “Is there any free government in any part of this world which can get rid of their national hero in such a disgraceful, in such an unsympathetic and unseemly fashion? Could you imagine a more wretched instance of such jealousy, meanness and ingratitude?”
The shrill voices from Bengal Assembly proceedings rang out across the nation and were heard in the Capital. By now the central government officials were veterans in containing such outbursts of emotions. A 1952 file noting mentioned with a sneer that “questions on Shri Subhas Chandra Bose’s death are asked in Parliament practically every session!” The authorities had in fact been successful in muzzling quite a few of them. An October 1952 Lok Sabha record listed questions disallowed and withdrawn. “Inquiry about death of Netaji” figured along with the sensitive questions on Geneva Conference on Kashmir, Churchill’s reference to Mahatma Gandhi’s fast, shrines and temples in India, Pakistan, oppression of Hindus in East Bengal etc.
The Bengal assembly resolution requesting the Government of India to “take all necessary steps for ascertaining the real efforts about the alleged death”of Bose was handled without much alarm by the Ministry of External Affairs. “The state government wishes to know what actions we are taking in this matter,” read a noting by the Foreign Secretary. “It is not very easy to carry out a more detailed investigation after so many years, but I shall ask Mr Rauf to check up on the facts and to get some more information, if possible,” he further commented. Dr Mohammed Rauf was the Indian Ambassador to Japan at that time.
But the Prime Minister was not OK with any such move. Below the Foreign Secretary’s note, he hastily scribbled this directive:
The state government should be informed that we have taken all steps that was possible for us and we are satisfied that the reports of Shri Subhas Bose’s death is correct. Nothing more can be done. The facts ascertained have been made public and Parliament has been informed. There is no point in referring this matter to Dr Rauf for this purpose.
The Prime Minister would repeat his stand over and over. His February 1953 PM Secretariat note [6] for Dr Keskar did it with absolute certitude:
Nehru’s confidence stemmed from the finding of a hush-hush enquiry conducted in Japan by SA Ayer, former information minister in the Azad Hind Government and then publicity director for the Bombay state (now Maharashtra) government. Six years after he had helped the Japanese military personnel in drafting the story of Bose’s death, Ayer returned to authenticate it on a mission that had the tacit backing of the Ministry of External Affairs. It was all devised in a queer way. A letter dated 11 May 1951 was issued by the Chief Secretary of Bombay, then a state comprising present-day Maharashtra and Gujarat, requesting Ayer on behalf of the Foreign Secretary to find out about Bose’s presumed ashes.
Ayer did not think it wise to consult any of his former INA colleagues, except JK Bhonsle, by then a central minister who had come to share the government view. Ayer’s enquiry in Japan was financed and virtually overseen by his friend Munga Ramamurti, former head of Indian Independence League in Tokyo.
The Indian community in Japan alleged—and the Government of India secretly concurred—that Ramamurti and Ayer had made off with the INA treasure, missing since Bose’s disappearance. (See Appendix I: The loot of the INA treasure) The moment Ayer landed in Tokyo, a rattled head of the Indian Liaison Mission there forewarned New Delhi: “I hope you are not seeking Ayer’s assistance with regard to the disposal of Netaji Subhas Bose’s ashes now lying in a Tokyo temple, as it is most undesirable that he should, in view of the suspicion surrounding him, be associated in any manner with the taking over of these relics.”
The mission head had no inkling that Ayer was on a government-backed mission to do precisely that.
Ayer went on to weave an account of Bose’s death on the basis of his talks with former Japanese military officers and others. Japanese-speaking Ramamurti acted as the interpreter and an old written statement of Habibur Rahman’s came handy. On his return to India in June, Ayer somehow met Harin Shah and collected his papers. He kept his findings to himself until he met the Prime Minister in September with a stack of papers containing the material he had gathered. The Prime Minister, who was also the External Affairs Minister, asked Ayer to “write out a full report about this”. Foreign Secretary Subimal Dutt was directed to go through the papers submitted by Ayer.
Dutt scanned the records and something caught his eyes. Ayer had been able to locate a hitherto unknown statement of Habibur Rahman with “significant reference to ‘Bose’s intention’ to get out of the plane at Dairen” in Manchuria. There was also a mention of “the intention of the Japanese authorities to let him cross over to the Russian-held territory”. Dutt found it politically explosive.
Habibur Rahman’s is the really important evidence, and those who still cherish the belief that Netajl Bose is alive and is somewhere in Russian-held territory, will seize upon any piece of evidence in support of their theory.
As directed by the PM, Ayer wrote a report. Datelined 24 September 1951, Churchgate, Mumbai, it was loaded with his own assumptions, sitting well with the official view.
I called at the house of General Tojo on June 3, and the next day Mrs Tojo and family were my guests at a dinner at the Tokyo hotel. I did not ask the Japanese journalists or Mrs Tojo and family any direct questions about Netaji’s death but I must say I am convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt that the report of the crash is hundred per cent correct. It was obvious that the Japanese journalists and General Tojo’s family assumed that I had no doubt whatsoever about Netaji’s fatal air crash.
The Prime Minister was mighty impressed with the former Reuters’ and Associated Press correspondent’s investigation. On 1 March 1952 he sent a personal letter to the West Bengal Chief Minister and Bose’s old political rival Dr BC Roy, saying he had “no reason to doubt the correctness of the report”. [7] The streak of conviction in him over this point was put on a public display when he informed the nation about Ayer’s findings. In the Lok Sabha on March 5, Nehru read out aloud the conclusion reached by Ayer: “I [Ayer] have not the faintest doubt in my mind that the ashes that are enshrined in the Renkoji temple are Netaji’s.”
As the news of Ayer’s furtive enquiry became public, his former colleagues and Bose’s followers convulsed with rage. Bose’s nephew Aurobindo told mediapersons on March 6 that Ayer’s report was a prelude to bringing his uncle's assumed ashes to India and end the controversy. Such apprehensions were further stoked by a story in Osaka Mainichi on 27 January 1953 that the ashes of Bose “may soon be sent back to India after more than seven years of ‘secret keeping’ in a Japanese temple in Tokyo”. The newspaper story also alluded to the rumours in Japan about missing Indian Independence League fortune and the INA treasure. A former secretary of the league, VB Sheth, told the newspaper that the needle of suspicion flickered on his former IIL colleague who had been recently arrested along with his Japanese wife for customs violation and “freed on bail, pending trial, fled to India”.
In March 1953 Debnath Das, who was living in Thailand, came out with his own report as the ex-general secretary of the Indian Independence League. Explaining his long silence, he wrote that “some allowance” had to be made for “Japan’s extremely delicate position”, “war criminals’ trials”, “other international complications” and “the disguised hostility of the powers that be in India towards Netaji”. Das rued the “complete disintegration of the INA”, “beggarly conditions” of its veterans and “somersault of some of our colleagues”—which was a swipe at SA Ayer, JK Bhonsle, AM Sahay and others who had taken up plump government positions. Ayer came in for further attack over his enquiry.
Why d
id the Government choose to send just one man (Sri SA Ayer) to Japan for the said investigation—a man who had been in Japan just for a month or so and did not know the language and country well and had to yield to a conducted tour? Why should he choose to keep his findings secret from us who are all pilgrims to that ‘journey’s end’?
Significantly, Das recalled the Japanese themselves telling him that the announcement of air crash was a smokescreen.
On the 26th August just a week after the reported death of Netaji, the chief of Japanese military intelligence department met me at Hanoi together with a military officer from Towloon—the seat of Marshal Terauchi’s headquarters and told me: “Netaji no hikoki ochiru kotown shinio shimasan….” Don’t believe the plane crash as a real crash….
Frustrated over Bose’s non-appearance, Das vent his anger on the Japanese officers who had handled his last flight.
Contact or no contact, we believe Netaji should naturally remain alive, but if Netaji is no more, we equally believe there is some foul play somewhere and that some heinous crime must have been perpetrated in our darkest moment of history. This is our charge. And the responsibility lies on those Japanese military officers who took charge of Netaji. Those officers who are living today can not shirk that responsibility.
The allusion was to General Isoda. The events of 16 and 17 August had left Das confused and distrustful. “After reaching Saigon only, the Japanese military authorities separated Netaji from the rest of us on the ground that there was no accommodation in the plane. Not only that, we were informed for the first time that he was to be taken towards Tokyo….”