Lets Kill Gandhi

by Gandhi, Tushar A.

  RECORDING THE STATEMENTS OF THE PROSECUTIONWITNESSES

  24 June 1948: Before the proceedings began for the day, Atmacharan, Daftary and Bhopatkar along with Apte, Karkare, Madanlal and Gopal Godse visited Birla House. Atmacharan minutely inspected the entire prayer ground and the room where Gandhi spent for last five months of his life. At 2 pm the court began examining and recording the statements of the prosecution's witnesses. With the consent of the prosecution and defence it was agreed that Atmacharan would himself record the statements of the witnesses in English. There were very few visitors that day.

  The first witness to be examined was a thirty-year-old Hindu Brahmin, head constable from Gwalior state, Ishwardutt Mulchand. Although he understood and spoke English he preferred to speak to the court in Hindi. He had been with the Gwalior state police for the past nine years, and for the last five years he had been posted with the CID under Inspector Mandlik. The prosecution examined him to prove to the court that three of the accused had been declared absconders by the court. The defence tried to prove through their arguments that during the investigations Gwalior state and British India were treated as separate identities, and, therefore, no Indian court had jurisdiction to try Parchure without first getting him extradited, but the court rejected the defences' line of questioning. On behalf of the prosecution Daftary questioned the witness, and from the defence, first Dange and then Parchure's counsel Inamdar questioned him.

  After a few questions by Inamdar the witness was excused. The former submitted cuttings from the Gwalior state gazette showing that no notice declaring Gangadhar Dandavate, Gangadhar Jadhav and Suryadev Sharma 'absconders' was published.

  After the tea break, Madanlal's lawyer Bannerjee submitted a request to the court that the prosecution should first prove the conspiracy charge and then the murder charge against his client. He also asked that the prosecution deal with the events in a chronological order and present witnesses right from 1944 onwards. The court refused to accept his arguments. 'If they fail to convince me about the existence of any conspiracy, I will stop their testimony', was the final comment by Judge Atmacharan.

  The next witness was Ramlal Dutt, the general manager of Sharif Hindu Hotel situated at Fatehpuri in Delhi. He was the fifty-five-year old son of Gokulchand Mehta, a refugee from Pakistan. He told the court that three people had stayed in Room 2 of the hotel from 17-19 January 1948. He gave the court all the details including the names the three had checked in with. On being ordered by the court, Ramlal identified Madanlal and Karkare. The prosecution then brought a man named Shantaram Atmaram Amchekar into the courtroom, and he was identified as the third person. Ramlal then pointed to Gopal Godse identifying him as the visitor who came to the hotel. The court ordered Ramlal to remove his spectacles while identifying the accused, which he did.

  After a few more questions, the court was adjourned for the day.

  25 June 1948: Inamdar, counsel for Parchure, had submitted a request to the court. Atmacharan replied, 'You have requested that the charge of conspiracy be explained in greater detail. I feel that the charges have been framed with utmost clarity.... I will not give any more clarifications....' Ramlal's questioning continued. Daftary wanted to prove that two of the accused had lived in the hotel prior to the failed attempt on 20 January and that a third accused had visited them. Karkare's counsel Dange questioned Ramlal and attempted to discredit his statement. There were quite a few heated exchanges between the two with Dange asking him why entry number forty-seven in the hotel register had been changed. Ramlal explained that the alterations had been done by his partner since the names of the guests had been entered incorrectly.

  After Bannerjee finished questioning Ramlal, Gopal Godse said he wanted to brief his counsel, Maniyar, before he began questioning Ramlal. Maniyar asked Ramlal if he had mentioned in his statement given to the police that Gopal Godse had visited Madanlal at Sharif Hotel. Ramlal replied that he could identify Gopal.

  Maniyar: 'Did the police write this in their report?'

  At this point Atmacharan intervened, 'How can Ramlal answer that? It is not necessary that the police write down a statement verbatim.'

  Maniyar: 'When did Gopal Godse come? Was there anybody with you when Gopal Godse came to visit Madanlal and Vyas?'

  Ramlal: 'Gopal Godse came to meet Madanlal in the afternoon. My partner was with me.'

  Maniyar: 'I say that you are lying when you claim that Gopal Godse came to your hotel.'

  Ramlal: 'If you say that Gopal V Godse did not come to the hotel to visit Madanlal and Vyas, it is a lie.' After this Ramlal was excused.

  The court then called in Shantiprakash, Ramlal's partner, who also identified Karkare and then Gopal Godse as the visitor. When Dange questioned him, Shantiprakash replied that he spent very little time at the hotel and mainly looked after bill recovery and accounts. He said he remembered 'Vyas' as the two chatted for nearly half an hour on the 19th.

  Before the court adjourned for tea that day, the electricity failed twelve times in half an hour.

  The proceedings continued with Ramsinh, son of Mansinh, being questioned. Ramsinh was a bearer and khansama at the Sharif hotel and said he was responsible for six rooms there. He identified Karkare and Madanlal. The next witness was thirty-year-old Amchekar, who had stayed at the Sharif Hotel with Karkare and Madanlal. Amchekar was a resident of Hirloke in Sawantwadi of the Bombay province. He was an important witnesses. He was a refugee from Karachi, where he had been posted as a government employee. He informed the court that he had boarded the third class compartment of the Peshawar Express leaving Bombay at 9.15 pm on 15 January 1948 and had met Madanlal and Karkare on the train. He had stayed with them at the Sharif Hotel from the evening of the 17th till the 19th. Karkare had told him during the journey that he was a Hindu Mahasabha activist and was going to Delhi for the Mahasabha's work.

  As per Amchekar's testimony: 'I am a government employee working at Karachi. After Partition, I reached Bombay on 12 January. I stayed at the Worli refugee camp where I took a ticket for Delhi and came to get my government job transferred from Pakistan to India. When I woke up next morning on the train, I learnt that the train was running four to five hours behind schedule. I was worried, because I had planned to finish my work in Delhi in one day and return. I did not know where I would stay, I was worried because I could not speak or understand any language other than Marathi. Just then I heard one of my co-passengers speaking in Marathi, I realised that he must be from my province and would be able to help me. I asked him where he was going. He introduced himself as Karkare and said that he was going to Delhi.' Pointing to Karkare, Amchekar said, 'He is the person. I introduced myself to Karkare and asked if he would help me with arranging accommodation in Delhi. Karkare assured me that he would get me a place to stay at the Birla Mandir.'

  Amchekar, identifying Madanlal, said he realised the two were together only when they alighted at the station. He then went on to relate the events which have already been mentioned earlier.

  Before the court adjourned for the day, Nathuram requested that Badge and Kistayya should not be allowed to interact either with each other or with the other accused. His plea was accepted.

  28 June 1948: Kanu Gandhi, Gandhi's grand-nephew, was present in court that day, the first time a member of the Gandhi family had made an appearance. The recording of Amchekar's statement continued. He mentioned that there was a third person in the hotel room and on being asked he pointed to Gopal Godse. He further said that he had not spoken to Godse and that all three were present in the room when he finally left at 5 pm. He then went on to give a detailed account of his association with the accused. He said, 'I was taken from my village to Bombay by the police to identify the accused. I saw the accused in the presence of the chief presidency magistrate. I had not seen these people before that.'

  Nathuram got up and claimed that the identification of the accused in court was not correct. Their photographs had appeared in newspapers and films of the trial w
ere being shown in many places. Under these circumstances, identifying the accused in court had become easy. The court overruled his objection.

  Dange began to cross-examine Amchekar in Marathi to which the judge objected saying that he would like to disallow certain questions. Amchekar further stated that he was aware of the Hindu Mahasabha but did not posses an in-depth knowledge of its philosophy and ideology. 'I did not know that Karkare was working among the refugees too. I also did not know that he owns many hotels in Ahmednagar where refugees are given free food. My acquaintance with Karkare was nominal.'

  After a small break, Madanlal's counsel informed the court that his client was unwell. The court allowed him to rest for a while in the adjoining room. An inspector guarding the accused informed the court that a doctor had been summoned. On a request by Daftary the court ordered an inspector to bring the approver, Badge, from jail. The next witness was Hiranandani, who worked as a clerk in the Transfer Bureau under the Home department. He said that his bureau accepted the applications of refugees wanting to get their jobs in Pakistan transferred to India. 'I sign the applications once they are completely filled by the applicants. Application No. 5286 was filled by a person called Shantaram Amchekar. There is a corresponding entry in the register too,' he said. He was not questioned by the defence. Ramchandra and Narayan Singh, who both worked in Marina Hotel in Delhi were called in next, and both of them identified Nathuram and Apte, who had checked in as 'S. Deshpande' and 'M. Deshpande'. In the meanwhile, Madanlal was brought back to court. The prosecution then produced some clothes as exhibits, a few of them bore the laundry mark 'NVG'.

  29 June 1948: The first witness to be examined that day was Mehar Singh a sepoy in the Forest department of the Government of India. He said that on the day when a bomb exploded in Gandhi's prayer meeting, he was patrolling in his sector with his colleagues Pyarelal and Kaptan. At about 11 am they saw four people near the panchkui (five wells) footbridge area. On questioning them they said they were visitors and were sightseeing. Their presence made him a bit suspicious, as they had been confronted about three furlongs behind the Birla Mandir and the Hindu Mahasabha Bhavan, a place which was not frequented by tourists. Daftary then called for Badge. This was the first time he was being brought into court after he had turned approver. Mehar Singh then identified Shankar Kistayya, Gopal V Godse, Narayan D. Apte and Digambar R. Badge as the ones he had confronted.

  SEARCH FOR A BIBLE

  Next on the witness stand was C. Pacheko, the manager of Marina Hotel. Daftary asked for a Bible so Pacheko could take his oath. It was discovered that there was no Bible available. Nathuram said that he had seen a copy in the prison and a police officer was despatched to fetch it holding up the court's proceedings for some time. In the meanwhile, two bearers, Govindram and Kelaram, who worked in Marina Hotel were examined. After a tea-break, Pacheko was called to the stand. After taking the oath Pacheko recounted the events of the evening of 20 January. Pointing to Madanlal, Pacheko identified him as the man who was brought handcuffed to the hotel and then also identified Nathuram and Apte.

  30 June 1948: Surjeet Singh, a taxi driver from Delhi was the first to be examined that day, his testimony lasted for four hours. Atmacharan inspected the car in which the accused had travelled to Birla House on the 20th. The unique feature of the blue-green Ford was that the car had a carrier. It was the only car of its kind in Delhi at that time. Pointing to Apte, Surjeet Singh said, 'He finalised everything with me. They agreed to pay me Rs 12/- for the round trip. Three people sat behind and the dadhi wala, bearded man, Badge sat in front with me.' He identified Gopal Godse, Apte and Kistayya as the ones who had sat behind. Singh then provided the court with all the details. He added, 'I remember the day Gandhiji was murdered. Three to four days after the murder I drove in my taxi to the Tughlaq Road Police Station, to finish some pending work I had with the police. Two Sikh officers called me and inquired if I had driven anyone to the Birla House on the 20th. I gave a statement to the police on that day. Four to five days later I was taken to the Delhi District Jail where I identified Nathuram and some days later I identified Apte. I was then taken to Bombay where I identified Gopal Godse and Badge.'

  After a break, the judge informed the court that he had received a request from Shivnarayan that he wished to appear as defence counsel for Parchure.

  1 July 1948: The proceedings began by recording Sulochana Devi's statement. She said she clearly remembered where and when the bomb explosion took place at Birla House, as her house was a mere hundred feet away from the spot. At the time of the explosion, she was barely standing fourteen feet away from the spot of the explosion. After the explosion, she pointed out to the man who had placed the bomb and lit it. The policemen immediately caught hold of the person. Sulochana identified Madanlal. She also identified Badge, Apte and Nathuram Godse as the people who had come in the car that day to Birla House. Daftary then took Sulochana outside the court and asked her to identify the car, which she was able to do accurately. On being cross-examined by Oak, she replied, 'Generally no tonga or car comes and halts at the circle at the rear of Birla House. The police recorded my statement only a few minutes after the bomb explosion. I did not know for certain if the wire or thread that I saw being lighted with the matchstick was connected to the bomb. I had identified Godse in the first identification parade at the Delhi District Jail. There were about fifteen people in the parade. All were dressed in ordinary clothes. Godse had something tied around his head. I don't remember if it was a bandage or a piece of cloth or a towel wrapped around his head.' Replying to a question asked by Mengle, she said that she had observed the car for almost twenty to twenty-five minutes and that the passengers had taken almost five minutes to get out of it. Replying to Bannerjee, she said, 'Even when I pointed him to Phulsinh and he and the police constable rushed towards him, he did not try to run away.'

  The next witness to be examined was Choturam the car cleaner. He said, 'When the blast occurred I was sitting a little distance outside my quarter,' adding that he knew Phulsinh, who worked as a guard at the Birla House. 'One room separates Phulsinh's quarter from mine. There is an open ground behind Birla House, which is adjacent to the rear gate. I had seen the dark green car driving up and stopping at the roundabout. It was parked by the left side of the roundabout and there was a luggage carrier on its roof. When the car stopped, I saw four people getting out of it. They got out of the left side and then entered the compound. Here they were met by three or four other men and after talking for some time they entered the prayer ground in groups of two and three. They inspected my quarters from all sides, twice or thrice. After this three of the men went into the prayer ground and one man came and started talking to me. He said he wanted to take Gandhi's photograph through the ventilator grill. I told him to do so from the front. But he wasn't carrying a camera on him. Finally, I asked him "Camera kahan hai?" (where is your camera?) He was carrying a black cloth bag filled with something quite heavy. But there was no camera in it. The man ran towards the car as if he was going to fetch his camera. Then he went out of the gate. I had seen a man placing something on the wall and then igniting it. I grabbed the hand of the man who exploded the bomb. Afterwards the man was sent to the police picket outside the Birla House. I had gone there myself. An officer frisked him and found a bomb in his coat pocket. Some soldiers unscrewed the bomb and defused it. Then the bomb was placed in a tin and the tin was wrapped in a cloth. They sealed the packet with the Birla House seal.' He then stepped down from the witness stand and identified Madanlal, Karkare, Apte and Nathuram. He said he had remained on the spot of the murder for twenty to thirty minutes after the tragedy. 'I found some of the spent bullets, two empty shells and a cloth that was draped around the shoulders. These things were scattered around the place where Mahatma Gandhi fell.' The exhibits were brought in and Choturam identified them. Five or six days after Gandhi's murder Choturam had identified Nathuram as the man he had seen after the bomb blast, after observing him caref
ully for five to six minutes.

  2 July 1948: Choturam's cross-examination continued. He said he used to attend Gandhi's prayer meetings regularly but on 20 January he could not. Pointing to Karkare, he said, 'He had tried to bribe me with five or ten rupees to allow him to take a picture of Gandhi from my room, this made me suspicious about his intentions.' He said he wasn't able to inform the authorities about his suspicions before the bomb exploded.

  After a short break, when the court's proceedings began, Bannerjee requested that he be allowed to confer with any of the accused apart from his client Madanlal if he felt it was necessary. Bhopatkar too requested for the same. They were told to submit their request in writing.

  As the bank accounts of all the accused had been frozen, Nathuram and Apte made a joint plea to the court to order the Presidency Industrial Bank of Poona not to stop either them or their agents from operating their accounts. Atmacharan asked them to write, through their defence counsels, directly to the bank. The next witness to be examined was Bhursinh, a chowkidar at Birla House who narrated to the court all that he had witnessed.

  5 July 1948: The court resumed hearings with Bhursinh's cross-examination. Next to be questioned was KM. Sahni, a magistrate from Karnal and a refugee officer. The witness informed the court that he was present at the prayer grounds on 20 January at exactly 5 pm. As his wife had died in a car accident on 10 January, he said he was in deep shock, and added that 'Gandhiji had requested me to meet him before I proceeded back to Karnal to join duty.' In his statement, he said that he was seated exactly in front of Gandhi, hardly about four or five steps away. Chandragupt Vidyalankar was with him, too. At a quarter past five there was a terrible explosion. Gandhi would have long begun his prayers but the loud speakers had failed.

  Replying to a question by Mengle, he said, 'I had visited Birla House many a times and had the good fortune of being able to talk to Mahatma Gandhi on many occasions. Of all the prayer meetings I attended, only in one were the ayatas from the Koran recited in the beginning.' Sahni went on to say that on 20th, he had filed the report in his private capacity. 'I was with Gandhiji till almost 6.30 that evening. The prayers continued even after the bomb exploded, there was a little disturbance. No one was injured in the explosion. Madanlal was not brought to Mahatma Gandhi in my presence. Mahatma Gandhi did not express a desire to meet Madanlal then. I did not speak to Gandhiji about the bomb explosion.' The next day the court recorded the statement of the manager of the Frontier Hindu Hotel, Ramprakash, after which Chamanlal Grover, a police witness during an identification parade and recovery of evidence, was summoned.