21 December 1948: Das continued his arguments. 'The prosecution has attempted to prove that four of the accused had gathered in Thana, as per Vasant Joshi's testimony. Even if this is accepted as the truth how can getting together be sufficient evidence of entering into a conspiracy? Actually the prosecution should have called Vasant's father G.M. Joshi to testify. Although he was present at Red Fort for fifteen days he was not asked to testify. It has been said that on 25 January a telegram had been sent to Apte at his Poona address, but according to Malekar's testimony Apte was in Bombay that day.*
'How could a person of the stature of Savarkar, who was known to have sacrificed so much for his motherland, ever enter into a conspiracy with people like Godse and Apte? The police recovered 10,000 letters from 140 files from his residence, but they did not find a single word in all those letters which would lead one to believe that Savarkar harboured ill will towards Gandhiji. There was no correspondence between Apte, Godse and Savarkar during 1947. In August 1947, Savarkar had gone against the fatwa of the Maharashtra Hindu Mahasabha and unfurled the Tricolour on the terrace of his home. Apte, Godse and Karkare had criticised his action. Is Badge's claim that Apte told him in the courtyard of Dixit Maharaj's home, of Savarkar having ordered the elimination of Gandhiji, Pandit Nehru and Suhrawardy, reliable? Can such matters be disclosed in the courtyard of someone's residence? What if Apte had falsely used Savarkar's name? If this kind of testimony is accepted in court, then not a single person will ever be safe. During 1947-48, Apte and Godse never met Savarkar, then why did they suddenly decide to go to Savarkar's home to tell him that they were going to murder Gandhiji? This seems impossible. Neither Jain, Morarji Desai nor Angad Singh have implicated Savarkar in the conspiracy. Apte and Godse were in Bombay from 24th till 27th January. Neither of them went to Savarkar's home during these days. He founded the Hindu Mahasabha and must have realised that to murder Gandhiji would mean the end of the Mahasabha. Why would he do such a thing? The testimonies of Badge and Dixit Maharaj don't match. All the allegations are open to doubt and so the benefit of doubt must be given to the accused.
'I have no doubt that Savarkar will be declared innocent and released. But the Court must also declare that he is being released with his honour and reputation unblemished.'
ARGUMENTS BY MADANLAL'S COUNSEL
Next, Madanlal's defence, Bannerjee, began his arguments. He reiterated his demand that the court should include the text of Gandhi's speeches and the articles written by him in the court's record, as well as the 'fact' that the government was forced to pay Rs. 55 crores to Pakistan because of Gandhi.
'The confessional statement recorded by the Gwalior magistrate cannot be legally accepted by this court.'*
22 December 1948: Referring to Parchure's confessional statement recorded by Atal, Bannerjee said, 'Magistrates of princely states must, along with recording a confessional statement, also testify as a witness in court. R.B. Atal had only read the confessional statement in court.'**
To establish and support his argument Bannerjee cited many legal acts. He was yet to begin his arguments to defend his client Madanlal. 'Many different dates have been quoted as to when the alleged conspiracy came into existence. From the testimony of the witnesses it has been proved that Madanlal was not part of the alleged conspiracy till 9th January. If this conspiracy was hatched in Ahmednagar, than Madanlal cannot be said to be a part of it because he was not present there. Dixit Maharaj's testimony also does not establish that Madanlal was involved in the conspiracy. The former has said that while the others were testing the weapons and explosives, he had remained aloof and inactive. That would not have been the case if he had been involved in the conspiracy.†
'The witnesses from Marina Hotel have said nothing regarding the presence of Madanlal there. He took the police to Room 40, late in the evening of 20 January 1948, but the statement made by the accused to the police cannot be taken into consideration. According to the prosecution, Jain had been informed by Madanlal that a conspiracy to murder Mahatma Gandhi had been planned. How is it possible that a conspirator would reveal such a secret to a stranger? Jain's testimony has not been supported by the testimonies of Morarji Desai and Angad Singh. Considering all these facts, it is right to say that there was no conspiracy to murder Gandhiji, and even if there was, my client Madanlal was not involved.
'Even if all that the prosecution has alleged, is taken to be the truth, a question comes to my mind—when Morarji Desai was aware that there was a conspiracy to murder Mahatma Gandhi, why did he not take any steps to arrest the conspirators and save Gandhiji's life? On hearing about it from Jain, Morarji Desai conveyed everything to Nagarvala without revealing his source. This is proof enough that Desai harboured doubts about the information given to him by Jain and did not issue any special instructions.' Referring to Jain's testimony, Bannerjee said, 'It is possible that after reading about the news of the bomb attack on 20 January in newspapers, Jain may have thought that a conspiracy to murder Gandhiji was in existence.'
23 December 1948: Continuing his arguments, Bannerjee said, 'The testimonies of Angad Singh and Morarji Desai demolish what Jain had said. Nagarvala too, has not acknowledged Jain's testimony as being relevant. When a police officer from Delhi briefed him, he issued an arrest warrant against Badge.
'If Madanlal and Karkare could transport the "stuff" in a crowded third class compartment of a train from Bombay to Delhi, the bag could have been kept in the office of the Hindu Mahasabha at Dadar. Why was it kept at Dixit Maharaj's house? There are contradictions in the testimony of both Badge and Dixit Maharaj. If there was a conspiracy to murder Gandhi, Nehru and Suhrawardy, why were no attempts made to kill Nehru and Suhrawardy? The prosecution has not thrown any light on when the plan to kill the other two along with Gandhiji was dropped. And, if there was a conspiracy these people would not have stayed at a very public place like the Hindu Mahasabha Bhavan in Delhi.
'Why did Apte take Badge to Birla House on the morning of 20 January? If there was a conspiracy he should have taken Madanlal. Nothing has been said on that. On the morning of the 20th, no task was assigned to Badge. Then why was only he taken to Birla House? Why was Marina Hotel, which was two miles away, selected for the distribution of weapons? Why was this not done at the Hindu Mahasabha Bhavan itself?*
Then why did Gopal Godse go back to the Hindu Mahasabha Bhavan? All this seems to have been cooked up by the police in mid February. Badge was arrested on 31 January but his statement was recorded only on 21-22 February. The police met Prof. Jain on 4-5 February but his statement was only recorded on 17 February. The court must realise that a purposeful fabrication of events was in motion. Attempts have been made to correct and fine-tune the tale in court while the case is in progress too. The trial started on 24 June. The approver was granted a pardon on 21 June, but his testimony which should have been taken right in the beginning was only recorded in mid July.'
'It has been alleged that Nathuram told Badge, "Ha amcha shevatcha prayatna aahe", this is our last attempt. When was the first attempt? If Apte and Godse were the brains behind the conspiracy, why did they accept the changes in the distribution of arms and explosives as suggested by Badge? There are contradictions between Sulochana and Badge's testimonies, too. Even if there was a conspiracy, it has not been proved that Madanlal was a part of it.'
24 December 1948: Bannerjee continued his arguments. Referring to the testimonies of the identification parade witnesses, Bannerjee said, 'The Chief Presidency Magistrate Brown, of Bombay, did not have the powers to rule on the police remand of the accused until he made note of the reasons why he was ordering their police remand on the case file. The Police Act does not give him the authority to conduct an identification parade while the accused were in police custody. Thus the process adopted was entirely illegal. The accused were moved from place to place for investigation and interrogation, this is permissible under the law, but the police did this with the intention of fabricating and establishing a conspiracy
, where none existed. The prosecution has not explained why the other gang members failed to carry out their allotted action after Madanlal had exploded the bomb according to the plan. Thus the charge of conspiracy is not substantiated or proven.'
Then Bannerjee challenged the powers of the court to hear such a case. According to the prevailing provisions of law the authority to hear the case against the accused vested in the court, this court can hear the case instead of sending it to the session court.
The desirable procedure would have been to accept the trial as a warrant trial and not a summons trial, as is being done now. There are no established precedences or guidelines in the law as to how such a trial should be proceeded with, thus there is a lacuna in the existing law. The entire trial has been conducted illegally, even the charges framed against the accused have not been done in conformity with established legal procedures.
'The coat seized from Madanlal at the time of his arrest is not Apte's as claimed by the police and the prosecution. The coat recovery scenario was cooked up to establish a link between Madanlal and the others and then prove that thus a conspiracy was in existence. The circumstances under which the trouser was recovered from Apte are also suspect.
'Why was no witness from Ahmednagar summoned? The prosecution had referred to them in the charge sheet. I agree that it is the prosecution's prerogative as to whom they will produce as witness. But the witnesses whose testimony is vital to the case must be called.
'Now it is up to the court to decide whether in not producing the vital witnesses to testify in court, the prosecution has erred. The prosecution has mentioned about the deeds of Madanlal in Ahmednagar by the testimony of Prof. Jain, but the latter's testimony about this is based only on hearsay.'
Bannerjee objected to the acceptance of the testimonies of the witnesses who had seen the accused. 'If the testimony of these witnesses in not accepted, Badge's statement about the said connection between Madanlal and Apte is not substantiated.'
Referring to the statements of the accused, Bannerjee said, 'The accused have made certain claims in their statements the prosecution has asked them to substantiate their statements by producing witnesses who would corroborate them. It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove the charges. The accused don't have to prove their innocence.
'Jain has stated that the conspiracy was in existence when Madanlal came to meet him. The conspiracy cannot be said to have begun when Madanlal along with Ompraksh and Chopra went to the Shastra Bhandar and checked the "stuff". If it was due to Gandhiji's fast then it can be said that it came into existence on 14 January.
'As long as the prosecution does not prove why, when and under what circumstances the conspiracy came into existence, how can it expect the court to believe that there was any conspiracy?
'The happenings of 20th and 30th January are not connected. Nathuram Godse was not present at the prarthana sthal. The prosecution claims that the conspiracy failed on 20 January and that Nathuram Godse was present there. But what Nathuram did on 30 January does not prove the claims of the prosecution.'
27 December 1948: Bannerjee claimed, 'The police have no right to question the accused. The accused can make a voluntary statement. In this case the police were first to question the accused, which is invalid according to the law. Even the court cannot cross-examine an accused first.'
Speaking on the conduct of the identity parades, and the recording of the statements by the magistrate, Bannerjee said, 'The statements recorded by the magistrate conducting the identity parades should have been despatched by him to the trial court, but this was not done. The remand orders were issued by a magistrate who had no jurisdiction over the accused.
'In this trial the prosecution has asked the court to imagine the existence of a conspiracy and then accept the testimonies of the witnesses. It is illegal for a court to issue a charge sheet without the testimony of any witnesses. Apart from this after the trial began it is not right for the police to raid and search the residence of Dr. Parchure in Gwalior. In this manner the prosecution has done things whch have been severely condemned by the high courts.
'According to established laws the court has no right to frame charges, which is what this court has done.' Bannerjee presented a ruling of the Privy Council on the matter in support of his argument.
Referring to the existence of a conspiracy as inferred from what Madanlal had told Prof. Jain, Bannerjee said, 'This was just a coincidence, it had no bearing on the existence of a conspiracy.'
Referring to the testimonies of some witnesses, Bannerjee said, 'These have not been substantiated as far as my client is concerned and so they have no bearing on his case.'
Concluding his arguments, Bannerjee said, 'Very serious charges have been filed against the accused. For generations lawyers and judges will argue and debate the ruling of this court, it will come in for criticism and for praise, it will be read by hundreds of thousands of people.'
ARGUMENTS BY GOPAL GODSE'S COUNSEL
Next, Inamdar, the defence counsel for Gopal Godse and Dr. Parchure, began his arguments.
Inamdar said, 'The way the prosecution has built a case against my client Gopal Godse leads me to believe that it was done as an afterthought.' Speaking of the charge of trafficking of illegal weapons and explosives, he said, 'From all the testimonies of the witnesses produced by the prosecution I could not find even a sentence, which could prove that my client, Gopal Godse, illegally transported an unlicensed revolver to Delhi.'
Royal Indian Air Force planes fly past the flotilla carrying Gandhi's ashes to the Triveni Sangam.
The urns containing Gandhi's ashes.
U.P. Chief Minister G.B. Pant, Prime Minister Nehru, U.P. Governor Sarojini Naidu,Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Sardar Patel along with dignitaries await the arrival of the special train carrying Gandhi's ashes.
The urn in a special train on its way to Allahabad.
Prime Minister Nehru, Devdas Gandhi and Ramdas Gandhi, with urn in hand, heading for the Triveni Sangam for the immersion.
Boats ferrying VIPs and media persons at the Triveni Sangam while millions throng the banks.
The stone ventilator grill in the wall behind which Gandhi sat during the evening prayers. On 20 January 1948 Badge was supposed to hide in the room behind the grill and shoot at Gandhi from there, and then hurl a grenade at him.
The Beretta 9 mm semiautomatic used to murder Gandhi.
Bhillare Guruji, the man who saved Gandhi when Nathuram Godseattacked him at Panchgani.
Justice G.D. Khosla, member of the three judge bench which heard the appeal in the Punjab High Court.
Justice A.N. Bhandari, the senior-mostjudge of the three judge bench which heard the appeal in the Gandhi murder trial in the Punjab High Court.
Justice Achchruram who jointly heard the high court appeal.
Conspirators and killers. (Sitting) from L. to R. Narayan Apte, V.D. Savarkar,Nathuram Godse and Vishnu R. Karkare. (Standing) from L. to R. Shankar Kistayya, Gopal Godse, Madanlal Kashmirilal Pahwa and Badge. The one missing member of the gang is Dr. Sadashiv Parchure.
The accused in the dock. Front Row from L. to R. Nathuram V. Godse, Narayan Apteand Vishnu Karkare. Middle Row from L. to R. Ramchandra Badge, Madanlal K. Pahwaand Gopal Godse. Back Row from L. to R. Shankar Kistayya, V.D. Savarkar and apartially seen Dr. Parchure.
Copy of Madanlal's first statement written in Urdu which was carried by the Delhi Police to Bombay.
Translation of Madanlal's confession prepared by the Delhi Police.
Copy of the translation of Madanlal's statement prepared by the Delhi Police.
Ex. 24 Kapur Commission. A police translation of Madanlal's statement.
Copy of the answer filed in the Bombay Provincial Council during the debate on Gandhi's murder. (Ex. 167, Kapur Commission).
from L. to R. Sindhutai Godse, Gopal Godse, G.V. Ketkar, Vishnu Karkare and Smt S. Karkare at the Satya Vinayak Puja.
(1) Gopal V. Godse,
(2) G.V. Ketkar,
(3) V.R. Thakur,
(4) V.R. Karkare,
(5) Smt. S. Karkare,
(6) Smt. D.H. Thatte at the Satya Vinayak Puja.
G.V. Ketkar addressing the meeting to felicitate Gopal Godse (L) and Vishnu R. Karkare (R).
After this Inamdar challenged the authority of the court to hear the case against the accused based on the powers vested in it. 'Till such time it is not established that my client transported an unlicensed revolver, the accused have the right to get the case dismissed and be released.'
28 December 1948: Inamdar continued his arguments saying, 'It is very strange that after learning of a plot to murder a person like Gandhi, the Bombay Police did not implement any measures to protect him.
'When Gandhiji was murdered, instead of immediately recording the statement of Prof. Jain, Nagarvala recorded the statement of Morarji Desai on 16 February. Only after that, he recorded the statement of Prof. Jain. By then, apart from Apte and Karkare all the other accused had been arrested. Jain's statement was recorded in a manner which would confirm the statement of Morarji Desai.'*
Madanlal is an idiot and that is why he disclosed the conspiracy to Prof. Jain.
Prof. Jain is an even bigger idiot.
Morarji Desai and Sardar Patel are unfit for their posts.
Lets Kill Gandhi Page 77