The point to be noted in regard to this diary is that besides the name of Karkare which was written as 'Karkara' the editor of Hindu Rashtra or the Agranee newspaper with his description and of his belonging to Poona was also mentioned as also the description of the 3 other Marathas and Maharaj who, according to Madanlal, were his co-conspirators, and special stress was laid on the immediate apprehension of the editor of the Hindu Rashtra or the Agranee and Karkare of Ahmednagar.
23.35 At 7.30 pm they were informed by their host, Inspector Kargaonkar, and two other officers that they had traced the suspects and men had been posted and he was confident that the whole matter will end usefully. But regarding 'Karkara' he said that an Inspector of Police was coming from Ahmednagar and after getting information of the full address of Karkare and of the editor of Agranee or the Hindu Rashtra a report about their arrest would be sent. This diary closes at 8 p.m. at which time the two officers 'Went off to sleep', 'Shah Bash' literally retired for the night.
CASE DIARY NO 4-B OF 23-1-48 FROM BOMBAY
23.40 Case Diary No. 4-B is by Deputy Superintendent Jaswant Singh purporting to be from Bombay. It is marked Ex.39. It begins at 10 am of 23 January 1948. It shows that Nagarvala gave Jaswant Singh a list of passengers who had travelled from Bombay to Delhi between January 13 and 20 but Jaswant Singh did not find anything useful in that list. The entry of 12 noon is that Inspector Kargaonkar had informed them that a Police Inspector from Ahmednagar had come and had contacted Nagarvala and that 'Kirkree was not present in Ahmednagar'. But the C.I.D. had been instructed to search for the Editor.
23.41 The next entry is that inquiries were made about Kirkree (Karkare) from Inspector, C.I.D., Bombay, and he was requested to inform them about the suspects who were responsible for the occurrence. The inspector had disclosed to the Deputy Superintendent Jaswant Singh that the real name of'Kirkree' was V. R. Karkare and he was the owner of the Deccan Guest House in Ahmednagar and was a zealous worker of the Hindu Mahasabha; and his co-workers were Badge of Poona, Avtar Singh of Amritsar, Talwar of Karachi, Balraj Mehta of Lahore, who also were Hindu Mahasabha workers.
23.42 Thus this Police Diary makes some very significant assertions; one, that the Delhi Police Officers were informed that Karkare was the owner of the Deccan Guest House, four of his associates were mentioned and Nagarvala directed these officers to return to Delhi; and that they again informed Nagarvala that Madanlal had named Karkare and had mentioned the editor of the Agranee' or the 'Hindu Rashtra'. This is a re-assertion of the mention of the editor of the 'Hindu Rashtra' or 'Agranee' to the Deputy Commissioner.
LACUNA NO. 1
23.135 The first failure on the part of the Delhi Police was not to send for Bombay Police to Delhi for stationing them to guard Mahatma Gandhi and to act as watchers and spotters. Sanjevi did not get into touch with the Bombay Provincial C.I.D. direct. To his credit it must be said that he got in touch with Rana in Delhi but it turned out to be sterile as Rana proceeded at a snail's pace and was as complacent as Sanjevi, he did not requisition his C.I.D. force or put them into immediate action against the proprietor of the 'Hindu Rashtra' whose identity he failed to discover, a failure for which he must share the blame with a much more experienced and senior officer, Sanjevi, who had come to occupy the top police job in India—of Director Intelligence Bureau. If this name had been discovered earlier it should have been that the whole case would burst and the conspirators would have been nabbed' before they got to Delhi.
LACUNA NO.2
23.136 It was argued that Madanlal should have been sent to Bombay, Poona and Ahmednagar, with the Delhi Police after his statement made on 24 January 1948. He could have been confronted in all these places and would have been interrogated by the police there. Crime Report No. 6 shows that during the interrogation of Madanlal by the Bombay Police on 4 February 1948, Badge was brought from Poona at first he denied all knowledge of the conspiracy. When he was confronted with Madanlal accused, who identified him as the Sikh Maratha referred to by him, and after he was subjected to searching interrogation, Badge broke down and made a clean breast of the whole conspiracy and the persons involved therein. He said that the attempt on Gandhiji's life on 20 January 1948, was in pursuance of this conspiracy. It was rightly submitted that what was done after the murder should have been done after 24 January, if not after 20th, when Ex.6 according to the Delhi police was made.
23.137 Amar Nath Bhatia, Police Superintendent of New Delhi, witness No. 17, said that he did not know anything about Sanjevi's order for Madanlal to be taken to Bombay, But D.S.P. Kartar Singh, Wit. 26, said that he had a distinct recollection that before the murder it was proposed by Sanjevi that Madanlal should be flown to Bombay so that the Bombay Police could interrogate him and arrangements were made to put that proposal into effect but Sanjevi countermanded his previous orders and Madanlal was not sent.
23.140 The course of investigations in Bombay after the Murder and the comparatively quicker and successful results of the investigation in Bombay leads one to the conclusion that if this course had been adopted, the course of events might have been different. It cannot be overlooked that we are looking at the matter 21 years after
LACUNA NO 3
23.141 In Ex. 1 which is the fuller statement of Madanlal dated 24 January, the name of the newspaper 'Hindu Rashtra' of Poona was given and also its proprietor was mentioned. Although it should have been possible for Sanjevi to find out the identity of the proprietor, he did not do so. A reference may be made to Exs. 198, 199, 199-A and 201. ex. 198 is an extract from the Bombay list of newspapers and their proprietors and editors and relates to 'Agranee' where the names of Apte and Godse are given as proprietor and editor, respectively. Ex. 199 also relates to the 'Agranee' Ex. 199-A is an extract relating to 'Hindu Rashtra' a Marathi Daily of Poona, wherein N. V Godse is shown as the printer and publisher and the paper is described as a Savarkarite group paper. Its proprietor is N.D. Apte and editor N.V. Godse. Ex. 201 shows that a copy of this list of newspapers called the Annual Statement of Newspapers was sent to the Government of India, Home Department, Government of India, Information and Broadcasting Department.
M.K. Sinha, Deputy Director, Intelligence Bureau, has stated before the Commission that the names of the editor and proprietor of a paper could have been available to the police at Delhi from the C.I.D.
LACUNA NO. 4
23.142 The Delhi Police and the Intelligence Bureau failed to use the Intelligence Bureau records because that contained important information regarding Madanlal. Inspector Balkundi of Ahmednagar had sent a report dated 7/10 December, 1947 to the Intelligence Bureau. This is Ex. 195. This was addressed to the Assistant Director (P), I.B., Ministry of Home Affairs. There are endorsements on it showing Hooja dealt with it on 14 January and M.K. Sinha, the Deputy Director, also on the same date. The report of Inspector Balkundi regarding Madanlal in the Intelligence Bureau had a seal put on it with the word 'Indexed'. This word 'Indexed' was stamped on the Provincial C.I.D. report from Ahmednagar which is separately marked as Ex. 66-A. In this report the complaint against Madanlal was in regard to his leading a procession of refugees and shouting slogans against Muslims and 'Vir Savarkar Ki fai' showing that the procession which had been taken out had a Savarkarite association and complexion.
23.143 M.K. Sinha witness No.44, was asked about this indexed document. He said, 'We in the bureau did not connect this Madanlal with the Madanlal Kashmirilal.... The name of Madanlal Kashmirilal is misleading and it would not be possible for the Bureau to at once connect a particular name with the name indexed in the Bureau'. He was further examined on this matter and he stated as follows—
Q. 'From the fact that Madanlal was from Bombay should it not have struck the members of the bureau to look into their indexing system?
A. If I were the in charge of the Investigation, I would at once have asked my own office as well as the offices of the various provincial C.I.D. to see whether the names which transpired from the various statemen
ts were or were not in the index cards.'
23.145 In reply to another question, it was said that when a card is prepared for an individual his identity is indicated and very briefly reasons are also indicated on the card. Madanlal's card shows that he was a refugee and led a procession of refugees in Ahmednagar. The exact date is not given. At any rate, this much is clear that the name of Madanlal had been sent up by the Ahmednagar Police in connection with his activities in Ahmednagar this document was seen in the Intelligence Bureau by high officials and his name indexed.
23.146 In the 'Times of India' of 21 January 1948 Ex. 106, the name Madanlal was given out as the person who threw the bomb and it was stated that his companions had escaped in a car but they had not been apprehended till midnight. Madanlal stated that he was from Montgomery and had migrated to Bombay and had returned to Delhi and was staying at the railway station.
23.147 In the 'Daily Statesman' of 21 January (Ex. 106-A) the name given was Madanlal who was carrying a ration card in the name of Balbir Singh and it was stated that three of his companions had escaped in the confusion and that policemen have been posted at all exits from the city. Besides this, it was stated that there was a formidable plot on the life of Mahatma Gandhi; and the hand grenade found on the person of Madanlal was to be used against Mahatma Gandhi himself.
23.148 In the 'Hindustan Times' of 21 January, Ex. 106-B, account is given of the arrest of Madanlal. This news is given on the front page but in a comparatively unimportant place with an unimportant heading 'Bomb Goes Up Near Prayer Ground'. There also the bomb throwing was taken as an attempt on the life of Mahatma Gandhi. In that newspaper the statement of Madanlal as given does not disclose that he had gone to or was connected with Bombay.
23.149 Therefore, one would expect the Director of the Intelligence Bureau to get his own records searched for any clues regarding the bomb thrower and one would also expect that the name Madanlal would tingle in the memory of two high officials like the Deputy Director and an Assistant Director; yet there are matters which the Commission cannot loose sight of (1) that the name Madanlal Kashmirilal could easily confuse as officer in Northern India where father's name is not so appended; (2) there was nothing to connect the arrested Madanlal with Ahmednagar at least not to the knowledge of these two officers. But all this hardly excuses the Delhi Police and the Director of the Intelligence Bureau who was also the Inspector General in charge of the investigation of a case of that importance from seeking information from any possible source known to them or they could reasonably have been expected to think of, Sanjevi should have had his own records searched.
LACUNA NO. 5
23.150 Kotwal emphasised that it was the duty of the Delhi Police to apprehend the accused persons and they could ask the outside police for their cooperation. He referred to the reply of the Government of India to Question 8 of the questionnaire—
'It would be the responsibility of the Delhi Police to ensure that the persons named were apprehended or prevented from coming to Delhi, if they were not already there. To the extent such action related to persons residing outside the jurisdiction of the Delhi Police. It would have been also the responsibility of the other police authorities concerned to extend necessary assistance and cooperation to the Delhi Police'.
LACUNA NO 6
23.151 It was suggested by Kotwal that Rana was in Delhi from the 20th January to 25th January 1948, and if he had been asked to be present at the time of Madanlal's interrogation, Madanlal would have been more informative and the very presence of Rana would have been a help in this direction. This he based on the fact that Madanlal in his statement Ex. 1 at Page 29 stated that on one occasion in Ahmednagar he led a procession of 500 refugees through the town of Ahmednagar where various slogans were raised. Thereafter, a meeting was held in Aarti Bazar in which high officials participated, amongst whom was the D.I.G. of Police, C.I.D., Poona, Rana, and a few others. They promised to help the refugees within a few days when a demand was made that Municipal officials should allot sites for fruit shops for refugees.
23.152 Rana, witness No.3, when recalled at Baroda stated that he was not present at the meeting. As a matter of fact he was not in Ahmednagar on that day. But he was in Ahmednagar on the 18th, 19th and 20th December, 1947 and visited Visapur Camp. This is a very slender basis for saying that association of Rana with the interrogation of Madanlal would have produced more information. At the most it is speculative and that by itself cannot be taken to be a failure on the part of Sanjevi in his investigational process.
LACUNA NO. 7
23.153 the Delhi police officers were sent to Bombay on 21 January. They returned from there on the 24 January and met the Superintendents of Police of Delhi on the morning of 25 January. Sanjevi's note, Ex.7, in Paragraphs 5 and 6 sets out what the Delhi Police Officers on their return reported to Delhi. In these paragraphs emphasis is laid on the Police officers telling Nagarvala that one of the accused mentioned by Madanlal was the editor of the 'Agranee' or the 'Hindu Rashtra' and that C.I.D. Inspector there told them that Inspector of Police from Ahmednagar had arrived and he had been told to make a search for the editor of the 'Agranee' or the 'Hindu Rashtra' and that some names were given to Deputy Superintendent Jaswant Singh when he asked for information in regard to Karkare and his associates. Those names were Badge of Poona, Avtar Singh of Amritsar, Talwar of Karachi and Balraj Mehta of Lahore. Paragraph 6 also mentions that Delhi Police officers handed over to the Inspector, C.I.D., a brief note on the case with the names and descriptions of the accused wanted as far as known then, a point on which Nagarvala was not questioned though he was cross-examined at length.
23.154 It is surprising that after this complaint was made to the D.I.B. he never took the trouble to find out from Nagarvala as to what had happened. It is true that he did tell U.H. Rana of the complaint by the Delhi Police Officers but he never found out from Nagarvala himself what had happened. As submitted by Kotwal, from 21 January, 1948 to 27 January, 1948, the D.I.B. who was also the Inspector General of Police, Delhi, did nothing and even after the fuller statement of Madanlal a copy of which was given to Rana on 25th, he took no steps to get in touch with the Provincial C.I.D., Poona, or find out as to who the proprietor of the 'Hindu Rashtra' was. The Commission is not overlooking the fact that Rana was himself the D.I.G. (C.I.D.), Bombay.
23.155 Even when Rana and Nagarvala rang him up on the 27th evening and Rana told him that Nagarvala had good reasons for not allowing Police Officers to move about in Bombay, and Nagarvala gave the information in regard to his theory of kidnapping of Mahatma Gandhi, there is nothing in Paragraph 8 to indicate that Sanjevi demurred in any way to or reacted sharply or even mildly against this rather unusual theory on which Nagarvala was working. All that he said in paragraph 8 is, 'I asked him about the absconding accused whose name s or descriptions were given to the Delhi Police by Madanlal'. This paragraph does not go further and say which names or what descriptions had been given to Nagarvala by the Delhi Police officers. Nagarvala has denied any such question having been put to him.
23.156 If, as is claimed, Madanlal had indicated in his statement of the 20th January, Ex. 6, the proprietor of 'Hindu Rashtra' or the editor of the 'Agranee' to be one of his companions, the Commission is unable to find any reason why the D.I.B. did not at once find out who the persons were and direct either Nagarvala or Rao Saheb Gurtu to apprehend those persons immediately, and get some Maharashtrian Policemen over to keep a watch both at the railway station and air terminal and at Birla House so as to spot those persons is and when they come to Delhi.
LACUNA NO. 8
23.158 Rana and Nagarvala on the evening of 27 January 1948 spoke to Sanjevi on the long distance telephone and gave all information in regard to kidnapping theory and Sanjevi is not shown to have found fault with that theory or rejected it nor did he violently react against it.
23.160 In Ex. 7-B it is stated that two police officers of Delhi were flown to Bombay and they contacted Nagarvala and 'put h
im in full possession of all the facts known to them so far'. These officers were not allowed to make any inquiries nor move about freely, and that was -because Nagarvala feared that the presence of police officers from Delhi would be a set back to his efforts in tracing the absconding men.
23.161 Commission finds little validity in this complaint. These two police officers had precious little knowledge of the City of Bombay which is a vast metropolis with the then population of three millions and a half. How these officers, even if clever and experienced, were to look for and spot Karkare in Bombay is beyond one's comprehension. In the matter of investigational utility their value was practically nil. Then why this complaint?
23.162 The two police officers returned after two days. On 25 January, Sanjevi gave a copy of the statement of Madanlal made on 24th to the D.I.G., C.I.D., Poona, Rana. This was a detailed statement. On arrival, in Bombay, Rana and Nagarvala contacted Sanjevi on the telephone and Nagarvala promised to send a letter by air next morning with a copy to Rana, but no letter was received excepting the one sent on 30th which contained no information about the assassins.
23.163 Unfortunately, Sanjevi from 25th to 30th morning did nothing to find out as to what had been done in regard to the persons mentioned in the fuller statement of Madanlal; and it is still more unfortunate that the statement of 20th January purported to have been made by Madanlal containing descriptions, names and mentioning the editor of the 'Agranee' or 'Hindu Rashtra' was sent through the police officers of Delhi and yet no contact was made by the D.I.B. or by any other high ranking police officer in Delhi with Nagarvala to find out from him as to what he had done or was doing in regard to that information and why he was not asked as to why no credence was given to the information alleged to have been given by the Delhi police to him.
Lets Kill Gandhi Page 99