by Ratan Sharda
The main points of the first statement were –
a.We were aware even at the time when allegations were hurled against Sangh that they were false and baseless. Still we had disbanded Sangh, while not accepting those allegations.
b.During this period all the charges have proven to be untrue.
c.Nine months has have passed, still this injustice waged against us has not been set right.
d.Orders were received that Sangh should merge with a political party. This will mean that there is no freedom or right to anybody to organise non-political activity in this country.
Guruji appealed to the society further, “It is my appeal to the Hindu society not to fall prey to misleading false propaganda. We have already suffered a lot during last 1000 years due to our disunity. Atleast, now we should have unity and we should build a more healthy, strong and enlightened life based on mutual affection, dedication and trust; that would result in we, the ancient Hindu society making our sacred motherland, Bharatvarsh happy and prosperous in our own home.”8
Second statement was about Sangh’s stand about symbols of national honour. Poisonous arrows of false propaganda were also being unleashed by various leaders about these issues. Clarifying about them, Guruji stated:
1.Flag – Confusion is being created deliberately about Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s views about the flag. the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh has its own flag that symbolises its urge to create cultural unity among the Hindu race. Being a part of the nation, Rashtriya Swayamsevak has complete faith and respect for the national flag. And I can say without hesitation that each member of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh will readily sacrifice his life to defend our national flag against any aggressor.
2.Faith in democratic system of governance – Time has proved that democratic state is the best and longest lasting and successful in comparison to all other systems of governance.
3.State is a secular institution – For a Hindu, state has always been a secular institution and so is it even now. Truly, it is unnecessary to give an adjective of ‘secular’ (asaampradaayik – non-communal) for a state that is already ‘secular’.
4.Hindu state – Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh does not propagate a Hindu state which has zero non-Hindu citizens.
5.We believe that no progressive organisation can stay alive long and grow if it works in a secretive manner. Question of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh working in a secret manner also cannot arise as its work is cultural and it has no political ambitions.
6.It is state’s duty to raise an army, not that of any non-government organisation. Therefore, it is not right to compare Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s discipline with Army’s discipline and its rules of work.
7.The idea of overthrowing the current government and capturing power taking recourse to violence is purely a figment of imagination. Keeping in view Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s cultural form of work and its efforts to keep itself aloof from political ambitions, this question too doesn’t arise.
8.I feel that after this, my brethren of this nation will completely believe that allegations against the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh are unjustified and propaganda against it is misleading, they will appreciate my efforts made to revive this organisation with lawful means.
Most of the newspapers published only a summary of these statements. But, Organiser published it in full. The false and misleading propaganda against Sangh and limited dissemination about it by the mainstream newspapers that was seen as a curse turned out to be a blessing in disguise. Swayamsevaks took it up as a challenge. Both of Guruji’s statements were translated in different languages and distributed in large numbers in different places all over Bharat. Many persistent college students made hundreds of hand written copies and distributed them.
The government did not arrest Guruji on November 2nd as expected by Sangh team. Instead of this, Guruji received an intimation from the Delhi’s magistrate that if he wished to meet Prime Minister then he can stay back in Delhi only for that work. But, this stay will be allowed only on the conditions that were imposed earlier on him by the Madhya Pradesh government. He also realised that government had not shut its doors completely. Therefore, he restarted his correspondence with the central leaders. He wrote a letter the same day to the Prime Minister on November 3.
He stated four major points in this letter. 1) “I request to you that as our Prime Minister you should give us an opportunity in an impartial, justified and positive manner to negate the allegations and prove our innocence.” 2) “Finding that the allegations are baseless, ban on Rashtriya Swayamsevak should be lifted immediately.” 3) “Adding new points to this issue should be avoided.” 4) “I will be highly obliged if I am given an opportunity to meet you.”10 But, Prime Minister’s response was not to the issues raised in the letter. Exposing his pre-conceived bias he wrote, “There is no relation between the declared objectives of Sangh and the real objectives, and activities of its members. These real objectives are completely contrary to the resolutions of the Indian parliament and the rules and regulations of the proposed constitution. As per our information these activities are anti-national and generally destructive and violent. Therefore, you will agree that just an adamant stand will not be of much use.”10
Guruji’s suspicion proved correct. Now a new accusation had come up which was not there in the government notification. Maintaining his expression of respect Guruji wrote back with clarity, “It seems that on the basis of said information you have concluded that our activities are anti-national. This is a grave accusation and it is not proper to raise it against anybody lightly. One needs solid and factual evidence for such an allegation. It is meaningless to keep saying repeatedly that government has information without giving permission to the people against whom they have been raised to examine such allegations. Both of us should agree that ‘just an adamant stand will not be of much use’. As far as the talk about being contrary to the regulations of the proposed constitution is concerned, it would have been better if our Prime Minister had not written it. It is like punishing somebody for attempting to kill a person who is going to be born after a year or more than that.”
Another point is that we do not know what actions of ours make you say that our declared objectives and activities are different from our real objectives and activities. We are just simple servants of the society involved in creating character and unifying in the cultural field, keeping away from politics. There is no place in our work for the art that conceals real objectives from the declared objectives.”11
Guruji had also written to Home Minister in the same period. Situation at that end was also not different. At the end, the Delhi mission proved to be a failure. He received the final directive from Secretary of Home Ministry, H. B. R. Iyengar, to leave Delhi within 24 hours and return to Nagpur. Guruji and his colleagues realised where the future was heading. They decided to utilise every minute of these 24 hours well. First of all, he wrote to Prime Minister about this last directive in a forthright manner, “We claim to be a cultured state. Such unconstitutional uncivilised qualities can suit only a dictatorial government or to some extent a one party foreign rule. But in my opinion it does not behoove a modern cultured democratic government that claims to protect civil rights impartially. Therefore I have decided to stay in the capital till this injustice to us is set right.”12
For 11 days, from November 3 to 13, handcuffs of the state were hanging in front of Guruji who was appealing for justice. He had worked on two fronts during these days. One – Meeting top people in power and demanding justice through letters. Two – Clarifying his stand in press through dialogue with journalists and statements.
Now only one action was left – present his analysis of the situation and views in front of the swayamsevaks, for whom he had come to Delhi as their representative. He prepared a letter in Hindi and English containing 10 paragraphs. In this he described in complete details what had been done from his side so far and stated at the end, “thus, I am taking back the di
rective that I had given on 6th February 1948 to dissolve Sangh after giving it full thought and I request you to begin your activities regularly. Along with this, we should try our best that peace is maintained and feeling of enmity is kept under check. I have asked our Sarkaryavaah Shri Bhaiyya ji Dani to inform all swayamsevaks about this decision and decide on the day and date to restart our work as it was running earlier.”13
Police officers arrested RSS Chief on midnight of November 12, 1948 under the Bengal State criminal procedure act of 1818. This 130 year old act gave unbridled power to arrest anybody anywhere without any proof or reason. In the words of Nehru spoken just three days prior to this, was it not “against the rules and regulations of proposed constitution of Bharat?” Guruji was brought secretively to Nagpur on November 15. The tag put on his luggage by the police officers accompanying him in the flight was ‘accompanying person.” He was taken to Nagpur Central Jail from the airport. From there he was shifted to Sivani sub-jail after two-three days. Second imprisonment of Guruji commenced thus.
(Excerpts of Chapter 23 of Shri Guruji Golwalkar, Biography by Ranga Hari)
***********
1. Shri Guruji Samagra 10 - 14
2. Shri Guruji Samagra 10 - 14
3. Ibid - 15
4. Ibid - 20-21
5. Sardar Patel patraachaar 7 - 261
6. Shri Guruji Samagra 10 - 77-80
7. Ibid - 24
8. Ibid - 28-29
9. Ibid - 30-32
10. Ibid - 39-40
11. Ibid - 41-42
12. Ibid - 43-44
13. Ibid - 49
Annexure V
Satyagraha Against 1948 Ban and its Successful Culmination
Plan of Sangh was to fight the ban with a satyagrah by reopening RSS shakhas. It was the beginning of the clash with government. There was no disturbance like ‘rasta roko’ nor did it involve sitting in ‘dharna’ in front of government offices. Common people were not face any disorder in their daily lives. Form of this protest was very simple. An designated swayamsevak would send written information to the office of local administration that “we are starting a daily Sangh shakha at xyz place at abc time.” A pre-decided team of swayamsevaks would reach that place at preplanned time and begin shakha activities shouting slogans like “Bharatmata ki Jai”, “Sangh se pratibandh hatao”. This was the format of satyagrah. Sangh satyagrah was not against anybody – neither government nor the police; but it was definitely against injustice.
To strengthen this plan, all the prachaaraks who had been moved to different small and big places, came back to their areas. Satyagrahis were prepared with personal contacts by working over-ground, without going underground, without depending on motivating speeches and without support from newspapers. Whatever the reaction of police against conducting shakhas – whether lawful or unlawful – they bore it peacefully. There was not even a small counter-reaction anywhere. Leadership had taken common swayamsevak into confidence and informed them about the actual conditions on the field transparently. They were told bluntly that government can act in a devilish way, students’ studies can be stopped, member’s jobs can be at risk, government servants would, surely, be removed from jobs, farmers’ properties may be confiscated, businesses may be shut down, some close brethren may lose lives due to unfortunate accidental attacks, families may force their members to seek pardon, imprisonment may be for longer period than expected etc. etc. Factual picture of the scenario was presented to the swayamsevaks. They were not given assurances like ‘ban will be lifted in four weeks’ as was done by leaders in earlier times who had assured that ‘independence will be achieved in one year’. Members were reminded how they had suffered all the atrocities with bounden hands in the first week of February. After making all these preparations only, did Sarkaaryavaah Bhaiyya ji Dani declare that Sangh shakhas would re-commence from December 9.
Guruji wrote another special letter for swayamsevaks who were to offer satyagraha. It was handed over to each satyagrahi. It was so inspiring that many swayamsevaks in jail learnt this letter by heart. Given below is a small extract of that letter:
“…There is no time for thoughts like ‘me and mine’ in this terrible time of calamity for Bharatmata. Whatever happens to us as individuals, we have to set Bharatmata free from the impact of un-Bharatiyataa (abhaaratiyata). We have to rescue all the children of Mother from abduction of their natural rights by parties in power that are blinded by selfishness. We have to see that everybody benefits from free, happy and honourable life.
Our work is undoubtedly the finest, it is exalted, it is divine work of God, in its fulfillment is the highest achievement for mankind. It is like envisioning the Supreme Being. Therefore, arise and make up for the loss of ten months of inaction. Truth is with us. It is a sin to sleep at times of injustice, and live as its victim. Let us set right this injustice. This is a confrontation of dharma versus adharma, justice versus injustice, Greatness versus pettiness, love versus evil. Victory is assured, because with Dharma is Supreme god and with him comes victory.
So, arise with victorious roar for Bharatmata’s glory that would reverberate from the horizons of the heart to the horizons of the universe and rest not till work is accomplished.”1
Government side had begun its verbal assault from the beginning of December. Speaking in Gwalior on 5th December, Sardar Patel cautioned in a threatening tone, “Hearts of Sangh members are filled with venom of hatred, therefore they can never run a satyagrah agitation successfully. Government is armed fully to accept their challenge.”2 While addressing the annual conference of Congress in Jaipur, Pandit Nehru said, “This is not satyagrah, it is an ill-conceived insistence of Sangh urchins. We shall use all over power to suppress this agitation. We shall never allow these people to raise their heads.”3
On the other side newspapers opposed these dictatorial and unjust steps of the government unhesitatingly. Editorial of 21st October in English daily Hitavaad, from Nagpur noted, “Prove the allegations or remove the ban – This demand of Shri Golwalkar is logical and one cannot disregard it. People from Congress should definitely not ignore it because they were in the same situation in 1942 that Sangh is in today. Congress had been declared outlawed and British government in its charge-sheet had claimed that Congress is responsible for the disturbances of year 1942. So, Gandhiji had made a humble demand that allegations against Congress should be presented to a court of law and they should be proven.”4
Even in this short period of two weeks, the satyagraha left a strong impression on the people. Government’s idea that this kids’ game would lose steam in 4-5 days proved to be totally wrong. Satyagraha was running with same vigour even in third week of January. The truth was that all the major prisons of the country had not only been filled up by the second week of satyagraha, infact they were packed to more than twice or thrice their capacity with satyagrahis. Most of the jailers had intimated the rulers of this situation through telegrams. But, how could satyagrah stop? So, government began another experiment. Police began picking up satyagrahis and pushing them into jungles that were 60-70 miles away from their homes. But, those people would come back again to take part in satyagrah as additional team after moving around from village to villages in small groups like the pilgrims of earlier times, partaking food in different homes and spreading the word about Sangh too.
Within a month the threatening tone of rulers had mellowed down. Government thought of opening the dialogue with Sangh again. For this satyagrah has to be stopped first. For this, Sardar Patel asked for co-operation of Moulichandra Sharma who was well known to both the sides. Moulichandra Sharma contacted the editor of Kesari, G. V. Ketkar in Pune to make Sardar Patel’s idea successful.
Discussion went along expected line. Ketkar met Sardar Patel and reached Sivani again on 16th. Writing about it, journalist Ketkar says, “I went to Sivani again, met Guruji. Discussions went on for four hours. Guruji would read each and every word of the directive that I needed from Guruji to s
uspend the agitation very seriously and kept correcting it time and again. Four drafts were made one after another, but each was rejected due to incorrect construct of words. Fifth draft was made satisfactorily. Guruji would examine each word in depth so that prestige of Sangh would not be compromised in anyway. Of the two copies of the fifth draft, Guruji kept one with him while I got ready to take the second copy to leave the jail.”5
Co-ordinator of the entire satyagrah movement was Doctor Bhai Mahavir. After getting Guruji’s directive through G.V. Ketkar, he gave a statement on January 21 about suspending the satyagrah. The statement said, “The Sangh had not begun the satyagrah to put government in difficulty. Its objective was to raise a strong voice against injustice being perpetrated against the Sangh and seek attention of government and enlightened people. It seems that our voice has attained expected success. Therefore, experiencing a friendly atmosphere and to make next level of action a success, agitation is being suspended.”6
Thus, the satyagraha of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh ran for 45 days from December 9, 1948 to January 22, 1949. As per last count, number of satyagrahis was 77,090.7 This figure was bigger than number of prisoners held during 1942 agitation, that was recognised as the biggest movement for independence.
Statesman of 22nd Jan carried both the editorial and statement about withdrawal of satyagrah together. It said, “For this, not only government, but Sangh leadership also deserves complements and thanks. Credit goes to them for the way they conducted satyagrah.”8
Atmosphere of struggle mellowed down and environment for dialogue became positive. But regrettably the Congress government’s stance was not straight forward. Leaving aside the points there were there in the notification about ban, they began throwing up unrelated issues like, “The Sangh doesn’t have a constitution so in its absence it is difficult to lift the ban.” Instead of sitting across and discussing issues in an atmosphere of friendly co-operation, their behaviour smacked of feudalism. T. R. Venkatraman and G.V. Ketkar had taken on the role of mediators between government and Guruji.