Bhagat Singh 1907–1931 was an Indian socialist revolutionary whose two acts of dramatic violence against the British in
India and execution at age 23 made him a folk hero of the Indian independence movement.
In December 1928, Bhagat Singh and an associate, Shivaram
Rajguru, fatally shot a 21-year-old British police officer, John Saunders,
in Lahore, British India, mistaking
Saunders, who was still on probation, for the British police superintendent,
James Scott, whom they had intended to assassinate. They believed Scott
was responsible for the death of popular Indian nationalist leader Lala
Lajpat Rai, by having ordered a lathi
charge in which Rai was injured, and, two weeks after which, died of a
heart attack. Saunders was felled by a single shot from Rajguru, a
marksman. He was then shot several times by Singh, the postmortem report
showing eight bullet wounds. Another associate of Singh, Chandra Shekhar Azad, shot dead an Indian police constable, Chanan Singh, who attempted
to pursue Singh and Rajguru as they fled.
After escaping, Singh and his associates, using pseudonyms, publicly
owned to avenging Lajpat Rai's death, putting up prepared posters, which,
however, they had altered to show Saunders as their intended target. Singh
was thereafter on the run for many months, and no convictions resulted at the
time. Surfacing again in April 1929, he and another associate, Batukeshwar
Dutt, exploded two improvised bombs inside the Central Legislative Assembly in Delhi. They showered
leaflets from the gallery on the legislators below, shouted slogans, and then
allowed the authorities to arrest them.[7] The
arrest, and the resulting publicity, had the effect of bringing to light
Singh's complicity in the John Saunders case. Awaiting trial, Singh gained much
public sympathy after he joined fellow defendant Jatin
Das in a hunger strike, demanding
better prison conditions for Indian prisoners, and ending in Das's death from
starvation in September 1929. Singh was convicted and hanged in March 1931,
aged 23.
Early life
Bhagat Singh, a Sandhu Jat, was born in
1907 to Kishan Singh and Vidyavati at Chak No. 105 GB, Banga village, Jaranwala Tehsil in
the Lyallpur district of the Punjab Province of British India. His birth
coincided with the release of his father and two uncles, Ajit Singh and Swaran
Singh, from jail. His family members were Sikhs; some had been active in
Indian Independence movements, others had served in Maharaja Ranjit Singh's army. His ancestral village was Khatkar
Kalan, near the town of Banga,
India in Nawanshahr district of the Punjab.
Revolutionary activities
Lala Lajpat Rai's death and killing of Saunders
In 1928, the British government set up the Simon
Commission to report on the political situation in India. Some Indian
political parties boycotted the Commission because there were no Indians in its
membership, and there were protests across the country. When the
Commission visited Lahore on 30 October 1928, Lala Lajpat Rai led a march in
protest against it. Police attempts to disperse the large crowd resulted in
violence. The superintendent of police, James A. Scott, ordered the police
to lathi charge (use batons against) the protesters
and personally assaulted Rai, who was injured. Rai died of a heart attack on 17
November 1928. Doctors thought that his death might have been hastened by the
injuries he had received. When the matter was raised in the Parliament of the United Kingdom, the British Government denied any
role in Rai's death.
1929 Assembly incident
For some time, Singh had been exploiting the power of drama as a
means to inspire the revolt against the British, purchasing a magic lantern to show
slides that enlivened his talks about revolutionaries such as Ram Prasad Bismil
who had died as a result of the Kakori
conspiracy. In 1929, he proposed a dramatic act to the HSRA intended to
gain massive publicity for their aims. Influenced by Auguste
Vaillant, a French anarchist who had bombed the Chamber of Deputies in Paris, Singh's plan was to explode a bomb inside the
Central Legislative Assembly. The nominal intention was to protest against the
Public Safety Bill, and the Trade Dispute Act, which had been rejected by the
Assembly but were being enacted by the Viceroy using his
special powers; the actual intention was for the perpetrators to allow
themselves to be arrested so that they could use court appearances as a stage
to publicise their cause.
Hunger strike and Lahore conspiracy case
Singh was re-arrested for murdering Saunders and Chanan Singh based
on substantial evidence against him, including statements by his
associates, Hans Raj Vohra and Jai Gopal. His life sentence in the Assembly Bomb
case was deferred until the Saunders case was decided. He was sent
to Central Jail Mianwali from the Delhi jail. There he witnessed discrimination
between European and Indian prisoners. He considered himself, along with
others, to be a political prisoner. He noted that he had received an enhanced diet at Delhi which was
not being provided at Mianwali. He led other Indian, self-identified political
prisoners he felt were being treated as common criminals in a hunger strike.
They demanded equality in food standards, clothing, toiletries, and other
hygienic necessities, as well as access to books and a daily newspaper. They
argued that they should not be forced to do manual labour or any undignified
work in the jail.
The hunger strike inspired a rise in public support for Singh and
his colleagues from around June 1929. The Tribune newspaper was particularly prominent in this movement and
reported on mass meetings in places such as Lahore and Amritsar. The government
had to apply Section 144 of the criminal code in an attempt to limit gatherings.
Special Tribunal
To speed up the slow trial, the Viceroy, Lord Irwin, declared an
emergency on 1 May 1930 and introduced an ordinance to set up a special
tribunal composed of three high court judges for the case. This decision cut
short the normal process of justice as the only appeal after the tribunal was
to the Privy Council located in England.
On 2 July 1930, a habeas corpus petition
was filed in the High Court challenging the ordinance on the grounds that it
was ultra vires and, therefore, illegal; the Viceroy had no powers to
shorten the customary process of determining justice. The petition argued
that the Defense of India Act 1915 allowed the Viceroy to introduce an ordinance, and set up
such a tribunal, only under conditions of a breakdown of law-and-order, which,
it was claimed in this case, had not occurred. However, the petition was
dismissed as being premature.
Criticism of the tribunal trial
Singh's trial has been described by the Supreme Court as
"contrary to the fundamental doctrine of criminal jurisprudence"
because there was no opportunity for the accused to defend themselves. The
Special Tribunal was a departure from the normal procedure adopted for a trial and
its decision could only be appealed to the Privy Council located in
Britain. The accused were absent from the court and the judgement was
passed ex-parte. The
ordinance, which was introduced by the Viceroy to form the Special Tribunal,
was never approved by the Central Assembly or the British Parliament, and it
eventually lapsed without any legal or constitutional sanctity.
No comments:
Post a Comment