CU-BA-Eng-SEM-V-History and culture of punjab -Second Draft

followers should have personal experience of heavenlyjoy and spiritual ecstasy. Some of his followers while reciting the name of God lost control over their senses and emitted shrieks, their turbans fell off. It was from this state of religious and ecstatic frenzy that they came to be known as Kukas - shriekers. These Kukas recited shabad (hymns) on the top of their voices accompanied by dholaks and chhehane. He employed professional singers (ragis and dhadi Jathas). These jathas were deployed in the different areas: the ragi jatha of Bhai Ditu and Bhai Fakira in District Sailkot, ragi-jatha of Bhai Prem Singh and Bhai Kirpal Singh in Bhadaur, Malwa, ragi-jatha of Bhai Tara Singh and Bhai Pali (of Attari, Amritsar) in Majha area and ragi-jatha of Bhai Suba Singh in Doaba area. They sang the songs of bravery of the Sikh heroes in the religious congregations. To keep these ragis and dhadis under discipline, Namdhari Guru instructed his sangat to observe austerity in extending hospitality to them. The singing jathas were given food and Rs 1/- for other expenses.26 Besides, he revived the tradition of reading and reciting gurbani and performing bhog (closing ritual of recitation of scripture) of the Adi-Granth. For instance, in most of the existing dharamsalas (religious places), the mahants and pujaris (priests), bhais (a learned Sikh) and granthis neither recited gurbani in the morning or evening nor performed bhog of Adi-Granth. He was pained to know that the sacred Sikh scriptures were kept in the almiras. He got the copies of Adi-Granth printed and made them available to his followers. He established and repaired the old dharamsalas. Namdhari Guru Ram Singh undertook extensive tours of villages and towns of Punjab for reaching straight to the people, understanding their problems and aspirations and disseminating the programme of social reforms. In these tours, he was accompanied by his troupe comprising 100 to 500 followers including ragis, granthis and parcharaks (preachers). Wherever he went, the local Namdhari sangat (congregation) made arrangements for holding religious congregations (diwans and hollas). He himself held religious discourses and the ragis and granthis recited gurbani and performed kirtan. Besides, he undertook the pilgrimages of the following places Harmandir Sahib, Amritsar; Nankana Sahib; Gurdwaras at Muktsar and Anandpur Sahib. Most probably, Namdhari Guru was the first religious leader who challenged the vested interests of the priestly class comprising Mahants and Pujaris who were in 151 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

possession of historical gurdwaras. He found that the custodians of devidvars, shivdvaras and mandirs (Hindu worshipping places) were parasites who made these places means of extortion. His staunch followers, as the British officials noted, held these custodians and places in contempt. Being the devotee of Akal Purakh, he found that the idols and idol worship were insult to God.27 Translating his belief into practice, his staunch followers (Kukas) started desecrating and demolishing the sacred places of the Hindus and Muslims alike. One of such sacred places of the Hindus was located between the village of ChuharBhaini and ChoteBorshu in District Ferozepur. The Kuka zealotsWaryam Singh, Fateh Singh and Jaimal Singh destroyed this place on September 1, 1866.28 Similarly, the Kukas (Mazhabis) destroyed twenty seven graves, located at village Khatri Kose. When theseKukas were destroying these graves, the villagers protested and resisted Kukas’ action. Asa result, violent clashes took place injuring relatives and friends to whom these graves belonged.29 The British Government was alarmed of such incidents and arrested these Kukas. They were put on trial and awarded with various punishments. It seems that Kukas’ intention was to eliminate fear and superstitions prevalent among the common people. They wanted to tell the rural population that there was no supernatural power which could harm them.30 The incident of destruction of graves and tombs in the day light projected the heroic image of the Kukas. They conveyed the message to the people that worship of graves and tombs was futile and useless. Nevertheless, these acts were fraught with dangerous implications. Namdhari Guru and his followers also confronted the Mahants and Pujaris who were in possession of historical gurdwaras. His confrontation with the priests of Gurdwara Keshgarh Sahib brought basic religious differences to the forefront. The priests alleged that Namdhari Guru was not gurmukh (guru’s Sikh). They argued that that (a) he set himself as a Guru, (b) he whispered a mantar (mystic word) in the ear of a convert whereas practice was to administer amrit, (c) he made a convert to repeat Janam Guru Hazro Aur Basi Guru Bhaini whereas the actual practice was that Janam Guru Patna Aur Basi Guru Anandpur and (d) Kukas’ turbans fell off on their shoulders in the state of frenzy in the presence of Guru Granth Sahib. It was a Sufi not Sikh practice. The Namdhari Guru evaded to answer his deviation of the Sikh tradition and said that pujaris failed to appreciate his religious reforms and counter charged them for their indulgences like drinking, lying, and female infanticide etc. He further alleged that the priestly class was creating rifts in the Panth itself. He reiterated that he was a servant 152 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

of God and revived the maryada (code of conduct) of tenth Guru. He told the priestly class that it was he who inspired hundreds of people to read and recite gurbani. The Namdhari Guru could see the reason for which the wealthy and priestly classes were opposed to his followers. He noted that right from Guru period onward there had been a contradiction between the rich and poor people. The latter aspired for the spiritual quest whereas the former perceived a threat from the poor. He quoted Guru Nanak’s verse in this context. If his contemporary rich people opposed the Namdhari Sikhs, it was not a surprise to him. He said that they were the cursed people and crying foul was their habit. He used the term dhanaad (wealthy) for the rulers comprising British and landed aristocracy. The latter submitted a memorandum to the then Lieutenant Governor, Punjab and extended their full support to the British and asked it to crush the wicked sect of the Kukas. However, he noted that this ruling class did not appreciate the fact that the Namdhari Sikhs were Guru Gobind Singh’s creation. If theNamdhari Sikhs had made successful strives, it was due to Guru’s grace. In contrast to the behaviour of the rulers, the Namdhari Sikhs alone performed akhand paths (continuous reading of Guru Granth Sahib) and mediated on the name of God. To encounter the temporal might of the Sodhis, Bedis, Mahants and Pujaris, theNamdhari Guru Ram Singh asserted that his Sant Khalsa was the actual creation of Guru Gobind Singh and his own mission was divine mission. Giani Gian Singh, a Nirmala scholar, imagined that Balak Singh and Ram Singh were the messengers of God and sent to purify the degenerated human-beings. Their appearance brought an immense relief to the common people. Giani Gian Singh further imagined that Ram Singh was the incarnation of Guru Gobind Singh and dedicated to the liberation of mankind. The Tenth Master sent him to re-unite the human-beings with Almighty and liberate them from their temporal stranglehold and social evils. Moreover, Giani Gian Singh makes us believe that the contemporary traditional Sikh leaders represented the cause of the rich people and used the religious places for their vested interests whereas he (Namdhari Guru Ram Singh) brought out the contradictions between the temporal and spiritual lords. He asserted that the struggle between two lords was going on since Guru Nanak Dev’s times. The temporal lords 153 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

were represented by Malik Bhago whereas Guru Nanak Dev stood with Bhai Lalo. The Namdhari Sikhs did not ‘own an allegiance to the temples, the places of pilgrimage, the Purans, the Sadhus (Saints) or Brahmins and Pujaris.’ Namdhari Guru Ram Singh addressed to the social problems of his followers. He attacked infanticide, dowry and widow-burning boldly as they became victims of these evils. Unable to afford expenses of dowry, they killed daughters. Several of them remained singles which often generated moral laxity. He noted that the Khalsa of Lahore Kingdom was the victim of prostitution and sodomy. He thought that the compulsory marriages could reduce the ignominious living or remove the social stigma. He made taboo for the Namdharicongregation to keep itself away from the morally depraved persons. He further made taboo for the Namdhari Sikhs not to remain singles. With the introduction of anand-riti and mass-marriages without dowry it became easier for his Sikhs to go for a married life. In addressing to these followers he was inspired by the Khalsa rahit of 18th century.35 Namdhari Guru Ram Singh did not accept the British rule and its institutions. He instructed his followers not to join the service of the British government nor send their children to government schools nor use courts of law, foreign goods and the government postal services.36 Rather he suggested them to have their own arrangements for all these things.37 Political overtones of his message were read by the British officials when a new version of Sau-Sakhi (hundred legends) was circulated prophesying the ‘rebirth of Guru Gobind Singh in the person of Ram Singh... Who would resurrect the Khalsa, drive the English out of Hindustan and establish a new Sikh dynasty...’.38 However, sensing danger in the activities of the Namdhari Guru, the British officials served a notice forbidding him to leave his village Bhaini. He lived under surveillance for four years and was set free in 1867 as the British official did not get any concrete evidence for his ‘treason’.39 After his release, Namdhari Guru revived his activities to revitalise his followers. He undertook tours to the historical places of the Sikhs, first to Anandpur Sahib and then to Amritsar. On the Dussehra festival in the autumn of 1867, he visited Amritsar with nearly 3,500 followers.40 They thronged in thousands at Bhaini in the same year. Efforts were also made to establishfriendly relations with foreign powers and to secure their aid. With positive response from Maharaja Ranbir Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, some Namdharis were sent there for military training and a Kuka regiment was raised under the command of Hira Singh. Besides, a deputation under Kahn Singh was also sent to Nepal to get help in arms, men and money.41 154 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Thus the clash with the British government became more or less inevitable and the issue of cow-slaughter precipitated the matter. The British officials had lifted the ban on cow- slaughter and permitted the Muslim butchers to open their slaughter houses. Within a short time, beef-selling and kine-leather became a trade in most of the towns of the province. This seriously offended the religious sentiments of the Hindus and the Sikhs, especially when beef was sold in the streets of the holy city of Amritsar. They protested but officials did not bother to stop the kine-killing. The Namdharis could no longer restrain their anger as the cow was an object of veneration and protection for them. Some of them made several raids on the Muslim butchers at various places in Amritsar and Malerkotlain the Ludhiana district in 1871-72.42 In the clashes, several butchers were killed. This gave a much awaited opportunity to the government to crush the Namdharis. Several of them were blasted off by cannons or hanged or awarded long imprisonments. Baba Ram Singh and a few other popular Kukas were deported.43 The state-repression did not restrain the anti-government activities of the Kukas. They made an attempt to procure arms from abroad. The Kuka leaders also reorganized their followers and tried to provoke the people by circulating the sakhis, legend, to spread the ideas of the return of Baba Ram Singh from abroad; of the rise of Muhammadan Chief in the North-West of India and Russian help against the British. Though there was no mass response to these sakhis they at least inspired the Kukas and raised their hopes regarding the fall of the British rule and the ultimate establishment of the Khalsa raj.44 Concurrently, with the exertions of Kukas for the restoration the Khalsa raj, came the proclamation of ex- Maharaja Dalip Singh as the sovereign of the Sikh ‘nation’.45 In 1886, he sailed for India and news of his journey generated a great excitement among the Punjabis. The Kukas believed that Ram Singh’s spirit had entered into Dalip Singh and their deputation reached Bombay to greet him. But the British government rightly foresaw the danger of his arrival in the Punjab and detained him at Aden. However, determined in his resolve against the British, the ex-Maharaja reached Russia in 1887.46 Meanwhile, rumours were spread in the Punjab that Suba Bishan Singh had joined Dalip Singh in Russia and that the Maharaja was now arranging assistance for the invasion of the Punjab. From Russia, Dalip Singh made appeals to the Sikh Sardars and masses to rise against the British. Among the Sardars who responded favourably to his appeals was Sardar Thakur Singh Sandhanwalia, a collateral of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. Dissatisfied and dejected with the British he took up Dalip Singh’s cause.48 It is said that he 155 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

contacted Sikh and Rajput soldiers in the British armies and got their oath of allegiance to the Maharaja. It is furtherbelieved that he succeeded in getting the promise of armed help to the Sikhs and other rajas, in case of battle against the British government.49 However, Kukas’ plans to secure aid from other sources turned out to be a futile exercise. The Maharaja of Kashmir recruited the Kukas to get a chance of expressing his loyalty to the British by dismissing them as soon as the latter wanted. Similarly, the ruler of Nepal had actually no sympathy with the Kukas’ cause. Like the Maharaja of Kashmir, he was also thinking to use Kukas’ as political lever in dealing with the British. The Russians too did not want toannoy the British either by helping the Kukas or Dalip Singh.50 Disillusioned Maharaja left Russia for Europe in 1888 and died in exile in Paris on October 22, 1893. His associate Thakur Singh Sandhanwalia had already been arrested by the British in 1887 and died all of a sudden on August 18, 1887. With his death, all plans of organising anti-British forces were given up.51 Namdhari-Hindu Relations In early years of 20th century, political scenario changed in favour of Namdhari Sikhs. ‘Satguru’ Partap Singh (1906-1959) resolved to shed of sectarian ideology of his predecessors and identify the Namdhari Sikhs with the nationalist forces like Congress and Socialists. He also contemplated on integrating the Namdhari Sikhs with the world of the Hindus. Primary reasons for his resolve were that the Namdhari Sikhs were ostracized by the Singh Sabha leaders and activists. The definition of Sikh evolved by this leadership excluded the Namdhari Sikhs from the main Sikh stream. This definitionimplied that a Sikh was a person who believed in the ten Sikh Gurus and Guru Granth Sahib whereas the Namdhari Sikhs believed in the continuity of embodied guru and claimed that Baba Balak Singh and Baba Ram Singh were eleventh and twelfth Sikh Gurus respectively. They performed their supplications in the names of these two Gurus on all occasions. Consequently, the NamdhariSikhs were further excluded from the managements of the Sikh shrines when the Gurdwara Act 1925 incorporated this definition in its provisions. The Satjug, the spokesman of the Namdhari community, defined the role of the Namdhari Sikhs in the national perspective. It reminded them that since ‘Satguru’ Ram Singh had already set the practice of observing swadeshi and boycotting British courts, 156 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

administrative services and educational institutions etc, therefore, they should participate in the Non-Cooperation Movement launched by Mahatma Gandhi.52 Maharaj Gurdial Singh and Sant Nidhan Singh Alam participated in the political conferences organised by the Congress. They were members of its committee which drafted resolutions. In one of such resolutions, Sant Nidhan Singh Alam argued that only those people could take the credit of promoting swaraj who themselves participated in the bonefire of imported clothes.53 For developing a rapport with Congress, Maharaj Nihal Singh, the younger brother of Namdhari Guru Partap Singh, participated in the proceedings of Lahore Congress Session (1929). MataJiwan Kaur, mother of the Namdhari Guru, was in charge of the community kitchen which served food to the delegates. Similarly, theNamdhari Sikhs participated in the Civil Disobedience Movement (1930). Maharaj Nihal Singh was deputed by the Congress to implement the programme of this movement in Punjab. He, along with a few other Kukas, courted arrest during the course of this movement. The Namdhari Sikhs also formed the Kuka Congress Dal to take part in the Congress movement against the British.54 Subsequently, the Congress leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru and Rajinder Prasad visited Bhaini Sahib headquarters and eulogized the sacrifices made by the Kuka Sikhs during the Kuka Movement. Eventually theCongress and Namdhari Sikhs became allies in the national politics. Simultaneously, for ending the social exclusion of the Namdhari Sikhs, Satjug advocated that they should identify themselves with the Hindus. It argued that there were no theological differences between Hinduism and Sikhism. It emphatically stated that the Sikhs were Hindus. Similar theological position was taken and advocated by the Udasi and Nrimala Sikhs. Inder Singh Chakarvarti was a leading Namdhari protagonist this theory. He knew that espousing popular Sikh theory of incarnation could build up philosophical linkages with the Hindus. Therefore, he reiterated that the Sikh Gurus were avtars (incarnations) and Akal Purakh sent them to this world to liberate the suffering humanity. According to Sanatanist Hindu philosophy, Ishvar is formless and universal who has had been appearing on the earth in His specific form which is the manifestation of His yog-maya. The Vedic literature, especially Puranic-literature, is related to with the avtar-episodes. The Shavalite Puranic literature refers to the several incarnations of Bhagwan Shankar. The Vaishnavite Puranas also refer to several incarnations of Vishnu. 157 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Important among these incarnations are Matrya, Kuram, Varah, Nirsinh (inRisMh), Vaman, Purshuram, Ram, Krishan, Budh and Kalaki. BhagvatPurans mention twenty-two incarnations of Vishnu. One of the important attributes of incarnations of Vishnu is that they appear on the earth to save dharma (religion) from being supplanted by dharma (irreligiousness). According toBhagvad Geeta, Sri Krishan addressed Arjun and told him that whenever dharma was in danger, Vishnu appeared in the human form to save dharma.55 Inder Singh Chakarvarti argued that the ten Sikh Gurus were avtars who appeared on the earth to protect Vedic Dharam. Quoting Guru Nanak, he said that he protected Vedic Dharam in terms of showing real path to those people who were corrupt and had forgotten God’s name. He argued that Guru Nanak exhorted them to meditate on the name of God and observe truth, continence and mercy. Continuing the Sikh tradition of protecting Hindu religion, Guru Tegh Bahadur laid down his life for the sake of tilak-janju (sacred thread). His kurbani (sacrifice) instilled a spirit of sacrifice among the dead Hindu race. Chakarvarti cited couplets of Sri Guru Partap Suraj and Panth Prakash in this context. Kashmiri Pandits pleaded with Guru Tegh Bahadur that if Hindus were eliminated then who would perform yag-havan.56 Guru Tegh Bahadur acceded their request and set out from Anandpur on 11 July, 1675 and wasexecuted on 11 November, 1675.57 Consequently, the Hindus continued to perform havan-yag. For corroborating his version of execution of Guru Tegh Bahadur, Chakarvarti cited Guru Gobind Singh’s writing BachitraNatak as a testimony of his father’s execution. Taking a leap forward in this context, Guru Gobind Singh created Khalsa Panth which was to work as the volunteer corps of Hindu race. Guru took this initiative because the Hindus had lost a sense of pride and self-respect. They were helpless even to defend the honour of their wives and daughters.59 For further substantiating his theory of socio-cultural Hindu-Sikh commonality, Chakarvarti profusely quoted couplets from the Adi-Granth, works of Guru Gobind Singh, Bhai Gurdas (of Behlo) and Bhai Santokh Singh. Quoting Bhai Gurdas, Chakarvarti said that Guru Gobind Singh performed Yagya for the revival of Hindu race. Chakarvarti further said that Guru Gobind Singh himself cited some couplets in the presence of Pandit Kesho Das for appreciating the relevance of performing the ritual of havan.60 Kesho Das was a tantrika (practitioner of magical techniques) of Varanasi. He came to Anandpur and claimed that if adequate provisions were made available to him he could make the Goddess Durga manifest. For months he 158 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

tried his best but failed to demonstrate the appearance of Durga. On his disappearance, Guru Gobind Singh himself performed havan. Moreover, Chakarvarti citedGiani Gian Singh for telling the reader that Guru Gobind Singh himself believed in the theory of incarnation and recognised the relevance of performing yag-hom. Performance of this ritual could dispel ignorance and evil-spirits. It could also bestow spiritual strength and relieve of any crisis. Besides, it could also instill a spirit of chivalry and fearlessness in the people. Above all, it was the havan which produced kirpan (sword) for eliminating the devils. The devatas (angels) used the kirpan for defeating rakhash (demons).61 The Hindu leaders responded to the Namdhari ideology in 1920s. Bhai Parmanand, a Hindu nationalist, wrote a small article for the Namdhari periodical, the Satjug. The article was published under the title “Satguru Ram Singh Ji” for its Basant Ank (issue) of 1928, he argued that the movement founded by Satguru Ram Singh was religious in its character but was transformed into a political one. Satguru Ram Singh taught the Indian people that if they wanted to attain freedom they should learn to lay down their lives. They should lead a simple life and control their worldly desires. Such a life-style was pre-requisite for attaining freedom. Perceiving the political character of Guru Ram Singh’s movement, Bhai Parmanand argued that it was he who6.4 GADDAR MOVEMENTevolved the concept of non-cooperation asking the people to boycott the British courts and goods. Satguru preached this concept in those times when English education was yet to be started. He was forerunner of Mahatma Gandhi in launching the Non-Cooperation movement.62 Swami Swantarta Nand, another Arya Samajist leader of Guru Dat Bhawan Lahore, found similarities in the programmes of Arya Samaj and Namdhari Sikhs. Swami said that both believed in the relevance of living Guru who could dispel ignorance of his followers. He argued that a scripture could not speak itself or hold a discourse or show the real path to the followers. It was the living guru who could alone interpret a scripture; share the mystical experience and lead to an enlightened path etc. It is for this reason that Guru Ram Singh assumed the role of an embodied guru. He further argued that the Arya Samajists and Namdhari Sikhs too performed havan and used ghee for ahuti liberally; were vegetarians and used satwahik food; advocated that the marriageable age of a girl should not be less than 15 years. Moreover, both were protagonists of swadeshi goods; advocated the boycott of the British courts and settle their disputes locally.63 The Swami disclosed that Inder Singh 159 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Chakarvarti, Nidhan Singh Alam and Mangal Singh approached him to write this article. Infact, the Hindu leaders had larger religious, cultural and political interests to respond to the call of the Namdhari Sikhs. Being the ideologues of the Arya Samaj and Hindu Mahasabha,64 they believed that the Sikhs were an integral part of the Hindus. In early 20th century, they wanted to construct Hindu Rashtra and its expansion in terms of bringing non-Muslims into the fold of the Hindu organisation. The Vedic interpretation of Sikhism of the Namdhari Sikhs conveniently suited the Hindu leaders. They were quick to eulogize Namdhari Sikhs as patriots and nationalists. They took pride in telling the Namdhari Sikhs that Guru Ram Singh was harbinger of the freedom struggle in Punjab. The implications of accepting ideological position of the Arya Samajists and subsequently the RashtryiaSwayamsewak Sangh by the Namdhari Sikhs had some serious implications for the Sikh community. First and foremost was that it negated the reiteration of separate Sikh identity by the Singh Sabha scholars. It was on the premise of this identity that the Sikh leadership could get political and constitutional rights for the Sikh community. In the wake of constitutional developments (Simon Commission, Nehru Report and Communal Award) in late 1920’s and early 1930, Sikh leadership of the Shiromani Akali Dal, Central Sikh League and Chief Khalsa Diwan was struggling to increase the percentage of its communal representation on the constitutional bodies. In choosing pragmatic politics, the Namdhari leadership put itself on the wrong side of the situation. Declaring Sikhs as Hindus, the Namdhari leadership alienated its followers from the Sikh community. However, the threat of political hegemony of the Muslims after the announcement of the Communal Award was so comprehensive that Guru Partap Singh organised the Guru Nanak Leva SarbSampardai Conference for strengthening Sikh communal solidarity in 1934. Going a step forward in the process of cultural fusion with the Hindu organizations, the Namdhari Sikhs accepted the concept of Hindu Rashtra advocated by the Rashtrya Swayamsevak Sangh.65 They were fascinated by the propagation of this concept by V.D. Savarkar in 1937 who was elected President of the Hindu Mahasabha. He used the ‘occasion of his presidential address in 1937 and then in 1938 to become the first Indian to pronounce that ‘there are two nations in the main: the Hindus and the Moslems in India’, pre- 160 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

dating Jinnah’s 1939 statement of the two nation-theory. When Savarkar visited Punjab in May 1938, the Satjug asked the Namdhari Sikhs to accord a warm welcome to him. Savarkar addressed the Sikh sangat in Ram Bagh, Amritsar on 12 May 1938 and stated that the Sikhs were sons of Guru Gobind Singh and he himself was son of Shivaji. The Hindus and Sikhs were inseparable ‘cousins’ who liberated India from Muslim rule. The Namdhari Sikhs' believed that Muhammad Ali Jinnah was determined to establish Muslim Raj in India and destroy Indian unity.66 Satjug reiterated the RSS doctrine codified by the M.S. Golwalkar who “declared that if the minority demands were accepted, ‘Hindu National life runs the risk of being shattered”.67 Golwalker perceived the Muslims as ‘inveterate enemies’ and wrote that the ‘Hindus were at war with at once with the Muslims on the one hand and British on the other’.68 The Sikhs and Hindus were forced to take collective stand against the Lahore Resolution passed by the All India Muslim League in 1940. The resolution stated “that no constitutional plan would be workable in this country or be acceptable to the Muslims unless it is designed on the following basic principle, namely, the geographically contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted, with such territorial adjustments as may be necessary, that the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in a majority as the North-western and Eastern Zones of India should be grouped to constitute ‘Independent states,’ in which the constituent units should be autonomous and sovereign.”69 Disturbed over the implication of this resolution, the Hindus and the Sikhs organised their joint conferences in the important towns like Amritsar and Lahore. Master Tara Singh and Dr.Gokal Chand Narang were authorized to form a working committee of these conferences for drafting resolutions. Namdhari Guru Partap Singh was special invitee to these conferences. Emphasizing the Hindu-Sikh unity, he said that those who preached separatism between Hindus and the Sikhs did neither understand Hinduism nor Sikhism. He further stated that at no stage of the history of the great Sikh religion, the Sikhs were separate from the Hindus. The division between the Hindus and the Sikhs was created to suit the politics of colonial government. “He pointed out that how the great Gurus stood for the protection of the Brahmins and the cow; the learned and the meek; and how the Sikhs and Hindus were the products of the one culture and one civilization. There may be a difference here or there in the customs but essentially and basically their rites and customs were the same”.70 The Namdhari Sikhs continued their socio- 161 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

cultural discourse with the Hindu organisations in the post-independence period. They paid homage to thesacred places of Hindus and participated in the Hindu rituals. Guru Partap Singh allowed his followers to attend functions of the Hindu organizations like Vishav Hindu Parishad.71 Thus the construction of the common cultural heritage helped the Namdhari Sikhs to identify themselves with the Hindu brotherhood. 6.3 GADDAR MOVEMENT The First World War broke out in 1914 and to many Indian nationalists, it appeared that once-in-a-lifetime opportunity had arrived to take advantage of Britain's difficulty. Being embroiled in the War, it was felt, Britain would not be in a position to effectively answer a nationalist challenge. The challenge was thrown by two very different groups of nationalists, the Ghadar revolutionaries based in North America, and the Home Rule Leagues of Tilak and Annie Besant in India. We shall first discuss the Ghadar Movement. The Ghadar revolutionaries were recruited largely from the ranks of Punjabi immigrants who had settled on the West Coast of North America at least since 1904. They were mostly debt- ridden and land-hungry peasants from the crowded areas of Punjab, especially Jullundur and Hoshiarpur, many of whom had served in the British Indian Army and had thus acquired the confidence and the means necessary for emigration. The hostile attitude of the local population including of the white labour unions, the increasingly restrictive immigration laws, helped by the active complicity of the Secretary of State for India-all pushed the Indian community to the realisation that they must organise themselves if they were to resist the blatant racial discrimination being imposed on them. For example, Tarak Nath Das, a? Indian student who was one of the first leaders of the Indian community in North America and responsible for starting a paper called Free Hindustan understood very well that while the British government encouraged Indian labourers to go to work to Fiji where they were needed by British planters it discouraged their emigration to North America for they feared that they might get infected by the current ideas of liberty. The first stirrings of political activity among Indian immigrants became evident as early as 1907 when a Circular-e-Azad (Circular of liberty) was brought out by Ramnath Puri, a political exile, in which he pledged support to the Swadeshi movement. Tarak Nath Das started the Free Hindustan and G.D. Kumar brought out a Gurrnukhi paper Swadesh Sevak advocating social reform and asking Indian troops to rise in revolt. By 1910, Das and Kumar had set up the United India House in Seattle in the USA and began lecturing every week to a 162 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

I group of Indian labourers. They also developed close links with the Khalsa Diwan Society which resulted in 1913 in a decision to send a deputation to meet the Colonial Secretary in London and the Viceroy and other officials in India. They failed to meet the Colonial Secretary, despite a wait of a month, but succeeded in securing an audience with the Viceroy and the Lieutenant Governor of Punjab. Their visit to Punjab became the occasion for a series of public meetings in different Punjab towns and enthusiastic support from the people and the press. Meanwhile, in early 1913, Bhagwan Singh. a Sikh priest who had worked in Hong Kong and the Malay states, visited Vancouver in Canada and openly preached the violent overthrow of British rule. Such was the effect of his exhortations that he was externed from Canada after three months, but his ideas had fired the imagination of his audiences. Disappointed with the lack of response from the Indian and British governments, convinced that their inferior status in foreign lands was a consequence of their being citizens of an enslaved country, and aroused to nationalist consciousness and a feeling of solidarity by the consistent political agitation, the Indian community in North America felt the acute need for a central organisation and a leader. The leader they found was Lala Har Dayal, a political exile from India, who had come to the U.S. in 191 1 and had been lecturing at Stanford University as well as to the various American groups of intellectuals, radicals and workers on the anarchist and syndicalist movements but had not shown much interest in the affairs of Indian immigrants. His attitude changed with the news of the bomb attack on the Viceroy in Delhi in December 1912 which convinced him that the revolutionary spirit was still alive. He assumed leadership of the immigrant Indian community and, in May 1913, the need for a central organisation was met with the setting up of the Hindi Association in Portland, which later changed its name to Hindustan Ghadar Party. Baba Sohan Singh Bhakna was elected the President, Lala Har Dayal the General Secretary and Pandit Kanshi Ram Maroli the Treasurer at the first meeting of the Association which was also attended by others including Bhai Parmanand and Harnam Singh 'Tundilat'. A sum of $10,000 was collected on the spot and decisions were taken to set up a headquarter by the name of Yugantar Ashram in S m Francisco and start a weekly paper, the Ghadar, for free circulation. The plans of political action outlined by Lala Har Dayal and accepted by the Hindi Association were based on the understanding that British rule could only be overthru.m by 163 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

armed revolt and that for this to happen it was necessary that Indian immigrants go to India in large numbers and carry this message to the masses and the soldiers of the Indian army. He also believed that the freedom available in America should be used to fight the British and not the Americans, for in any case Indians would never be accepted as equals abroad till they were free in their own land. Basing themselves on this understanding, the militant nationalists launched a vigorous propaganda campaign, touring factories and farms where Indian immigrants worked. The paper Ghadarwas launched on the first of November, 1913; the first issue was in Urdu followed a month later by the Gurmukhi version. The format of theGhadar paper was designed to convey the message of nationalism in simple and bold terms. Its v e j name meant revolt, thereby leaving no doubts about its intentions. On its masthead was inscribed the caption :Angezi Raj Ka Dushman or 'An Enemy of British Rule'. Besides, the front page of each issue carried the 'Angrezi Raj Ka KachaChittha' or 'An Expose of British Rule', which consisted of 14 points enumerating the negative effects of British rule. This Chittba was in effect a summary of the entire nationalist critique of British rule on the issues of drain of wealth, high land revenue, low per capita income, recurrence of famines which killed millions of Indians, high expenditure on Army and low expenditure on health, the policy of divide and rule by pitting Hindus and Muslims against each other. The last two points of theChittha also pointed to the way out by highlighting the small number of Englishmen present in India as compared to the crores of Indians and by suggesting that the time had come for another revolt since already fifty-six years had lapsed since the last one in 1857. Ghadar was, of course, circulated widely among Indian immigrants in North America, but it soon reached immigrants in the Philippines, Hong Kong, China, Malay states, Singapore, Trinidad and the Honduras as well as Indian regiments stationed in many of these centres. It was sent to India as well. The response it generated among immigrant communities was tremendous, groups were formed to read it and discuss the issues it raised and contributions poured in. The most popular proved to be the poems that were published in the paper, which were soon put together in the form of a collection called Ghadar Ki Goonj, and were recited and sung at gatherings of Indians. The poems were marked by a revolutionary spirit and a strongly secular tone, as the following lines show: 164 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

No Pundits 9r Mullahs do we need No Prayers or litanies we need recite These will only scuttle our boat Draw the Sword ; 'it is time to fight'. The Ghadar also exhorted the Punjabi to atone for his pro-British role in the Revolt of 1857 by playing a leading part in throwing off the British yoke and it changed his self-image from that of-aloyal soldier, an image that had been assiduously cultivated by the British, to that of b a rebel whose only aim was freedom. The message of Ghadar went home so rapidly that , Har Dayal himself was surprised at the intensity of the response and the impatience of those who had been aroused into action. The subsequent course of theGhadar Movement was, however, determined by three major events in 1914: .the arrest, jumping of bail and flight to Switzerland of Lala Har Dayal, the fateful voyage of the ship Komagata Maru, and the beginning of the First World War. i) In March, 1914 Har Dayal was arrested. The most likely reason was the pressure exerted by the British government who for obvious reasons would like to see him removed from the leadership of the Ghadar Movement, but the stated reason was his anarchist activities. He was released on bail and it was decided that he jump bail and go the Switzerland. ii) Meanwhile, in an attempt to defy Canadian immigration laws which forbade entry to all except those who made a \"direct passage in their own ship,\" Gurdit Singh, an Indian contractor living in Singapore chartered a ship, the Kornagata Maru, and, with 376 Indian passengers originating from various places in East and South East Asia, set sail for Vancouver. On the way, Ghadar party mobilisers visited the ship, gave lectures and distributed literature. Receiving prior intimation of the intended immigration, the Press in Vancouver warned of the 'Mounting Oriental Invasion' and the Canadian government prepared to meet the challenge by tightening its laws. On arrival, the ship was not allowed into the port and was cordoned off by the police. Despite the strenuous efforts of the \"Shore Committee\" in Vancouver led by Husain 165 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Rahim. SohanLal Pathak and Balwant Singh and a powerful campaign in the USA led by Barkatullah, Bhagwan Singh, Ram Chandra and Sohan Singh Bhakna. the Komagata Maru was forced out of Canadian waters. Before i t reached Japan, the First World War broke out and the British government ordered that no passenger was to be allowed to leave the ship till reached Calcutta.. Its return journey triggered off a wave of resentment at every port of call among the communities of immigrant Indians and heightened anti-British feelings. When the ship reached Budge Budge near Calcutta, the hostile attitude of the police led to a clash which resulted in the death of 18 passengers. 202 were arrested and the rest succeeded in running away. iii) The third and most important event that brought about a dramatic change in the situation was the outbreak of the First World War. This was the opportunity that the Ghadarites had been waiting for to seize and to make the best of Britain's difficulty. I t came earlier than they had expected, and their preparations were still in a rudimentary stage. Nevertheless, a special meeting of the leading workers of the party met and decided that the time had come for action and that their biggest weakness, lack of arms, could be made good by persuading the Indian soldiers to revolt. The Ghadar party accordingly issued its Ailan-e-Jung or 'Proclamation of War', which was circulated among Indians living abroad. Ghadaractivists also embarked on tours exhorting people to return to India and organise a revolt. The response was tremendous, with large numbers offering themselves and their entire belongings to the cause of the nation. Encouraged by this the Ghadar party began the exodus to India, and batches of revolutionaries began to arrive in India by different routes in the latter half of 1914. The Government of India was lying in wait, armed with the new Ingress into India Ordinance. Returning immigrants were carefully scrutinised, and of an estimated 8,000 who returned, 5,000 who were considered 'safe' were allowed to go unhindered. Of the remaining, some were interned in their villages, others detained. Nevertheless, many hard- core activists succeeded in reaching Punjab. Kartar Singh Sarabha, the young and brilliant Indian student who had joined the Ghadar Movement in the USA and played a prominent role in the production of the Ghadar paper, had been among the first to reach Punjab safsly 166 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

and he set about the task of organising and contacting the returning emigrants, holding meetings and formulating a plan of action. Ghadar activists toured the villages, cyclostyled and distributed party publications, addressed gatherings at melas and made every effort to persuade the people to rise in revolt. But the Punjab in 1914 was very different from what they had expected, and the people were in no mood to embark upon the romantic Ghadar adventure. They had also to contend with the active hostility of loyalist elements such as the Chief Khalsa Diwan who declared them to be apostates or fallen Sikhs and criminals and cooperated fully in the government’s efforts to crush them. Disappointed with the popular response, the Ghadar revolutionaries next attempted to spread their message among the soldiers and engineer a mutiny. Attempts at revolt in November 1914 failed for lack of proper organisation and centralised leadership. Another, more organised, attempt was made in February 19 15 after Rash Behari Bose had been contacted and entrusted the task of leadership and organisation, but this too proved abortive as the government succeeded in penetrating the organisation and taking pre-emptive measures. Bose managed to escape, but most of the other leaders were arrested and the Ghadar movement effectively crushed. 6.4 SUMMARY  The Revolutionary activities were not confined to any one region of the country and at times  They even crossed the boundaries of India. The GhadarPartyis the best example of this. The! Government suppressed these movements with an iron hand. And yet these movements were successful in generating and adding to the anti-British consciousness. However, their major weakness was their isolation from the masses in general. 6.5 KEYWORDS  Arbitration Award: Terms and Conditions on which a body mediating in industrial dispute makes a settlement possible.  Disenfranchisement: Deprivation of voting rights. 167 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

 Ideology: A system of ideas organised around a principle e.g. Gandhian ideology conferred around the principle of Ahimsa.  Indentured: Bonded.  Passive Resistance: Opposition without physically hurting the opponent.  Trustees for the workers :Gandhi advocated that capitalist and the labour could live in harmony and that the capitalist should make an attempt to be the guardian of workers' interests. 6.6 LEARNING ACTIVITY 1. What action was planned by Ghadar leaders in India? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 2. What was the main achievement of the Ghadar movement? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 3. What were the main weaknesses of the Ghadar movement? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 6.7UNIT END QUESTIONS A. Descriptive Questions Short Questions 1. Who founded Namdhari movement? 2. Discuss the foundation of Namdhari Movement. 3. Write a note on civil disobedience movement by the Kukas. 4. Briefly write about Baba Kharak Singh. 5. Briefly write about Komagata Maru. Long questions 1. Write about Baba Ram Singh. 168 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

2. Explain about foundation of Namdharis 169 3. Write about beliefs and faiths of Kuka movement. 4. What were activities of Ghadar Party? 5. Write on legacy of Gadar movement. B. Multiple Choice Questions 1. Ghadar party was found in a.1913 b.1915 c.1918 d.1917 2. Ghadar party was an international movement by a. Expat Indians b. Tribals c. English d. French 3. Initial name of Ghadar party was a. Pacific Coast Hindustan Association b. Hindalco c. Congress d. Hurriyat 4. President of Ghadar Party a. Sohan Singh Bhakna b. Ram Singh c. Narain Das d. Tito Singh 5. When did Komagata Maru happen? a. 1914 b. 1917 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

c. 1916 d. 1915 Answers 1-a,2- a, 3- a, 4- a, 5- a 6.8 REFERENCES Reference  History and Culture of Punjab Paperback – 1 January 1989 by Mohinder Singh  Social & Cultural History of the Punjab: Prehistoric, Ancient & Early Medieval Hardcover – 1 January 2004 by J S Grewal  Punjab: A History from Aurangzeb to Mountbatten by Rajmohan Gandhi  A History of the Sikhs (1469-1839) - Vol. 1 by Khushwant Singh Website  https://abhipedia.abhimanu.com/Article/State/NTE5MwEEQQVVEEQQVV/Socio- Religious-Movements-in-Punjab-Punjab-State  https://punjab.pscnotes.com/ppsc-mains-updated-notes/ppsc-mains-paper-i- history/socio-religious-reform-movements-of-punjab/  https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/ghadar-party/  https://www.drishtiias.com/images/pdf/Culture&Heritage%20(25th-30thNov).pdf 170 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

UNIT 7 - FREEDOM STRUGGLE MOVEMENT PART I: CONTRIBUTION TO THE FREEDOM STRUGGLE WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE GURDWARA REFORM MOVEMENT STRUCTURE 7.0 Learning Objective 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Gurudwara Reform Movement And Freedom Struggle 7.3 Summary 7.4 Keywords 7.5 Learning Activity 7.6 Unit End Questions 7.7 Reference 7.0LEARING OBJECTIVE After studying this unit, you will be able to:  To learn about the role of Gurudwara reform movement in freedom struggle  To learn about the Akali Dal  To learn about SGPC  To learn about the Akali Dal and freedom movement 7.1 INTRODUCTION The record of the proceedings of the Punjab Legislature clearly shows that its members preferred to defend their communal interest’s visa-a-vis of common cause against the British Raj. Given that the members representing their communities openly took communal line in their demands, thereby this state of affair sharpened the communal split in the society. Since the legislators were the policy makers in the province, 171 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

therefore, their views and actions influenced the bulk of the society. Thus, this factor turned out to be a major factor in determining the future relations of the two-nations, namely Muslims and the non-Muslims, which unfortunately deteriorated to that level which brought about not only the partition of India but also the partition of the province on the communal basis. 7.2 GURUDWARA REFORM MOVEMENT AND FREEDOM STRUGGLE This study explores the nature and working of the Punjab Legislature during 1920s with reference to the Sikh Gurdwara Reform. This study attempts to dig out primary and secondary sources which mainly targets Punjab Legislature and legislators, what was their respond to the Sikh Gurdwara Reform Movement? The underling hypothesis of the paper is that the major communities of the province i.e. Hindus, Sikhs and the Muslims, were divided owing to their communal interests in the Punjab Legislature. Instead of strengthening unity and harmony, this institution served as one of the major arenas for Hindu-Muslim and Sikh conflicts which greatly influenced Muslim political thinking in the province as well as the centre. No wonder, after having a bitter communal experience in the Punjab Legislature, Allama Iqbal spoke out in the Allahabad Address in 1930 in which he suggested the partition of India into separate Hindu and Muslim majority zones. The ruling political party the Unionist Party (which was comprised of Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs) did not easy to deal with Gurdwara Reform in the legislature and unnerved its government as well. The question of communal harmony in the Punjab was not only shatter but also bleak in the coming years 1940s and its worst shape could be seen at the time of partition of India 1947. The writings on the provincial history of India generally analyze the political development of some provinces by analyzing the party politics or highlighting the role of individual persons or party in the endgame of the Raj. David Page, Iftikhar Malik, Ikram Malik, Zarina Salamat, Tanwar, David Gilmartin, Ian Talbot and Dr.Abid have done the study of the Punjab politics on these lines. These and other historians have generally overlooked the importance of the role of Punjab Legislature in shaping the ideas, views, thoughts and actions of the communities. In fact, the Legislators took remarkable communal line during this period and therefore the Muslims and non-Muslims reached to a point of no return in the 172 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Legislature and it affected the overall outlook of the communities. Therefore, the present paper is of great importance as it analyses the Punjab politics by digging out those documents particularly the speeches, statements, debates, resolutions and legislation in the Punjab Legislature that have not adequately been explored by the historians. This study highlights an in-depth analysis of the Sikh Gurdwara Reform which had perennial effects on the political mind-set in the subcontinent. It unveils the culturally masked faces of three different communities, i.e., the Muslim, the Hindus and the Sikhs, erstwhile living together on the universal principle of mutual co-existence, but now being sharply differentiated from one another on religious lines into radicalized groups and factions. The paper discusses at length the role of the then political leadership in resolving the issue as guided and directed by their particular religious and political doctrines. This issue alone can be believed to have broadened the gulf between the two aforementioned communities never to be bridged over in the times to come. Sikh Gurdwara Reform Movement was an important issue in the council that dominated the discussions in the council and strengthened the anti-British temper in the Punjab to a considerable extent. 1 The Sikh Gurdwara Reform Movement was an attempt reformation and resurrection of the Gurdwaras and to bring them under the auspices of the Shromani Gurdwara Prabhandak Committee (S.G.P.C). The issue of the control of Gurdawars was sporadically taken up by the Singh Sabha, a loyalist organization. And the strife between the Akalis and the Mahants caused a lot of bloodshed. To pre-empt this, government issued a communiqué 3 showing the intention of legislation on the issue. They also gave the Sikhs the right to keep a kirpan and to retain other religious emblems in jail. But the Sikhs were not prepared to accept it and moved to possess the Gurdwaras with force. As a result, a number of Sikhs lost their lives in the incident of Tarn Taran (January 1921) and Nankana Sahib (February 1921) that made the political parties and national press and gave birth to a group who was defying non-violence and opted for violence as a creed. The group believing in violence was called Babar Akaliswho targeted British officers and their Indian informers. They were the staunch believers of Sikh faith and were the patriots to the hilt. Mahant Narain Das, an udasi managed the sacred birth place of Guru Nanak-Nankana Sahib. But he was a debauch who was very much fond of debauchery and the dances of the prostitutes. It highly irked the Sikhs who wanted his expulsion even by force. Mahanat requested 173 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

for the security and hired four hundred guards to safeguard his interests. Narain Das‟ men killed the non-violent Akalis ruthlessly when a jatha of Akalis led by Lachhman Singh Dharowala entered the gates of the Gurdwara the bodies were set on fire. One hundred and thirty Akalis had been burnt when the police and the local Sikhs arrived on the spot. Ironically, for such huge carnage of Akalis, only three persons were sentenced to death and two including the Mahant were imprisoned for life. The Sikhs gathered at Nankana Sahib held the strong opinion that the commissioner of Lahore was also involved in that carnage. Resultantly Commissioner of Lahore hurried to Nankana Sahib and handed over keys of theGurdwaras to the Chieftains of the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabhandak Committee. It is to the credit of the Akali Sikhs that they remained patient and carried out morcha in a peaceful manner. Mahatma Gandhi who was shocked at the bloody incident, paid homage to the martyrs, he described it as a “second edition of Dyerism at Jallianwala Bagh”. Since the situation was getting from bad to worse so Sikhs introduced Gurdwara Bill amid the strong resistance of the Government. Sir Fazl-i- Husain proposed the members of Muslim and Hindu communities might also be included in the managing board. But the bill failed to get the consent of Sikh members, as they boycotted the bill so it was dropped in November 1921. Because of the wrangling between government and the Sikh members, the ones was on the Sikh members of the legislative council to bring forward a fresh bill or not as they thought best in the interests of their constituents. Undoubtedly, government was unable even at that time to understand the enormity of the issue of the spiritual affairs of the perceptive community whose participation in the army meant so much to them. So, in the eyes of the government, Sikhs had violated the law and justice so a punishment was waiting them. But having made the Gurdawara Bill a benchmark, government expected all the Sikhs to adhere by the Bill. Measures were adopted to cast away all doubts in the minds of the Sikhs hoping that Sikhs would realize that the administration was not “Satanic” but anxious and ready, as indeed it had always been, to befriend and assist those who stood by it in the days of Mutiny. Akali movement got impetus due the impact of financial limitations and tyranny. Radical leaders who came to the forefront were of different shades of political opinion and religious enthusiasm, Baba Kharak Singh, Mehtab Singh and Teja Singh Samunderi were inspired by religious considerations. Master Tara Singh and three brothers- 174 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Amar Singh, Mukh Singh and Jaswant Singh of Jhabal were religious fanatics. Baba Kharak Singh was not credible in the eyes of the Government and the keys of the Golden temple were taken away by the Deputy Commissioner of Amritsar on the 7th November, 1921. Deputy Commissioner of Amritsar sought to hand over the keys to a person of his own choice which was resisted to by the SGPC (Shiromani Gurdwara Prabhandhak Committee) On November 21, Baba Kharak Singh, Mehtab Singh, Master Tara Singh and over 1,200 others members of Akali were arrested by police and sentenced with various terms of imprisonments. However, were released on January, 22 1922 they including BabaKharak Singh. On this occasion, Mahatma Gandhi congratulated and said, “First battle of India’s freedom won, Congratulations”. Sunder Das, a Mahant and also baptized as Sikh, was bestowed with the keys of Guru Ka Bagh, a Gurdwara near Amritsar by the Shiromani Gurdwara PrabhandhakCommittee. But having been affected by the sympathetic treatment of the Government, he claimed Guru ka Bagh as his personal property and resisted cutting of timber by the for Langer (food-meal). As a consequence, five Sikhs were arrested on the charges of trespass and sentenced to the six month of rigorous imprisonment on 9th August 1922. Government showed its heavy handedness to Mehtab Singh and Master Tara Singh by not only blocking their way to Guru ka Bagh but also by beating them to the extent of their becoming unconsciousness. At the same time, Akali Jathas comprising about 100 volunteers were proceeding to Guru Ka Bagh in instalment and remained non- violent in word and actions. Theywere given a sound beating by the police and this thrashing continued for long nineteen days. The leaders like Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya, Hakim Ajmal Khan, Dr. Rajinder Parsad and C.F. Andrews observed the non-violent attitude in the face of the worst aggression of police force. Their struggle was hailed as, “A new heroism being learnt through suffering”. It was observed that a new lesson in moral warfare has been taught to the world.” Hindu-Muslim relations were at the lowest ebb but Hindu-Sikh relations were going well in the legislative council but urban Hindus who were considered to be the real power of Congress did not side by them. This was the reason that Malaviya and 175 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Lajpat Rai could not win Sikh support for Congress and Gandhi had a little concern for them. Though Hindus put up an artificial resistance to the Gurdawara Bill but government made a serious mistake in dropping the said bill. It might have been the sole satisfaction for the Sikhs.16 It was very strictly ordered by the Lieutenant Governor of Punjab ordered police to withdraw from baton charge on the SatyagarhiAkalis. At that time arrest toll was 5,605 out of which 936 were hospitalized for treatment. So, Sir Ganga Ram, a retired engineer and charity donor, bought the land and donated it to Akalis on the request of the Governor. Maharaja Ripduman Singh of Nabha, being sympathetic towards Akalis was an eyesore for the Government. The Government created a fake case on the complaint of Maharaja Bhupindar Singh of Patiala who referred to British court of inquiry a boundary dispute with Nabha state. The court gave verdict in favour of Patiala. The political agent compelled Raja Ripduman Singh to abdicate. This really hurt the Sikhs. The S.G.P.C.passed a resolution demanding the restoration of Maharaja and asked the Sikhs to observe 9th September, 1923 as Nabha Day. At this volt face, Sikhs got angered and they organizes Akhand path at Gurdwara Gangsar in village Jaito. The Punjab police and Nabha state police attacked the august shrine and put a stop on the recitation of the Granth and put some Akalis behind the bars. It was a total affront. The Government declared ban on S.G.P.C. and Shiromani Akali Dal and also declared them quash bodies. Akali leaders including Mehtab Singh, Teja Singh Samundri, Teja Singh Akarpuri, BawaHarikishan Singh, Gyani Sher Singh, Prof. Teja Singh, Prof. Narinjan Singh, Sarmukh Singh Jhabal, Sohan Singh Josh, Gopal Singh Qaumi and Sewa Singh Thikriwala were arrested on the charges of treason and waging a war against the Crown and were brought to the Lahore Fort. But the Jathas kept on marching towards Jaito despite the fact they were severely beaten. So much so that on 21, March, 1923, they were fired upon and many Sikhs were shot dead. The Indian Congress declared its full support for Akali Morcha at Jaito. Jawahar Lal Nehru, Santhanam and A.T.Gidwani, who were the members of Indian National Congress rushed to Jaito for the evaluation of the actual situation but 176 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

they were arrested on September, 21, 1923 and they were produced in the court of Nabha on 3 October, 1923 for trial. During the trial Nehru strongly criticised the administration as well as court. The governor of the Punjab Malcolm Hailey, in the meanwhile, was not at all hesitant to fulfil the demands of the Sikhs for having a full control of all the significant Gurdwaras in the province. And the decision was taken by the five-member committee set up by the Sikh members of the legislative council. Hailey sent a new draft of Gurdwara Bill to the detained Akali leaders, Master TaraSingh, Baba Kharak Singh and Sardar Teja Singh Samundri in Lahore jail, and after their thorough examination it was negotiated. But the Sikhs showed no sign of reconciliation because of their detained companions. And the government was not clear on the point. The decision was taken by the same committee of five members. They were of the opinion that the interference by the government was not acceptable at any cost but at the same time government failed to give clear direction as to who would take control of the Gurdwaras. In his speech at Punjab Legislative Council Sir Malcolm Hailey made the important announcement that the Punjab government was prepared to release most of the Sikh prisoners, whether convicted or under trail, whose offences arose out of the Gurdwara movement and were not convicted of violence, after they had showed their willingness to follow the Gurdwara Bill. He showed a great deal of sympathy towards the Sikhs in his speech. The question of prestige did not therefore arise, for they (Sikhs) had won the battle, and it was needless to process this question any further. In the opinion of the governor of the province, it was very necessary that the Sikhs should take over the management of the Gurdwaras according to the law.In fact the measure to support the Sikhs on Gurdawara Bill was adopted by the Hindus in order to ensure the cooperation of the Sikhs against Muslims without any regard to right or wrong. But the Bill was passed even in the face of huge opposition. However, such opposition rendered it valueless and almost impracticable. The Hindu-Sikh alliance was a transient measure and not a genuine one. Both the communities did not agree on the Land Alienation Act. 177 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

There was a sharp divide of urban and rural sections on the matter. Sikhs belonging to the rural strata sought to safeguard their own interests. And the natural effect of all this on the Hindus was to rethink on Swaraj and the Congress politics. They were totally cognizant of the fact that the Muslims got politically activated because of their participation in the Khilafat Movement and Hindu politicians, infact, were responsible for making Muslims conscious of their political course. Now the urbanite Hindus were keen to have good relations with the Government instead of with the Congress. By the time, Communal dissension and discard had taken root in the hearts of Hindus and Muslims but Hindus did not want to embark upon any open wrangling on account of Muslims being a powerful community. The Bill was not resisted by the Hindus on the whole despite the fact that it had treaded on their corn. It was a generally agreed truth that Udassies were orthodox Hindus. That was why they were not happy with Malaviya who had not tackled the issue in an appropriate manner for the Hindus. But Malaviya, being a congressman wanted to support Akalis because of some political considerations. So Hindus had to gang up together to support Sikhs even against their own interests. The support of the Hindu members attributed either to political motives of the same kind, or to open bribery on the part of the S.G.P.C. It was simply in fact reduced to them somewhat critical position of having to depend entirely on government. The net result was that Hindus outside the council were not happy with the Congress- Akalis cooperation and abandoned their support to the Hindu members of the council. On the whole it depressed them and their credibility had a question markin the eyes of their own co-religionists. If government were not lent a hand to the Hindu legislators they would have lost the game. The Gurdwara Bill was passed without any opposition from the Hindus while many of them were offended by the Bill. Now Hindu and Muslims contended that they had given the Sikhs what was due to them and now they could bring the Sikhs around their point of view. Thus the bill met all the Akali demands and was passed into law on July 28, 1925 by the Governor General of India after its authorization by the Punjab legislative council. The Act became law on November 1, 1925 with a gazette notification from the government of Punjab. According to the Act, a Central Gurdwara Board elected by the Sikhs was to be the custodian of all-important Sikh places of worship. The first meeting of the Gurdwara board 178 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

passed a resolution that its designation be changed to Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, which was accepted by the government. The establishment of Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee and Shiromani Akali Dal in December 1920 heralded a new era in the history of Punjab politics. The Gurdwara Reform Movement was started by Sikhs to free their Gurdwaras from the control of Mahants (Priests). Gurdwara are the places for worship for the Sikhs. In the early days Gurdwaras were simple Dharmsalas. But with the passage of time these Dharmsalas became a centre of Sikh community, where, apart from worship and religious ceremonial activities connected with births, baptisms, betrothals, marriages and obsequies were observed. There was a free kitchen, the Guru-Ka-Langar, and also a school (Pathshala) where children learnt the alphabet and their daily Prayer. These Dharmsalas were later called Gurdwaras. In other words the Dharmsalas or Gurdwaras were the important institution of the Sikhs. According to Sikh tradition the priests in the early days as well as other persons were placed in-charge of various Gurdwaras. It was in tune with the advice of Guru Nanak. Moreover, they wished to dedicate their life to prayer and service of the community.Moreover some of them had been leading luxurious life and squandered large earnings of Gurdwaras on wine and women. The Gurdwara Reform Movement is significant in three respects (1) It created sense of confidence among the Indians that the British could be forced to meet their genuine demands through non-violent mass movement; (2) it brought the Akali Dal and the Congress leadership very close to each other, giving a great impetus to the freedom movement in Punjab; (3) the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee and the Akali Dal provided the institutional and organizational structure to respond to the aspirations of the newly mobilized Sikh masses, and in the process it acted as the training ground for the emerging Sikh5 Gurdwara_Reform_MovementIn the course of their five year (1920-25) struggle the Shiromani GurdwaraPrabandhak Committee and the Akali Dal were not only able to oust the Mahants rather obtained the control over all the important Sikh shrines through peaceful agitation and passive sufferings, but also to strengthen the forces of nationalism in the Punjab by ejecting the Mahants, the government 179 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

appointed managers and other vested interests in the Sikh communities. Once the important Sikh shrines came under the Akali control, the Mahants in charge of the smaller Gurdwaras either voluntarily submitted to the authority of the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee or were made to surrender their shrines and the jagirs attached to them under the provisions of the Sikh Gurdwaras and Shrines Bill passed in July 1925. Mohinder Singh opines that over three hundred large and small Gurdwaras were liberated by the Akali. GurdwaraBabe-di-Ber Chronologically the first Gurdwara to be reformed through agitation was Babe-di-Ber Sialkot. When Hamam Singh, its Mahant died. His widow had her minor son appointed as successor, under .The guardianship of one Ganda Singh, an Honorary Magistrate. There was a wave of resentment among the Sikhs thought out the Punjab against this action. And various Singh Sabhas sent telegrams to the Lieutenant-Governor of the Panjab conveying their protest· against this 'outrage' the collector, however, decided to ignore all popular opposition and sanctioned the mutation in favour of the minor Mahant Gurcharan Singh. The reformers reacted by filing a civil suit in the court of the District Judge who ordered the plaintiffs to pay a court fee of Rs.50,OOOrejected. Having thus failed to achieve their objective through recourse to be courts, the reformer then resorted to peaceful agitation. The Sikhs of the locality organised, themselves and formed a Khalsa Sewak Jatha to reform the Gurdwaras in the city. Under the new programme of action, they started holding weekly (and latter daily)services in the Gurdwara Ganda' Singh placed many hurdles in. the way of the reformers., but they succeeded in taking over the control of shrine and re-starting the system' of free langar which had been stopped by the Mahant .On 5 October 1920, the Sikhs held a big elected 8 managing committee ofmembers for the control of the Gurdwara . Meanwhile some new' developments in the affairs of the Golden Temple and the Akal Takhat diverted the attention of the reformers and the (of struggle shifted from relatively small town to the. Sikh headquarters at Amritsar The Nankana Holocaust It was being manage by an udasi mahant, narain das, who lived in the Gurdwara with a mistress and was known to have invited prostitute to dance in 180 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

the sacred premises. Local Sikhs there tended to eject him by force the mahant asked the police for and hired nearly 400 things to safeguards and defend his interest in early morning hours on 20, Feb.1921, a jatha(band) of akali led by lachmanSinghDharovalia entered the gurdwara. The gates of shrines were then closed, andNarain Das thungs attacked the Jatha with swords, hatches, and firearms. The dead and dying Akaliswere then dragged to a pile of legs which had been collected earlier, and burnt by the time. The police and local Sikhs came on the scene 130 men had been consumed by flames Nankana Sahib Tragedy was the most important tragedy of the Gurdwara reform movement, which infuriated the whole Indian people against the priests of Gurdwara and the Government. Only a boy of 12 years, who had taken refuge under Guru Granth Sahib, was spared. The news of the outrage spread like wildfire. Sardar Uttam Singh wired the terrible news to the Governor, the Commissioner the Deputy Commissioner, the Superintendent of Police and different Sikhs centres Teja Singh, Gurdwara Reform The Deputy Commissioner Currie reached Nankana Sahib at 12:30 p.m. he could do nothing without the assistance of Police and saw the bodies of Sikhs burning with his own eyes.In 1923, the Akalis decided to take over the Gurdwara Gangsar at Jaitu (or Jaito) in the Nabha State. The erstwhile Maharaja (ruler) of Nabha Ripudaman Singh had been sympathetic to the Akali and the Indian nationalist cause, but was deposed by the British Government. When the SGPC launched an agitation, its leaders and members were arrested on the charge of sedition. Subsequently, several marches were organized in support of the agitation. The protestors were arrested, beaten and shot at by the police at various instances. December, the Government recognized the SGPC as the manager of the gurdwara, but also ordered the Akalis to follow the legal process for ejecting the Udasi mahants out of the premises. On 1 January 1924, an Akali jatha forcibly took the possession of the property occupied by Pala Ram. Around 34 Akalis were arrested by the police for this action on the next day. In subsequent days, a number of Akali jathas staged demonstrations at the site. A total of 5,251 persons were arrested for the demonstrations, and 3,092 of these were sent to the prison. Morcha For Keys with the setting up SGPC,There was improvement in the management of Darbar Sahib,Sarbrah Sunder Singh Ramgarhia was cooperating with the committee. On 20 april1921,it had been declared by the government that it had handed over management of darbar sahib to the Sikhs. But keys of toshakhana were 181 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

still in possession of government-appointment sarbrah.lest the latter hand over keys to SGPC,DEPUTY COMMISSIOR,Amritsar,sent EAC Amar Nath to secure keys from the Sarbrah.the keys were placed in the government treasure. this foolish act of the deputy commissioner proved that the statement of the government that management of darbar sahib had been handed over to Sikhs was false. Government was further isolated among the Sikhs. the hands of non-co-operator were strengthened. The SGPC held a meeting and passed a resolution to boycott the forthcoming visit of prince of wales to Punjab. The Sikhs shope-keepers were called upon to observe hartal on that day along with their hindu and Muslim brethren.it was further decided by the committee that by way of protest there would be no illumination on 15 Novembr,the birthday of Guru Nanak.to protect against the government action the government action, a massive public meeting was held in Bagh Akaliion.Akalis from all over the Punjab had arrived to take in the protest Dewan,5000 of them having already arrived by afternoon of 11 November 1921. 13 Bakhshish Singh Nijjar (1996). the main speakers at the meeting were kharaksingh,Jaswant Singh Jhabal and Mehtab Singh.Meanwhile the government had appointed another Sarbrah,Captain Bahadur Singh of Ghwind in place of Sunder Singh Ramgarhia, He was a toady who in 1915 had helped the government to arrest a patriot Ganga Singh in HotiMardan. the deputy commissioner handed over keys to him. On 12 november1921,SGPCtook the decision to boycott the new SarbrahSahib. Such was the prevailing sentiment among Sikhs masses that soon the new Sarbrah also resigned and apologised to the SGPC. 7.3 SUMMARY  Sikh Gurdwara Act, legislation passed in India unanimously by the Punjab legislative council in July 1925 to end a controversy within the Sikh community that had embroiled it with the British government and threatened the tranquillity of the Punjab. The controversy had emerged over a reforming movement, organized as the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (“Committee of Shrine Management”), that wished to remove from the Sikh gurdwaras (temples) hereditary mahants (guardians), who in some cases had diverted temple revenues to private use. 182 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

 The controversy was embittered by the outrage at Nankana Sahib (now in Pakistan), when a number of protesters were trapped inside a gurdwara and burned to death. Processions of protest were organized, and the government was involved because the mahants had acquired customary proprietary rights in the pre-British period. The act, formulated with the help of the British governor, Sir Malcolm Hailey, set up a popularly elected central Sikh board, which represented the Sikh community. Sikh shrines and mahants were placed under the board’s control, ensuring that religious property was used for religious purposes and that the regular Sikh worship was maintained. 7.4 KEYWORDS  Akali:Its dictionary meaning is, a worshipper of Akal i.e. the Timeless God.  Guru Granth Sahib: More appropriately, Guru Granth Sahib, that is the Book of the Gurus, or the sacred Book which has the status of the last and final Sikh Prophet.  Nihang:Nihang, literally, is an alligator, who is all supreme in the waters, just as the lion is the supreme king amongst the fauna of the forest.  Panth literally means: The way, the good way of life.  Granthi:Literally, ‘the keeper and the reader of the Sikh scripture.1 In every Sikh Gurdwara there is a granthi nominated or accepted as such by the local Sikh congregation. 7.5 LEARNING ACTIVITY 1. Who were Udasi Sikhs? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 2. What is Akali Movement? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 3. What was the outcome from Nankana? 183 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 7.6 UNIT END QUESTIONS A. Descriptive Questions Short Questions 1. How was Akali Dal created? 2. What is Nirankari movement? 3. What is the role of SGPC in Sikhism? 4. What was the role of Akalis in freedom movement? 5. Briefly mention about the creation of SGPC. Long Questions 1. Elaborate about Nirankari movement. 2. Describe Naamdhari movement 3. Discuss about the role 4. What was Gurudwara reform movement contribution to Indian freedom struggle? 5. Write about internal structure of SGPC. B. Multiple Choice Questions 1. The committee which made to control and manage the Golden Temple and Akal Takht and other Gurdwaras was……? a. SGPC b. AGPC c. SKPA d. SMOP 2. What was the main objective of Akali Movement? 184 a. Freeing the gurdwaras from control of ignorant and corrupt Mahants b. Freeing the gurdwaras from control of British Govt. c. Freeing the gurdwaras from control of Terrorists CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

d. Freeing the gurdwaras from control of Maharajas 3. What was Akali Dal and SGPC (Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee) accepted as their creed? a. Non-Violence b. Violence c. politics d. Underground movements 4. In which year SGPC passed a resolution in favor of Non-Cooperation Movement? a. May 1921 b. May 1922 c. May 1923 d. May 1925 5. Who was the head of SGPC in Oct 1921, when govt. surrendered all keys to SGPC head? a. Baba Aghori Singh b. Baba Kharak Singh c. Baba Ranjit Singh d. Baba Khar Singh Answers 1-a, 2-a, 3-b, 4-a, 5-c 7.7 REFERENCE Reference 185 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

 History of the United Panjab. Atlantic Publishers & Dist. p. 130 14. S C Mittal (1977). Freedom Movement in Punjab. Concept. pp. 171–179. 15 Surinder Singh Johar (1998).  Holy Sikh Shrines, M.D. Publications New Delhi p. 64. 16. S C Mittal (1977).  Freedom Movement in Punjab, Concept.Anand Nagar Delhi p. 171–179. 17 S C Mittal (1977).  Freedom Movement in Punjab. An and Nagar Delhi Concept pp. 171–179. 18 Singh  Hari, Master Punjab Peasant in Freedom Struggle, volumetwo.pph New Delhi1984P112-113 Website  https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/100-years-of-sgpc-a-tumultuous-history- of-faith-and-politics-7056048/  https://amritmahotsav.nic.in/freedom-movement-detail.htm?21 186 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

UNIT8 - FREEDOM STRUGGLE MOVEMENT PART II STRUCTURE 8.0 Learning Objective 8.1 Introduction 8.2 Jallianwala Bagh 8.3 Bhagat Singh 8.4 Non-Cooperation 8.5 Civil Disobedience 8.6 Summary 8.7 Keywords 8.8 Learning Activity 8.9 Unit End Questions 8.10 Reference 8.0LEARING OBJECTIVE After studying this unit, you will be able to:  To learn about Jaliianwala Bagh massacre  To learn about Bhagat Singh  To learn about Non Cooperation movement  To learn about Civil Disobedience 8.1 INTRODUCTION Gandhiji arrived in India in 1915 from South Africa. Having led Indians in thatcountry in non-violent marches againstracist restrictions, he was already a respected leader, known internationally.His South African campaigns had brought him in contact with various types of Indians:Hindus, Muslims, Parsis and Christians; Gujaratis, Tamils and north Indians; and upper-class merchants, lawyers and workers 187 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

8.2 JALLIANWALA BAGH On April 13, 1919, several thousand unarmed Indians, mainly Sikhs, peacefully assembled in Jallianwala Bagh, Amritsar, to listen to several prominent local leaders speak out against British colonial rule in India and against the arrest and deportation of Dr. Satya Pal, Dr.Saifud-Din Kitchlew, and few others under the unpopular Rowlatt Act. UdhamSingh and his friends from the orphanage were serving water to the crowd. O’Dwyer had declared a martial law which not announced. He probably made some announcements about it in some localities of the city beforehand, but the general population was not aware of it. The political instability made it very difficult for him to stay in Punjab much longer after the Amritsar massacre. He says, “I arrived in India in November, 1885, and was posted to Lahore, the capital of the Punjab. I left Lahore and the Punjab for good in May, 1919.” General Dyer received the news that a huge meeting was to be held at Jallianwala Bagh at on the same day. People had started pouring into the Bagh after 2 p.m. At 4 p.m. he received definite information from Rehill (Superintendent of Police) that a crowd of 1,000 had assembled at Bagh. Thereafter, the news was confirmed by Mr. Lewis, Manager of Crown Cinema. Dyer thought it as a challenge to his authority. Dyer at once gave orders to his striking force to fall in. He took two armoured cars arrayed with machine guns along with him. Dyer with the company of his favourite officers Briggs and Anderson, fifty rifle men, forty Gurkhas armed with their traditional weapons, the Kukris,28 marched towards the Jallianwala Bagh. Seeing a vast crowd gathered in the Bagh, General Dyer had nothing to wait for. He had gone to the Bagh with a fixed mind and an iron determination. According to Briggs “it was very hard to estimate the size of the crowd. The General asked me what I thought the numbers were and I said about 5,000 or so but I believe it has been estimated at more like 25,000.”29 Dyer, standing on a raised platform inside the entrance, was struck by the diverse nature of the crowd. Dyer did not think it necessary to give any warning to the people. Dyer deployed his troops, the Gurkhas riflemen on the left and 25 the Baluchis on the right. All thishappened withinthirty seconds. The ground on which the soldiers stood was at a higher level than the rest of the area. The General then instantly ordered them to open fire.30 Immediately, the crowd shouted but authority uttered no need to worry; the troops were firing blanks. But they quickly lost their illusions, however, as people began to crumple and fall. 188 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

The firing continued for ten minutes and in that time 1650 rounds of 303 marks, VI ammunition were fired i.e. 33 rounds per rifle per man. The firing ceased only after the ammunition ran out. When the firing ceased, nothing expected dead bodies was visible in each and every corner of the Bagh. The Bagh was full of dead bodies. Hundred persons were badly wounded and they were crying for help. Some dead bodies were lying outside the Bagh. It so happened that the wounded persons who tried to run, could not survive and fell dead after a vain attempt to save themselves. According to Dyer’s statement on 25th August 1919 to the General staff, he tated, “I fired and continued to fire until the crowd dispersed”. There was nobody to give them water. No medical aid was available for the people. Even those residents of Amritsar whose relatives had come to Bagh did not dare to enter the Bagh for quite some time to search for them. The Bagh thus looked like a mini battle-field which was full of numerous corpses and wounded persons. General Dyer left the Bagh, along with his force, leaving behind a scene which was like a hell on earth. According to Girdhari Lal, who saw the scene closely: “I saw hundreds of persons killed on the spot. The worst part of the whole thing was that firing was directed towards the gates through which people were running out. There were small outlets, four or five in all, and bullets actually rained over the people at all these gates....and many got trampled under the feet of rushing crowds and thus lost their lives....blood was pouring inprofusion.....even those who lay flat on the ground were shot.....some had their heads cut open, other had eyes shot and nose, chest, arms and legs shattered”. When the news of the tragic incident percolated out of Punjab, India was convulsed and there was an outbreak of criticism and condemnation and a serious expression of sense of discontent and fury against the British rule for its failure to maintain perfect law and order without using illegal, vastly questionable, heartless, treacherous and horrible means. Dyer’s action was criticized in various meetings and conferences. Brutal and strong punishments were called for General Dyer and other administrators of Martial Law and the urgent release of political and other prisoners’ arrests and convicted before and during the Martial Law. In comparison to the 1857 Mutiny, historian Percival Spear comments that with the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, “a scar was drawn across Indo-British relations deeper than any which had been inflicted since the Mutiny”. The tragic event had far-reaching consequences – 189 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

for example Rabindranath Tagore renounced his British knighthood in the wake of the massacre. Tagore wrote to Viceroy: “The time has come when badges of honour make our shame glaring in their incongruous context of humiliation and I for my part wish to stand shorn of all special distinctions by the side of my country.”It became a remarkable signpost on the way towards Indian independence. The many disputes which exist in connection with Dyer’s action in Amritsar began to manifest themselves almost immediately and are evident in the Majority and Minority Reports of the Hunter Committee, the Parliamentary Debates on Dyer and in the Congress Report on the Punjab Disturbances. Individual sanctioning of collective violence is a function of moral inclusiveness on the part of the judge and tolerance of its contrary, moral exclusiveness. However, tolerance of General Dyer’s conduct was not one individual’s act but was determined by a chain of organizational actions (or inaction). General Dyer asked for and received the approval of his immediate superior, Major General Beynon, and the provincial lieutenant governor of the Punjab, Sir Michael O’Dwyer. The massacre was apparently overlooked by the Government of India for five months before it was debated in the Imperial Legislative Council in September 1919. At that time, they agreed to postpone judgment of General Dyer until after the Hunter Committee’s hearing, even though the statement requested from Dyer by the commander in chief of the Indian Army had been received on 25 August 1919 and the Hunter Committee was not a judicial body qualified to make a legal indictment or judgment. This succession of lapsed opportunities for judgment led LordMidleton, a “deviant” supporter of the motion, to denounce that government: “After all the facts were known the Government of India extended his [Dyer’s] autocratic power in the Punjab. A month later they sent him to the front. In October they promoted him, and in January this year they promoted him again; and then, in March, they tell him that they cannot give him further employment. If anybody is to be accused of favouring racial humiliation or frightfulness, it surely is those to whom all these facts were known, who took no action on them, and allowed it to be believed that theywere condoned, so long as the emergency was hot, but are to be condemned now that 190 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

public opinion has got coolSecretary of State for India Montagu pressed the Government of India for an inquiry into the case of the disorders, first recommending such an inquiry in his budget speech of 22 May 1919. Montagu's initial impressions based on that ambiguous wire from Delhi were clarified by two conversations with the retired lieutenant governor of the Punjab, Sir Michael O’Dwyer, in London in June. What could be done? If he had unilaterally condemned Dyer on O’Dwyer’ssecond-hand report that Dyer fired without warning and without being threatened, or even demanded a court-martial for him, he would become the butt of attack by the whole imperial class in India and Britain and risk rejection of the proposed Government of India Act incorporating reforms at the hands of their allies in Parliament. And he would be censured for prejudging the issue without the accused being heard if he attempted to have Dyer quietly removed from command. On the other hand, he was pressed by the Indian delegation in London whose support he also needed for the reforms he had spent three years in developing from the government’s 1917 promise to legislation. To avoid both risks and develop a joint resolution, what better method was there than to appoint a committee composed of official Britishers andIndians (loyal to the government, of course)? He wired the viceroy on 18 July that he was making “a statement in Parliament to the effect that you are going to appoint a committee and have asked me to select a chairman....It would sooth the Indian delegation here.” On 14 October 1919, after orders issued by the Secretary of State for India, Edwin Montagu, the Government of India announced the formation of a committee of inquiry into the events in Punjab. Referred to as the Disorders Inquiry Committee, it was later more widely known as the Hunter Commission. It was named after the name of chairman, Lord William Hunter, former Solicitor-General for Scotland and Senator of the College of Justice in Scotland. The stated purpose of the commission was to “investigate the recent disturbances in Bombay, Delhi and Punjab, about their causes, and the measures taken to cope with them”. He wired the viceroy on 18 July that he was making “a statement in Parliament to the effect that you are going to appoint a committee and have asked me to select a chairman....It would sooth the Indian delegation here.” On 14 October 1919, after orders issued by the Secretary of State for India, Edwin Montagu, the Government of India announced the formation of a committee of inquiry into the events in Punjab. Referred to as the Disorders Inquiry Committee, it was later more widely known as the Hunter Commission. It was named after the name of chairman, Lord William 191 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Hunter,former Solicitor-General for Scotland and Senator of the College of Justice in Scotland. The stated purpose of the commission was to “investigate the recent disturbances in Bombay, Delhi and Punjab, about their causes, and the measures taken to cope with them”. The members of the commission were:  Lord Hunter, Chairman of the Commission  Justice George C. Rankin of Calcutta  Sir ChimanlalHarilal Setalvad, Vice-Chancellor of Bombay University and advocate of the Bombay High Court  W.F. Rice, member of the Home Department  Major-General Sir George Barrow, KCB, KCMG, GOC Peshawar Division  Pandit Jagat Narayan, lawyer and Member of the Legislative Council of the United Provinces  Thomas Smith, Member of the Legislative Council of the United Provinces  Sardar Sahibzada Sultan Ahmad Khan, lawyer from Gwalior State India to remove General Dyer from his post-this action was, as Winston Churchill, the ecretary of state for war, told the House of Commons in July 1920, the lightest sanction that could have been employed. The Government of India’s censure of Dyer’s action,reaffirmed subsequently by both the British Cabinet and the Army Council, provoked motions by Dyer’s defenders in both Houses of Parliament in July 1920, passage of which would have symbolically condemned the government’s sanction, thus condoning Dyer’s action and the imperial policy it was recognized to represent. The motion passed the House of Lords that the government’s conduct of the Dyer case was “establishing a precedent dangerous to the preservation of order in the face of rebellion.” In testifying to the Hunter Committee, the committee officially appointed by the British Government to investigate the massacre and what was quaintly known as other “disturbances” in north India, Dyer foregrounds his identity as a military officer, legitimising his authority on the basis of military expertise and access to conditions on the ground. He narrates his intentions by stressing that his objectives were calculated from a military perspective. 192 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Believing that there was evidence of a widespread rebellion which was not confined to Amritsar alone, he felt that his duty at Jallianwala Bagh was not limited to dispersing the crowd, but was “to produce a moral effect in the Punjab”. Dyer had ascertained, in his words that the situation was very serious and had made up his mind...to do all men to death if they were going to continue the meeting. “It was no longer a question of merely dispersing the crowd,” he added, “but one of producing a sufficient moral effect, from a military point of view, not only on those who were present but more specifically throughout the Punjab. There would be no question of undue severity.” Dyer’s statement regarding the massacre is an admission of what is known in jurisprudential discourse as “constructive intent”: a reasonable expectation that casualties, or the “wilful and wanton” infliction of injuries to others, would result from his actions. His testimony indicates that a crucial aspect of maintaining the peace in Amritsar and in the Punjab included upholding British military prestige, thereby asserting colonial masculinity and dominance over the natives through the exercise of force. For example, after admitting that he could have dispersed the crowd without firing on it, Dyer explains that he rejected this opinion out of the anxiety that the crowd could make a laughingstock out of him. “I could disperse them for some time”, he reveals, “then they would all come back and laugh at me, and I considered I would making myself a fool”. This possibility would have been all the more personally abhorrent to Dyer considering that he subscribed to the adult-child paradigm of colonial relations. In response to the suggestions that he had done “a great disservice to the British Raj” by firing on the crowd, Dyer asserts, “I thought it would be doing a jolly lot of good and they would realise that they were not to be wicked.” After reporting to the General Headquarters in Delhi, he was shown not to the Military Secretary’s office in Delhi, but to that of the Commander-in-Chief. Outside in the anteroom, he was met by General Hudson, who told him that he was to be deprived of his command, as the Commander-in-Chief agreed with the censure of the Hunter Committee. Dyer objected that as he had not been tried, he should not be condemned, but Hudson told him that it was too late and asked Dyer to not make any difficulties with the Commander in Chief as he is very much upset. Dyer agreed that he would not do this. He entered the Commander-in- Chief’s office and was told briefly by Monroe to resign his post and that he would not be re- employed. Dyer left without speaking a word. The Hunter Committee split down the middle, with its three Indian members, Jagat Narayan, C.H. Setalvad and Sultan Ahmad, authoring a dissent. The majority condemned Dyer, 193 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

arguing that in “continuing firing as long as he did, it appears to us that General Dyer committed a grave error.” The dissenting members, understandably, argued that the martial law regime's use of force was wholly unjustified. “General Dyer thought he had crushed the rebellion and Sir Michael O’Dwyer was of the same view”, they wrote, “(but) there was no rebellion which required to be crushed.” Both Secretary of State for War Winston Churchill and former Prime Minister H. H. Asquith however, openly condemned the attack. Churchill referring to it as “monstrous”, while Asquith called it “one of the worst outrages in the whole of our history.”48 Winston Churchill, in the House of Commons debate of 8 July 1920, said, “The crowd was unarmed, except with bludgeons. It was not attacking anybody or anything... When fire had been opened upon it to disperse it, it tried to run away. Pinned up in a narrow place considerably smaller than Trafalgar Square, with hardly any exits, and packed together so that one bullet would drive through three or four bodies, the people ran madly this way and the other. When the fire was directed upon the centre, they ran to the sides. The fire was then directed to the sides. Many threw themselves down on the ground, the fire was then directed down on the ground. This was continued to 8 to 10 minutes, and it stopped only when the ammunition had reached the point of exhaustion.” After Churchill’s speech in the House of Commons debate, MPs voted 247 to 37 against Dyer and in support of the Government. Rabindranath Tagore received the news of the massacre by 22 May 1919. He tried to arrange a protest meeting in Calcutta and finally decided to renounce his knighthood as “a symbolic act of protest.” In the repudiation letter, dated 30 May 1919 and addressed to the Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford, he wrote “I ... wish to stand, shorn, of all special distinctions, by the side of those of my countrymen who, for their so called insignificance, are liable to suffer degradation not fit for human beings.” The possibility of a court-martial was rejected because the Army Act stated that an offence of murder or manslaughter could not be tried by court martial, unless it was committed on active service. Whilst it was arguable that duty in Amritsar had indeed been an active service, it was the Government’s view that the Army Act’s intension was that both offences must always be dealt with by the civil power if civil courts were available. The Legal Advisor Edward des Chamier warned, however, that there was nothing to stop any private person bringing up a 194 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

case against Dyer. If this happened, the Government was entitled to take over, then drop the case. Montagu accepted this, but still wished to take the matter further than what had been done so far, the removal of Dyer to the unemployed list by the Commander-in-Chief in India. In a note he drew up to clear his mind, he wrote: “The Government of India is right to suggest not to try Dyer, but to suggest dismissal. Condemnation of his use of principle of terrorism must be stronger than Hunter. His Majesty can have no further use for the services of General Dyer....He leaves the service a brave soldier whose fault is the misconception of the principles which govern his profession.” Montagu was also advised by his Military Secretary Lieutenant General AS Cobb of Dyer’s personal circumstances. As an officer without employment, Dyer was entitled to unemployed pay of 700 pounds per annum, which he was entitled to draw for up to five years. Cobb presumed, however, that Dyer would elect to retire, in this case or in the case of compulsory retirement, he would receive a pension. Dismissal from the service, which could only be effected by the sentence of a court martial or by the King, on the advice of the Secretary of State for War, would mean the loss of his pension. Advice given to the Secretary of State for War still intent on having him compulsorily retired. The committee agreed that it was undesirable to allow a trial in India or the United Kingdom and that it would be impossible to try Dyer by court-martial. The members accepted that they should condemn Dyer’s failure to make a proclamation or exhibit a notice at the Jallianwala Bagh when he heard of the meeting, as well as his actions of opening fire without warning and continuing to fire for ten minutes. The committee met again, though made no progress as Montagu had not been able to prepare a draft resolution condemning Dyer. He was still discussing with Chelmsford the Government of India’s draft resolutions, and the committee’s draft would have to await the outcome of this. Eventually, the agreement over the resolution was reached. The Government of India published their first findings on the Hunter Report in a letter to Montagu dated 3rd May, 1920. This was their first public pronouncement upon the Hunter Report, which was by now some two months old. In their letter, they accepted that the civilian authorities had been at some fault in handing over control of Amritsar to the military ‘in such terms as to suggest that they did not intend to exercise supervision or guidance over the action of the military 195 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

commander’. They censured Dyer severely, finding that “Orders prohibiting assemblies should have been promulgated more widely and in particular that notices might have been posted up in Jallianwala Bagh....The Government of India agree with the Committee that General Dyer should have given warning to the crowd before opening fire....General Dyer’s action in continuing to fire on the after it had begun to disperse was, in the opinion of the Government of India, indefensible. [They] cannot accept this [Dyer’s intention to intimidate lawless elements in the population] as a justification of the continued firing, which greatly exercised the necessity of the occasion....General Dyer exceeded the reasonable requirements of the case and showed a misconception of his duty which resulted in a lamentable and unnecessary loss of life....We must express our great regret that no action was taken by the civil or the military authorities to remove the dead or give aid to the wounded.” The Dyer story was now beginning to leak into the press. The letter of which Joynson-Hicks had forewarned Montagu was published in the Sunday Times on 23rd May, under the heading ‘Amritsar – Hunter Commission Report: Shall General Dyer Be Sacrificed?’. Theletter reflected the briefings of Joynson-Hicks had from Sir Michael O’ Dwyer during his visit to India, which had excused Dyer’s firing without warning on the grounds that there was fear that the crowd would surge forward, and which claimed he carried on firing until it dispersed. The letter, clearly aimed at the Army Council, concluded: “Do not condemn this man too hastily.” The Morning Post went further the next day. In an article headed, ‘The Amritsar Episode. Some Side-lines on the Event’, wrote that the appointment of the Hunter Committee had been a great mistake. It blamed Chelmsford for giving way to Indian nationalists. The Post, which published considerable detail of Dyer’s actions, had also been fed the O’ Dwyer Line.59 Dyer, the article maintained, had gone down a blind alley where he found himself faced with a mob that could have rushed his force. He had fired on the mob, which broke, ran, couldn’t get out and surged back. These were the signs that the opposition was becoming more organised and Montagu pressed on with the revisions to the committee’s conclusions as fast as possible. On 26th May, 1919, he published both the Viceroy’s letter of 3rd May and his own despatch, which replied to Chelmsford and embodied the Cabinet’s decision. Both documents were published as 196 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Command Paper 705 and the Hunter Report was published at the same time. This was now the published policy of the British Government. Had it not been for the massacre, General Dyer’s name surely would not have become an issue, a public symbol, a flag, and later an epithet - “Dyerism”. Most British historians have concentrated exclusively on explaining how the firing occurred, as if it were a singular event and as if Dyer had not intended to do exactly what he did. They assess the sincerity of Dyer’s motives in terms of the threat he perceived in Amritsar in those days. Exploring the contradictorydefines statements made under threat of incriminations, the after-dinner remarks indicating boastfulness or penitence, and the physical symptoms displayed by Dyer after the firing has been a singularly vacuous academic exercise, considering that Dyer clearly asserted what his motives were in his response to the commander in chief of the Indian Army’s request for a written account. In his report of 25 August 1919, he wrote the following: “I fired and continued to fire till the crowd dispersed, and I considered that this is the least amount of firing which would produce the necessary moral and widespread effect it was my duty to produce if I was to justify my action. If more troops had been at hand the casualties would have been greater in proportion. It was no longer a question of merely dispersing the crowd, but one of producing a sufficient moral effect, from a military point of view, not only on those who were present, but more specially throughout the Punjab.” While factual clarity is rarely an aspect of the international disputes such as colonial massacres, with the Amritsar massacre the factual details of the event were not disputed; yet these details caused less of a reaction from the British public than less of the Dyer’s explanation of his intentions in ordering the attack on civilians. 8.3 BHAGAT SINGH Bhagat Singh's ancestors had a distinguished military record in the army of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. They had settled down in Khatkar Kalan in Jullunder District. The region known as Doab was famous for revolutionary activities. His grandfather, Sardar Arjan Singh was a Unani Doctor and a social worker. He was an Arya Samajist. Arya Samaj in the Punjab represented nationalist aspirations and his father and uncle were political activists. They were instrumental in forming a revolutionary movement in the form of Bharat Mata Society in 1907. His father Kishan Singh was jailed for organising peasants to protest against the Colonization Act and the Bari Doab Canal Act. His uncle, Sardar Ajit Singh became famous for his long term exile and was an active member of the Ghadar Party. The early 197 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

socialisation in t h e politics must have had a decisive influence in shaping Bhagat Singh's ideas. He had his schooling in D.A.V. High School, Lahore. It was considered to be a pioneer institution in Punjab. Here he came in contact with the nationalist leaders of Punjab like Lala Lajpat Rai, Sufi Amba Prasad, PindiDass, Mehta An and Kishore. His natural bent of mind was reflected in his choice of the ideal hero, Sardar Kartar Singh Sarabha, who was a Chadrite and died as a tnarty The Growing Unrest in the Punjab In the last decade of the nineteenth and the first decade of the twentieth century, the agriculturist of Punjab became the greatest sufferer. Repeated famines and growing unemployment along with government's colonial policies had resulted in great unrest among title peasantry. There were frequent clashes with the authorities and the harsh treatment meted out to the demonstrators alienated the people from the British rulers. The suppression of revolutionary parties like the Ghadar Party and the Babbar Ali movement with a heavy hand by the British government added to this growing alienation. The passing of We Rowlatt Act, the Jalianwala Bagh massacre at Amritsar and the Martial Law atr6cities and humiliations were all contributing to the growing i l feeling among people. The Amritsar Congress of 1919 and Gandhi's Non-Cooperation Movement played their part in the agitation in Punjab. The youth were impressed by what was happening to Europe after the first world war. The Russian Revolution made a great impact on the younger generation. Political Contacts Bhagat Singh, as a young man, had joined the National College at Lahore. The college had' a reputation of attracting young men who later on were in the forefront of various movements. Here he was under the influence of JayachandVidyalankar who tought history. As a student Bhagat Singh was active, intelligent and well disciplined. He learnt his lessons in revolutionary movements outside India-from Italy, Ireland, Russia and China. He had made up his mind to join the revolutionaries and rejected a proposal of his marriage. With a letter of introduction from Professor Vidyalankar, he met Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi at Kanpur. Vidyarthi's house was a centre of political. Activities and it was here that Bhagat Singh came in contact with the revdutionaries of North India. They had formed an organisation called Hindustan Republican Association. As a political worker, Bhagat Singh toured many places in U.P. Later on, he was assigned the job of running a National School near Aligarh. For some time, he went to Delhi and worked in a daily newspaper \"Vir Arjun\", a journal of socialist learning’s run by Sardar Sohan Singh Josh. The political forum created for the initiation of young man into the revolutionary' 198 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

activity was called Navjawan Bharat Sabha. Created in 1926, it had a specific programme of educating the young in social matters, popularizing Swadeshi and developing in them a sense of brotherhood and physical fitness to bear hardships. Added to this was a programme of cultivating a secular attitude bordering on atheism and hatred for the alien rule. It was a sort of open forum meant to train and recruit personnel for revolutionary activity. The NavjAwan Sabha was considered to be a stepping stone for those young people who later wanted to join the Hindustan Republican Association. The Hindustan Republican Association aimed at overthrowing the British Rule by insurrection and armed revolution. The Association had an elaborate organisation to carry on its clandestine activities, both within the country and without. It was no surprise that the Sabha became suspect in the eyes of the bureaucracy and its meetings were dispersed and its office bearers arrested. The Sabha was a forum from which speeches were made exhorting people to write against the unjust and arbitrary rule by the British. It also published the Independent Bhagat Singh Nationalism India tract Series. The Sabha propagated the idea of equality, removal of poverty and equitable distribution of wealth. The Hindustan Republican Association changed its hameto the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association. The new title was adopted after deliberations held on 9-10 September, 1928 a t Feroze S h a h Kotla grounds in Delhi. Bhagat Singh became an active member of the H.S.R.A. Avenging the Death of Lala Lajpat Rai These were the days when all-white members Simon Commission toured the whole country to make recommendations about future constitutional reforms. Its compositions and purpose was very much resented a n d the Commission was greeted everywhere with black flags and slogans asking the commission to go back. It was tovisit Lahore on October 30, 1928. Despite t h e ban, a procession was organized by all parties and Lala Lajpat Rai was requested to lead it. The processionists were. brutally assaulted by the police led by the superintendent of Police of Lahore. The assault and its shock resulted in Lalaji's death. The death was deeply mourned by all Indians. Bhagat Singh and his colleagues decided to kill the Superintendent of Police of Lahore, to avenge the death. However, they were guided by mistaken signal and instead of the superintendent killed his subordinate, Saunders and a policeman Chan an Singh who chased them. Bhagat Singh escaped the police net a n d reached 199 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)

Calcutta. Here further plans were laid to set up bomb factories a t Agra, Lahore. and Saharanpur. The British Government wanted to suppress the Workers movement. With this view it implicated the labour leaders in a conspiracy case. The Government had also introduced two bills restricting freedom of workers-the Public Safety Bill a n d the Trade Dispute Bill. The H.S.R.A. decided to protect against the high handed policy of the Government. Plans were made to create panic in the Legislative Assembly a t the time the Bills would be taken up. Bhagat Singh and B.K. Dutt were selected for this purpose. From the gallery, they threw two bombs a t a place where few members were sitting a n d made no attempt to escape. They also threw leaflets explaining the purpose of the H.S.R.A. in undertaking the act. The Defence of Terrorism The leaflet eloquently a n d succinctly explained the stand taken by the Revolutionaries. The futility of reforms, the mockery of parliamentary system, the need to prepare for a revolution and a justification of violence all of these found their place in the leaflet. The leaflet declared. \"It takes a loud voice to make the deaf hear, with these.immorta1 words uttered on similar occasion by Valliant, a French anarchist martyr, do we strongly justify this action of ours. \"Without repeating the humiliating history of the past ten years of the working of the reforms (Montague-Chelmsford reforms) and without mentioning the insults hurled a t the Indian nation through this house-the so called Indian Parliament-we want to point out that, while the people expecting some more crumbs of reforms from the Simon Commission, and a r e ever quarrelling over the distribution of the expected none, the Government is thrusting upon us new repressive measures like the public safety a n d the trade Dispute Bill, while reserving the Press Sedition Bill for the next session. The indiscriminate arrests of labour leaders working in the open fields clearly indicate whither the wind blows. \"In these provocative circumstances, the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association, in all seriousness, realizing their full responsibility, had decided and ordered its army to do this particular action, so t h a t a stop be put to this humiliating force a n d t o let the alien bureaucratic exploiters do what they wish, but they must be made to come before the public eye in their naked form. \" k to the representatives of the people return to their constituencies and prepare the masses for the coming revolution, a n d let the government know that while protesting against the public safety and Trade Dispute Bill and the callous murder of Lala Lajpat Rai, on behalf of the 200 CU IDOL SELF LEARNING MATERIAL (SLM)