A G Noorani, J L Kapur & Jayaprakash Narayan

The patient reader would find 3 excerpts below.

1. From A G Noorani’s articel in Frontline (in a box).

2. The complete excerpts from the J L Kapur report referred to by A G Noorani in his article.

3. An excerpt from a biography of Sardar.

It is relevant to note that the J L Kapur report of 1969 refers to JP’s speeches in January1948. The excerpts from the biography reflects his stand in 1967. What he thought in 1975 – 77 is another story altogether.

Read the sources form your own unbiased opinion

 

1. Excerpt from Frontline – 

The J.L. Kapur Report noted at Page 162, Volume 1:

“According to the Times of India, dated February 18, 1948 Ex. 242, Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan said that the people should not distrust the campaign that he had undertaken to draw pointed attention to the weakness of the Central Administration:

‘He had nothing to benefit personally, he said, from a frank and free criticism and an over-all estimation of the events leading up to Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination. He was no believer in fate and was convinced that, if prominent Congress Ministers had not patronised and attended RSS rallies and had warned the youth of the country clearly against joining the organisation and provided other suitable outlets for their energies, Mahatma Gandhi would never have been taken away from us when we most needed him.

‘Even after the bomb was thrown at him during the prayer meeting no strong action was taken, but instead attempts were made to blanket the criminals by officials within the administration, who sabotaged any effort taht might have been made to unearth the conspiracy.”

“He criticised the Government for having spokesmen of big businessmen included in the cabinet. He wanted communalists and communal saboteurs to be replaced by democratic minded nationalists.

“In the Bombay Chronicle of February 28, 1948, Ex 243, is given a report of a speech of Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan at Bombay where he demanded the resignation of Dr. Shyama Prasad Mookerjee, Mr. R. K. Shanmukham Chetty, Sardar Baldev Singh and Mr. C. H. Bhabha. He blamed the Central Cabinet for encouraging communal organisations in the country which resulted in Gandhiji’s murder and demanded the banning of communal organisations.”

JP was clearly referring to Patel’s praise for the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabha on January 6, 1948, shortly before the dastardly deed on January 30, 1948.  

 

 

2. Excerpt from Vol 1 Page 162 of J L Kapur Report:-

12C.8 Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan then said that a man of 74 had departments of which even a man of 30 would probably find it difficult to bear the burden. He said that there was too much burden on the Home Minister but added as a suffix he was not censuring him. 

12C.9 According to the Times of India, dated February 18, 1948, Ex 242, Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan said that the people should not distrust the campaignthat he had undertaken to draw pointed attention to the weakness of the Central administration:

He had nothing to benefit personally, he said, from a frank and free criticism and over-all estimation of the events leading up to Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination. He was no believer in fate and was convinced that, if prominent Congress Ministers had not patronised and attended R.S.S. rallies and had warned the youth of the country clearly against joining the organisation and provided other suitable outlets for their energies, Mahatma Gandhi would never have been taken away from us when he most needed him.

“Even after the bomb was thrown at him during the prayer meeting no strong action was taken, but instead attempts were made to blanket teh criminals by officials within the administration, who sabotaged any effort that might have been made to unearth the conspiracy.”   

12C.10  Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan then said that it was wrong that he desired a Cabinet portfolio which he had refused several times. He said that he was also taunted for having exaggerated the differences between Pandit Nehru and Sardar Patel but he had only mentioned them with the intention of clearing the atmosphere of rumours. He had ideological differences with Sardar Patel but he used to meet him quite often.

12C.11 He criticised the Government for having spokesmen of big businessmen included in the Cabinet. He wanted the communalists and communal saboteurs to be replaced by democratic minded nationalists.

12C.12 In the “Bombay Chronicle” of February 28, 1948, Ex. 243, is given a report of a speech of Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan at Bombay where he demanded the resignation of Dr. Shyama Prasad Mookerjee, Mr. R. K. Shanmukham Chetty, Sardar Baldev Singh and Mr. C. H. Bhabha. He balmed the Central Cabinet for encouraging communal organisations in the country which resulted in Gandhiji’s murder and demanded in the banning of communal organisations. He said that he did not demand that the socialists should be included in the cabinet but there were a number of nationalists who could be there and the portfolio of Information and Broadcasting should be separated from that of Home otherwise it will result in dictatorship. He said that he was not against Sardar but he wanted a man who was free from communalism to be incharge of Home Department.

12C.13 This was a strong condemnation of Sardar Patel with a charge of communalism added to other charges.

12C.14 Miss Maniben Patel deposed before the Commission that Mr. Jayaprakash Narayan and the Socialists were anxious to have Sardar Patel removed.

12C.15 This evidence shaows that two parties, the Hindu Mahasabha and the Socialists had held meetings in defiance of the prohibitory order under S. 144 Cr. P.C. The former criticised the Congress for pandering to the muslims and condemned the giving of Rs. 55 Crores at the instance of Mahatma Gandhi and also criticised him for helping the muslims. The latter were after Sardar Patel’s head and wanted him and the non-Congress elements in the Cabinet to make an exit.  But both the Hindu Mahasabhites and the Jayaprakash Narayan socialists were endeavouring to achieve their objective by defiance of the prohibitary order, thereby showing little regard for legal processes.

12C.16 The Commission is not called upon to pronounce on the proprietary or otherwise of the two opposite views expressed, but it cannot help remarking that meetings in defiance of the prohibitary order showed an utter lack of regard for lawful orders promulgated and the shouts of “MADANLAL ZINDABAD” (Long Live Madanlal) showed a lamentable lapse on the part of the convenors of the Hindu Mahasabha meeting of the 27th January and comparison of Mahatma Gandhi to Hitler with prediction of meeting a similar fate cannot be termed political innocuousness but clearly showed violent illwill.

3. Excerpt From “Sardar Vallabhai Patel – India’s Iron Man” by B. Krishna published by Rupa & Co,  from Third Impression, 2007 Page 461:

Subsequent years proved the truth and soundness of what Patel had told the Muslims in January 1948 at Lucknow. Jayaprakash Narayan repeated that advice nineteen years later, in 1967, when he asked the Indian Muslims not to forget that ‘Partition had left a deep wound’ in the hearts of Hindus; and reminded them that ‘many of the Muslims and Muslim leaders who had made India their home, particularly in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, were passionate advocates of Pakistan’, on account of which there was still ‘so much mistrust in their heart.’ Narayan emphasised that ‘the healing of hearts and minds will not depend only upon the behaviour of the majority community.’ Narayan’s warning was, “We do not realise on what a veritable volcano of disruption we are sitting. We also tend to forget the history of our country from ancient times down to the British Conquest.” And Narayan repeated what Patel had said in 1948, “I fear that what I am saying may arouse bitter anger…. I am speaking as a friend, as one who is deeply concerned about the future of Indian Muslims, and of the future of our country as a nation.”

Patel’s advice was as ‘a friend of the Muslims.’ Patel had attempted to reach the core of the problem, and find a solution as a rational secularist: a solution based on his fundamental belief in what he had once said, “A nation forgets the lessons of history only at its peril…. It will be a folly to ignore realities. Facts will take their revenge if they are not faced squarely and well.”     

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s