INDIAN
INSTlTUTE FOR RESEARCH INTO TRUE HISTORY
Newsletter
16 of
1. GENERAL
In 1987 we published only one newsletter. At the time of the second newsletter
Mr Godbole was busy with a matter of great importance. Dr. Vijay V. Bedekar led
a group of scholars at the International Sanskrit conference held in
On 12th September 1987 a slide show on Taj Mahal was arranged at the house
of Arvind Pradhan. It lasted for three hours.
All the slides were collected by Mr Godbole. It is a great pity that
after all these years we still do not have a good set of slides.
2. NEWS AND CURRENT AFFAIRS
2.1 Dr D.V. Nene of
Dr Nene's research shows that --
(1) The Indian War of Independence 1857 was much more extensive as
asserted by Veer Savarkar.
(2) There were many more attempts of armed uprisings against the British
rule.
We eagerly await detailed articles by Dr None.
2.2 Mr Godbole's book on Taj Mahal is likely to be translated and
published in Bengali. The work would be undertaken by Dr Rajkumar Sen, Reader
in Economics,
2.3 Vishva Hindu Parishad - The
Misguided People
One would have thought that the VHP was founded to create respect for Hindus
and Hinduism among non-Hindus. It's aim is exactly the opposite. It has three
objectives. The second one reads -
"To cultivate in Hindus... .respect for the peoples of all colours,
creed, races and religions".
We have tried to point out this stupidity to as many VHP officials as possible. A copy of VHP objectives is attached with
this newsletter.
We are however very happy to note that when the Gujrat Government banned
Rath Yatra in 1986, all the Hindu associations of
VHP of America have also expressed deep concern over the increase in the
percentage of Muslim population in all parts of
2.4 Archaeological Survey of
Our friend Prof. Marvin Mills wrote to Dr. M.S. Nagaraja, Director General
of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) on 3 October 1984. He suggested that
archaeometric dating should be applied to Taj Mahal. Twenty brick samples and a
few wood samples would be required. But the controversy could be settled
scientifically.
Scared to death, should the truth come out, Mr S.P. Mukherjee, Superintending
Archaeological Engineer replied on 21 November 1984. He said, "....Taj
Mahal is well dated on documentary evidence. Moreover BARC Bombay and Physical
Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad are also siezed of the problem (this is a
blatant lie. We checked with them.) and it is not considered desirable to
have further investigation at this stage...." In other words though it
is essential to carry out the tests suggested by Prof Mills it is not desirable
to do so, as the truth may come out. Get
it?
2.5 No alternative to Savarkar's Hindu Rashtra
Subramhanyam Swamy, now a Lok Dal leader has written an article entitled "In God's Name" (Illustrated Weekly of India 1 March 1987).
He says -
I have come to the conclusion that as far as this issue (of Babri Masjid)
is concerned, argument and persuasion are of little value. The Hindus of the
country feel strongly about Ram Janam Bhoomi, therefore now is the time to assert
themselves. This assertion has to be not by processions and petitions but by
understanding the psychological core of the Muslim attitudes and developing
suitable Hindu responses.
At the root of their thinking, devoted Muslims recognise the world as divided
into Dar ul Islam; countries where Muslims are in a ruling majority (e.g. Saudi
Arabia, Pakistan) and Dar ul Harab; countries where Muslims are in a
minority...Dar ul Harab means 'the world
of the sword' and is comprised of nations that have yet to be conquered by
Islam. It is the responsibility of the devout Muslim to employ any tool to
dominate and conquer the Dar ul Harab countries.
This conceptional division of the world is known to anyone with even a smattering
of knowledge of Islam. But what is not widely realised is that Islam recognises
a third division, termed Dar ul Ahad, in which Muslims enter into a contract
with the majority to abide by the rules set by the majority. (Swamy quotes no
reference for this assertion)...
Unfortunately for
....In 1947 we rejected the two nations theory (???) That was not enough.
We should have resolved to adopt the one-nation theory of
...The importance of Babri Masjid lies in giving the nation the moment of
history to work out an explicit and clear cut Hindu Muslim relationship. If a
Dur ul Ahad
There is therefore, room for give now and take later. But there is no room
for patchwork compromises. If Hindus assert now, the 21st Century
(Long
Live Savarkar!)
2.6 Sanskrit the mother of all
languages
In Sept/Oct. 1987 Peter Ustinov presented a series of six programmes on
3. HOW OUR HISTORY GETS FALSIFIED
OR DISTORTED
3.1 Veer Savakar
Balarao Savarkar has written an excellent biography of Veer Savarkar in four
parts covering the period 1924-1966. The last part came out in 1986. On page
285 of the last part he says "....recently in 1985 a plaque has been fixed
on the house where Savarkar used to live in
3.2 Indian War of
During the birth centenary of Veer Savarkar, we managed to locate six copies
of this famous book (1970 edition).On the page preceding the "contents"
we are told "....First published in
On page xix we find "... .how mutinies broke out in Indian
regiments stationed at
The fifth edition came to light in the days when the last and the most determined
effort was made to organise an army on the largest scale, yet recorded, to
invade India to free her from the British bondage, by Ras Bihari Bose Unimpeachable evidence recorded by patriot
and warriors who took part in the invasion shows that this History was
read and re-read in their camps. (Pages xx & xxi).
How does one invade one's own motherland?
4. WORKS OF OUR FRIENDS
4.1 Mr Mukund Sonapatki (01-904 2427)
During our research on places associated with Indian freedom fighters we
came across a reference to manuscript called the Havell collection in the India
Office Library. Ref. MSS/EOR/D736. Mr
Sonapatki went to the library and found that there are four files containing
letters to Havell from various intellectuals. It seems that there was quite a
lot of support for Havell 's conclusion that the so called Indo Saracenic
Architecture was in fact Hindu Architecture. One needs to go through all the
files.
4.2 Dr Viiav V. Bedekar (Thane.
In our newsletter 12 of 16 February 1984 we had criticised and exposed the
mentality behind the Marathi drama "Ghashiram Kbtwal" (The chief of police
of
4.3 Mr B.K. Sood (0l-518-1605)
Mr Sood went to Taj Mahal recently (Dec 86/Jan 87). There he picked up a
booklet entitled '
Prof Ram Nath of
Ref -
Dr D.V. Jog of 99 Shreekrishnagar, Borivali,
Ref - Letters to the editor published in the 12 January 1986 issue of
SOBAT a Marathi weekly of Pune. The problem is that Jog is not an expert in
Persian. He has a Ph. D in English and was a Professor of English at I.I.T.
Bombay. So where did he get his
information from? From, Setu Madhavras Pagdi!
It seems that in Taj Mahal the ASI have converted part of one of the Nagarkhanas,
into a museum. It contains copies of some documents, but not of Badshahnama! Dr
Jog does not wonder why? nor does Mr Pagdi. And they are both honourable men.
5. RESEARCH FINDINGS
5.1 Holy Bible (continued from
Newsletter No. 15)
5.1.9 Barbarity of punishments of
Lord God of
Lord God of
Deuteronomy. Chapter 13
Paras. 6 to 10
6. If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or they son, or thy daughter,
or the wife of thy bossom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee
secretly, saying Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known
nor they fathers.
7. Namely, of the gods of the people which are around about you....
8. Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor harken unto him, neither shall thine
pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him.
9. But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him
to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
10. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he
hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out
of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. (What happened to the commandment
- Thou shall not kill?)
Deuteronomy Chapter 17
2. If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD
thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of
the LORD they God in transgressing his covenant.
3. And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun,
or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
4. And it be told thee and thou hast heard of it, and inquired diligently,
and behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought
in
5. Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed
that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman and shalt
stone them with stones, till they die.
After the death of Moses, Joshua was made the leader of Jews by Lord God
of
Joshua Chapter 1
We find the same expression in Chronicles II.
Chapter 15.
That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to
death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
Numbers. Chapter 15. Paras 32 to
36
32. And while the children of
33. And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron,
and unto all the congregation.
34. And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be
done to him.
35. And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all
the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
36. And all the congregation brought him without the camp and stoned
him with stones, and he died as the LORD commanded Moses.
Leviticus. Chapter 20
And the IDRD spake unto Moses saying,
2. Again, thou shalt say to the children of
Chapter 24
10. And the son of an Israelitish woman, whose father was an Egyptian
went out among the children of
11. And the Israelitish woman’s son blasphemed the name of the LORD, and
cursed. And they brought him unto Moses; (and his mother’s name was she-lo-mith,
the daughter of Dib-ri of the tribe of Dan)
12. And they put him in ward, that the mind of the LORD might be shewed them.
13. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
14. Bring forth him that hath cursed without the camp; and let all that heard
him lay their hands upon his head, and the all the congregation stone him.
15. And thou shalt speak unto the children of
16. And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be
put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the
stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the LORD.
shall be put to death.
23. And Moses spake to the children of
The chosen people
Jews consider themselves as the chosen people. But surely God cannot show such favouritism.
It is the Lord God of
Deuteronomy. Chapter 7.
When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest
to posses it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites and the Gir-ga-shites
and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Pe-riz-zites and the Hi-vites and
the Jeb-u-bites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;
2. And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite
them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew
mercy unto them.
3. Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou
shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.
4. For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may
serve other gods: so will the anger of
the IDRD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly.
5 …..
6. For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy
God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that
are upon the face of the earth.
More about the Bible in the next newsletter.
6. BOOK REVIEWS
Reminiscences of the Nehru Age by M.O. Mathai. Vikas Publishing House,
Memoirs of persons who had held important positions are interesting reading
especially if they provide important information. Mr Mathai was Special Assistant
to Nehru from 1946 to 1959. Apart from Nehru he mainly deals with various
personalities.
Mathai tells us - Ever since I started work in the FM's secretariat, no file
or paper reached the PM (i.e. Nehru) except through me - with rare exceptions,
in which case they would come to me from him. Nothing went out except through me.
(even though he was neither a member of the Indian Civil Service nor of the
Indian Parliament) ....For this I had to
study specific issues and problems and
get advice from those who were in a position
to advise - people in government and outside... Except for a few, I had only
contempt for ministers who were nothing but a bunch of mediocrities or worse.
(But at least they were elected by the voters unlike Mr Mathai) It is true that no file or paper containing
a recommendation reached the PM (Nehru) without my comments on a slip or a routine
note if I felt that such comment was called for. Such slips and routine notes
never formed part of the files. They were removed when papers came down from
the PM (How convenient! Now we would
never know what Mr Mathai was upto) P9
On pages 11 and 12 Mathai tells us how he was instrumental in getting S.D.
Upadhyaya proposed and elected as a Member of Parliament. Why? because Mr
Upadhyaya would make a good M.P.? No, for the simple reason that Upadhyaya had
worked for Nehru and his father for long years and he was rotting. And yet
Mathai had contempt for Ministers! He
says ".... If any man deserved a prize for never opening his mouth in
parliament, it was Upadhyaya...."
On page 12 Mathai says ...It is true that I have been instrumental in the
appointment of innumerable ministers, governors, and non-official ambassadors -
none of them related to me. There was perfect understanding between Nehru and
me.
On pages 13/14 he tells us of a minister of state who was sent as a delegate
to the UN General Assembly. The minister took with him a youngish woman and
stayed in hotels in
On page 57 Mathai says ...Nehru lacked the toughness of Churchill and Churchill-type
courage in adversity. He wilted in the wake of the Chinese attack on
On page 68 we find ... .Nehru wanted Rajaji to be the first President. He
was anxious to establish a convention that normally, if the Prime Minister was
from north
Mathai says on page 73 ... .The embarrassingly-named Fakruddin Ali Anmed
was the poorest specimen (of President). By signing the Proclamation of Internal
Emergency in June 1975 without Cabinet approval, he amply qualified himself for
impeachment. However, it must be said to his credit that he knew when to die.
Mathai is quite frank about Nehru's vanity - He says "...
.Churchill was not given to self criticism; neither was he vain. Nehru was
given to self criticism; and he had self confessed vanity (p. 56) ....I once
told Nehru that the press conference was an American invention to provide a
forum for the President. The Prime
Minister in a parliamentary system has parliament as his forum where he can
talk his head off. Neither Churchill nor
Attlee held press conferences. I suggested to Nehru that he might consider
giving up the practice. While he agreed with me his vanity prevented him from accepting
the suggestion. He liked to show off (p. 79).
A secret file on Vijaya Laxmi Pandit was kept by Gandhi (whose cardinal principles
were truth and non-violence). On his death the file was passed on to Nehru.
Mathai wanted to preserve it but Nehru would not have it so he burnt it. Mathai
says that it contained papers about the lady's elopement with Syed Hussain. Mrs
Pandit’s scandalous financial dealings are given in detail and yet nothing
happened to her! (p. 133-142)
Maulana Azad was a blatant liar. But as he was a Muslim that was o.k. with
Nehru and Gandhi. Mathai tells us - Maulana Azad says (in India wins Freedom)
that when the first dominion government was formed on 15 August 1947 Gandhiji
had insisted that he should take up the Ministry of Education as it was of
vital importance. On Gandhiji’s usual silence day on a Monday he wrote a
personal letter to Nehru on the inside of a used envelope advising him not to
make Maulana Azad the Education Minister as he was convinced that Maulana would
ruin education.... Nehru could not comply with Gandhiji’s wishes because the
Maulana adopted the attitude "Education or nothing" (And Maulana
being a Muslim he won). Gandhiji's letter is in the archives of Teen Murti
House,
During the visit of the Cabinet Mission, Maulana had written a letter to
the
Mathai has given 36 pages to Krishna Menon. It is astonishing how Nehru
got attached to such a third rate person and went to the extent of saying "any attack on Krishna Menon is an
attack on me". On page 184 we are told
- The police action in Goa in December 1961 was, to a large extent,
dictated by political considerations -
having an eye on the impending general elections.....Actually there was
no need to deploy the army. The Central Reserve Police could have accomplished
the job – such confessions by a congressman are rare indeed.
It is a great pity that the author only gives two pages to Lady Mountbatten.
She had a tremendous hold on Nehru who acted to the detriment of
Practically every year lady Mountbatten used to halt in
P. 209.
On the whole the book is quite interesting. The author, a Christian however
fails on Nehru's secularism i.e. anti Hinduism. He says – The secular character
of the nation he had dreamt of was in dire peril. Alone in government,
undeterred by the ridicule of some of his principal colleagues, Nehru waged a
heroic battle against religious fanaticism and mob hysteria. Nehru
stood as firm as a rock for something basic he believed in. (p. 260). And yet it was Nehru who for 17
long years refused to bring in a common civil code as required by the
constitution. He was however enthusiastic about Hindu code bill. It was Nehru,
who turned a blind eye to the massive infiltration of Muslims from
Mathai says on page 151....In the predominantly Muslim areas of Moplahs
is northern Kerala, where the Muslim league was sure to win, the KPCC had
decided not to contest. (Surely Nehru should have pulled all his weight to
ensure that Muslims nominated by congress did win against the candidates of
Muslim league, at least in the first general election after partition. But that
did not happen. Hindus did vote for Muslim candidates put up by Congress. And Muslims always vote for a Muslim candidate
be he from Muslim league or the Communist Party. That is the truth.) Mathai keeps quiet about Nehru's efforts to
revive the Muslim league and give it a certificate of nationalism in 1959. He
does not mention and explain how Nehru's secularism led to constant
capitulation to
7. SOME IMPORTANT NOTES RELATING
TO GANDHI MURDER TRIAL
(continued from Newsletter 15)
24. Though Veer Savarkar was declared innocent, it seems that the
Special Judge Mr Atma Charan did not award any costs to him. The trial cost Savarkar
50,000 Rs. at 1948 prices! (Biography of Veer Savarkar by Balarao Savarkar
1947-66 page 299)
25. Partiality & Prejudice of Honourable Mr Justice Gopal Khosia
25.1 Khosla and Gandhi
Any judge is expected to be not involved in the case in front of him.
But his was flagrantly disregarded. Mr Khosla, one of the
"... .when I visited the Muslim quarters to see things at first
hand... I was besieged by homeless
refugees clamouring to be let into the empty houses abandoned by Muslim
occupants. Was it fair, they asked me, to deny them a shelter after they (i.e. refugees) had been hounded out of their
homes (in
In my office I received hundreds of visitors each day. I knew many of them
personally. Among them were my own relatives, friends and acquaintances....All
they wanted was a house - a portion of a house, a room, an
empty garage or a shed to live in
and to work in....I began to entertain doubts about what was just in the
circumstances. Should I let the homeless people occupy the empty houses? Should
I allow the Muslims to be chased out of
(pp.203/204).
I sat down near him and began to tell him of my assignment and the difficulties
I had encountered.... I concluded by saying:
The Muslims in the Old Fort camp have no wish to stay in this country. They
told me, when I visited them, that they would like to go to
Gandhi told Mr Khosla – ‘when I go there, they do not say they want to go
to
...And as he went on talking understanding came to me that this man had
only one sentiment.... and that was a deep and prevading feeling of love....He
loved the British who had ruled over us for 150 years, he loved the
Pakistanis who had hounded out millions of Hindus from their ancestral homes.
.. .When I left him after having spent thirty minutes in his company, I knew
what I had to do. Bapu was completely, utterly right, just as he had been
right in insisting that we fulfil our
premise to pay
Thus Gandhi, living comfortably in Birla House offered no solution to the
problem of refugees desperately seeking shelter from the bitter cold and rain
of December / January in Delhi. Khosla goes to Simla, after this interview, to
live in comfort.
25.2 The dark days of January 1948
Nathuram tells us - One of the seven conditions imposed by Gandhiji for the
breaking of his fast unto death related to the mosques in
I witnessed with my own eyes this scene which would have melted the
heart of even a hard-hearted person....Was not Gandhiji aware of
the reasons and circumstances that compelled the refugees to occupy the
mosques? The refugees had cane - fled
to
Ref - May it please your honour, by Nathuram Godse 1978 pp. 151/2.
[Note - it was such perverted
mentality of Gandhi that ultimately cost him his life! How could Khosla claim
to remain impartial? Four days after their meeting i.e. on 30 January 1948 Gandhi
was shot dead by Nathuram Godse]
Khosia says -
Gandhiji referred to the Peace
Pledge taken by the residents of
(But enmity towards Hindus was O.K!)
Khosla continues ....
As the enquiries proceeded, it transpired that Nathuran Godse was not the
only person concerned in the murder. His act of shooting Gandhiji was the
culmination of a widespread and carefully laid conspiracy in which several
persons were involved.
(Conspiracy was NOT the conclusion. Sardar Patel had ordered an investigation
on the basis that there was a conspiracy).
25.3 The
.. .Mr Atma Charan was specially appointed for the trial and invested with
powers to give him the requisite jurisdiction. This was necessary because the
judge would have to deal with offences committed beyond his normal territorial
jurisdiction. (In the footnote Khosla adds - Law and order is a state subject,
and judges of one State cannot, unless especially empowered, deal with offences
committed in another State).
Note - Khosla makes no reference to the fact that there was no jury, Bombay
Security Measures Act was made applicable to Delhi Area with retrospective
effect etc etc. and the fact that when the Supreme Court of India was
constituted it declared the special court of Mr Atma Charan illegal.
Khosla continues....Out of the men charged, Savarkar was acquitted, two,
viz Nathuram Godse and his friend Apte were sentenced to death and the remaining five were awarded sentences of imprisonment
for life (False - They were sent to transportation for life). The trial judge,
at the time of announcing his order, informed the convicted persons that if
they wished to appeal from his order, they should do so within fifteen days.
(Khosla does not say that the normal time for appeal was sixty days, but
it was only fifteen days in this case. He also fails to say that there could
be no appeal against the death sentence passed by the special judge) pp.210/211
25.4 Freedom of the Press
It was well known that Nehru, Patel and Co prohibited the publication of
Nathuram Godse's statement as soon as he read it out in the
...Daphtari and colleagues looked really small in everyone’s eyes (when Nathuram
exercised his right to reply on 15 and 16 December 1948). I do not know how
the press will do justice to Nathuram in reporting his address but I have set
no hopes on them as they are under the iron rule of the Government, who may ban
the publication of this address also.
(Story of the Red Fort Trial by
P.L. Inamdar, Popular Prakashan, Bombay 1979, pp.197/8)
And yet Khosla has the audacity to say - the court was open to the public
and the Press, and the proceedings were extensively reported in all newspapers,
(p.209)
Gopal Godse, younger brother of Nathuram Godse tells us - The Press was muzzled
in respect of Nathuram’s arguments in the High Court as well. His exciting plea
made with an impassioned appeal and delivered with rare poise naturally
interested the press and the correspondents took it down ad verbatim. But as
soon the Judges returned to their chamber, the police pounced on the
correspondents and snatched their note books into pieces and warned the
pressmen of severe consequence if they published the true account of Nathuram’s
speech. The Press was forced to toe the Government’s instructions and
accordingly disjointed and distorted reports were carried by newspapers
(May it please your honour - by Nathuram Godse. p19)
25.5 No respect for Veer Savarkar
Khosla gives some information about the accused and his biased mind is
evident.
Vinayak Savarkar or Veer Savarkar as he came to be known....He joined a
revolutionary body (false - he started that revolutionary body – Abhtnav Bharat) and
was sentenced to transportation for fourteen years (false – he was
sentenced to transportation for life twice i.e. a total jail sentence of 50 years, a sentence without parallel in the
history of the British Empire!) his
house Savarkar Sadan was visited by all Hindu leaders, and the meetings held
there were viewed with an eye of suspicion by the authorities (British were
viewing with suspicion during 1937-1946 because Savarkar had been a source of
inspiration for revolutionaries from Madanlal Dhingra to Bhagatsingh and
Subhashchandra Bose. He was also a source of inspiration to innumerable
Congressites, for example Archarya Kripalani the then President of Congress, B.G.
Kher the Chief Minister of Bombay and even Rajagopalachari the first Indian
Governor General.
Congress Government viewed the meetings in Savarkar’s house with
suspicion out of guilt. Only Savarkar and his Hindu Mahasabha opposed partition
of
Khosla does not mention the wickedness of Nehru, Patel and Co. in trying
to implicate Savarkar in the Gandhi murder trial. Mr. Daftari the Advocate
General of
25.6 Indian Press gagged
Khosla gives in brief the statement made by Nathuram Godse in the appeal
court (pp.238-243) but keeps quiet about how little was reported in the Indian
Press for the fear of vindictive Nehru, Patel and Co.
Mr P.L. Inamdar, counsel for Dr. Parachure wrote to his wife on 13 May
1949.
"Nathuram stated his argument over the last six working days....The
last portion of it was very thrilling.
On all the six days listeners thronged the court. On the last day many
ladies and even some men were crying and tears could be seen streaming down
their cheeks....The Press did not report anything about Nathuram’s speech,
the report as published has been suitably edited at many places. Even I cannot
write those matters in this letter. I
must tell you about them in person, otherwise it will be difficult for this
letter to reach you!”
(The Story of the Red Fort Trial by P.L. Inandar p. 171)
Such was the atmosphere of terror in which Mr Justice Khosla was delivering
his judgement in comfort! Devdas, one of
the sons of Gandhi was then chief editor of Hindustan Times. But he never protested against the high
handedness of Nehru, Patel & Co. and never insisted that people must be
told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. That was too much to
be asked for. Rajagopalachari the then Governor General, was the father-in-law
of Devdas.
25.7 The
Khosia continues - the hearing
began on May 2, 1949 There was Mr
Banerjee, a senior advocate from Calcutta, for Apte and Madanlal Pahwa ...Mr
Inamdar from Bombay (False - He came from Gwalior) for Parchure and Gopal
Godse. Nathuram Godse had declined to be represented by a lawyer and had made a
prayer that he should be permitted to appear in person to argue his appeal
himself. This prayer had been granted....The plea of poverty on which Godse had
based his request to be present in person was only an excuse, and the real
reason behind the manoeuvre was a morbid desire to watch the process of his disintegration
at first hand and also to exhibit himself as a fearless patriot and a
passionate protagonist of Hindu ideology. (Note - Khosla's accusation is false.
Firstly Nathuram was not a rich man.
Secondly he wanted to defend himself as he had every right to do so. He
felt that he could do this better than his lawyer. Khosla knew damn well
that in the Red Fort trial Nathuram
himself replied to the case made by the prosecution even though his lawyer Mr
Oke was present. Khosia is hitting below the belt.) He had remained completely
unrepentant of his atrocious crime, and whether out of a deep conviction in his
beliefs or merely in order to make a last public apology he had sought this opportunity
of displaying his talents before he dissolved into oblivion....pp. 213/4.
.... It is not difficult to pick out inconsistencies and contradictions in
the statement of the most truthful witness after he has been subjected to a
lengthy and tiring cross-examination by a clever lawyer (Dear! O dear! Khosla a member of the
We gave Dr Parchure and Shankar the benefit of doubt and, accepting their
appeal, acquitted them (False - P.L. Inamdar the counsel for Dr. Parchure
tells us - On the morning of Friday 20
May 1949 Dange closed his argument within an hour and I was called upon to
begin. I did so by about 11 a.m. that day. Saturday the 21st would have been
half day. After the lunch break he says - I began to notice that all the
Honourable Justices on the Bench were nodding to my submissions. His Lordship
Justice Acchru Ram was off and on obliging me with adequate and relevant references....All
the Honourable Justices seemed to be cooperating with me....Then came the weekend
of 22 May 1949.
On 23 May....I began to urge my submissions....His Lordship Justice Acchru
Ram as if intervening said "Oh, Mr
Inamdar! I will read it for you". His Lordship then himself cited the
numbers of the volume, page and line saying "Here it is on page 220 line
22 in volume II of the Paper Book. The whole paragraph. His Lordship noticing
that the other Honourable Justice on the Bench had opened his relevant volume
at the cited page and line then said, "please look first at page 221 line
45 onwards" …I looked at the Bench and noticed that Justice Khosla was
whispering to the Chief Justice Bhandari. Soon all the three Judges on the
Bench had begun to talk to each other, such as I overheard were "We are
going to reject it - we have decided - it is worthless - we can write the
judgement even now -
....Suddenly my Lord the chief Justice Bhandari was saying to me - "Mr.
Inamdar, you need not argue Dr Parchure’s case any further.... we are satisfied. Let us hear what Mr
Daphtari has to say. (Inandar finished
at 11.30 a.m.)
On 3rd June 1949 Mr Inamdar rose to reply to Dapthari. He says – while I
asked these questions in a loud voice, I noticed there was a lot of agitation
amongst their Lordships on the Bench. All of them were whispering agitatedly to
each other. Justice Khosla seemed to be
the most agitated. As I asked my last question, above. His Lordship loudly and deliberately
burst out, "Let me tell you, Mr Inamdar, after having listened to all that
Mr Daphtari had to say I was not at all convinced by his argument and I am
still of the opinion that the confession of Dr Parchure was not all a voluntary
one. It was a result of all the coercive atmosphere that was created around him. I am not going to rely on
this confession at all!"....His Lordship the Honourable Chief Justice, as
if ruled, we are certainly not going to rely on this confession!
(Story of the Red
This hardly amounts to giving Dr Barchure the benefit of doubt!
Khosla continues on p. 238 - The highlight of the appeal before us was the
discourse delivered by Nathuram Godse in his defence....He pursued the same
line in the long written statement which he had filed in the trial court....
(Khosla’s book was published in
1963, i.e. 14 years after Nathuram was executed. He does not state the fact that Nathuram's
statement was still proscribed by Government of
25.8 The last day of Nathuram
Godse and Apte
He continues on pp. 243-245 - The final chapter of this sad story takes
us to the Central Gaol, Ambala, where Nathuram Godse and Apte were executed....
Apte began to write a treatise on some aspects of Indian philosophy which he
completed a day or two before his execution.
(Why has it not been handed over to his relatives as yet? Khosia does
not say). Gopal Godse says that the subject was Administration, and he was with
Apte till the last day.
Khosla was not and could not have been present at the jail on the day of
the execution. His observations about Nathuram are nothing but hearsay. It is
astonishing how a Judge could sink so low. He says – Godse walked in front. His
step occasionally faltered. His demeanour and general appearance evidenced a state
of nervousness and fear.... his voice had
a slight croak in it, and the vigour with which he had argued his case at the
trial and in the High Court seemed to have been all but expended ... .Apte died
almost at once, but Godse continued to wriggle and display signs of life in the
shivering of his legs and convulsing of his body for quite fifteen minutes.
It was said afterwards that Godse had, during his last days in goal, repented
his deed and declared that were he to be given another chance he would spend
the rest of life in the promotion of peace and the service of his country.
(False - Godse never changed his mind. Khosla's writing shows his
prejudice! True, some letters were
exchanged between Ramdas, son of Mahatma Gandhi and Nathuram in May / June
1949. It was suggested that Ramdas should convince Nathuram that he was
wrong. But Ramdas chickened out when
Nathuram wrote - If we do meet you may make me change my mind by arguing
emotionally or logically. Or may be that I will convince you that I was right
all along! Ramdas was not taking any
chances. Nathuram was hanged five months later. But Ramdas did not meet him).
So much for the impartiality of Mr Justice Khosla! He naturally became Chief
Justice of Punjab High Court six years later i.e. in 1955. Mr P.L. Inamdar's
words are most appropriate. He says -
After Nathuram had accepted and undergone the maximum punishment for his deed,
without the least hesitation or rancour in his heart, it is unjust to talk
about him in abusive language.