Bhagat Singh chose the gallows, Savarkar chose the petition

 

Bhagat Singh and Savarkar: The Gallows, The Petition, and the Two Paths of Freedom

 

Bhagat Singh chose the gallows, Savarkar chose the petition

Indian history brings together many brave figures, but few contrasts are as sharp as the one between Bhagat Singh, Vinayak Savarkar, and Mahatma Gandhi. All three opposed colonial rule, all three were imprisoned, all three shaped the political imagination of India. Yet the British treated each of them in dramatically different ways. Savarkar was transported to the Andaman Cellular Jail under the belief that he could be broken and controlled. Bhagat Singh was denied the option of transportation because the British feared that he would become unstoppable if he lived. Gandhi was never even considered for the Andamans because the British believed that his presence among political prisoners in a remote island would strengthen resistance, not weaken it. The empire made a different calculation for each man based on fear, strategy, and political consequence.

The story begins with Savarkar, one of the earliest revolutionaries associated with armed revolt against British rule. His writings and speeches encouraged violence, bomb making, and militant resistance. His association with Dhingra, who assassinated Curzon Wyllie in London, brought him under direct scrutiny. When Savarkar was arrested and sentenced to two life terms, the British believed that transportation to the Andamans would separate him from political activity and break the organisational chain that connected Indian revolutionaries in Europe and India.

Inside the Cellular Jail, Savarkar faced harsh punishment. The regime was brutal, with solitary confinement, hand driven oil mills, flogging, poor food, and complete communication blackout. Many prisoners collapsed mentally and physically under these conditions. Savarkar wrote multiple petitions to the British government asking for mercy, remission, or conditional release. In these petitions he offered to give up political activity, promised loyalty and good behaviour, and stated that he would follow the guidance of the government. These documents remain preserved in the archives and reveal a shift in tone and strategy.

The British examined these petitions carefully. They concluded that Savarkar was someone who could be managed. A man who sought release through repeated requests and promises was not a man who would continue armed revolution upon freedom. When he was finally removed from the Andamans and placed under strict restrictions in Ratnagiri, he accepted the conditions. His speeches were banned, his travel restricted, and his political activity suspended. The empire got exactly what it wanted. A revolutionary turned into a contained figure.

In complete contrast stood Bhagat Singh. He began his political journey as a revolutionary but soon became a philosopher of liberation. He read Marx, Lenin, Tolstoy, and European political thinkers with intense focus. He saw Indian independence not as a simple transfer of power but as a deeper social transformation which required the liberation of workers, peasants, and oppressed communities. His writings in jail displayed remarkable intellectual maturity and moral courage.

The British did not fear Bhagat Singh merely because he used violence. They feared him because he represented a new kind of revolutionary mind. When he launched a hunger strike for the rights of political prisoners, he became the most influential youth leader in the country. His fast lasted more than sixty days. Students held protests in Lahore, Delhi, and Calcutta. Labour groups organised marches in Bombay. Gandhi and Nehru spoke about him. The entire nation watched the struggle of one man inside a prison cell.

This changed everything for the British. A man who controls the political temperature of a subcontinent from inside jail becomes dangerous beyond measure. Transportation to the Andamans would not destroy Bhagat Singh. It would strengthen his legend. He would become a teacher to all political prisoners. His ideas would spread with even greater force. The empire had already witnessed how Irish revolutionaries turned prisons into political schools. It was not willing to repeat the same mistake in India.

Therefore, the British created a special tribunal for the Lahore Conspiracy Case through an extraordinary ordinance. This tribunal removed the right of appeal and ensured a fast conviction. Its purpose was simple. It blocked every legal pathway that could lead to transportation. The British did not want Bhagat Singh in the Andamans. They wanted him dead. They believed only death could neutralise his influence. This is why the execution was carried out secretly at night, the bodies burned without ceremony, and the ashes thrown into a river. Even in death, the British feared the fire of his ideas.

Now we come to Gandhi, whose treatment by the British was entirely different from both. Gandhi led the largest non violent mass movement in the world. His campaigns paralysed British administration more effectively than any bomb or gun. Yet the British never sent him to the Andamans. The question is why.

Gandhi was not transported to the Andamans because the British feared that his presence there would inspire the other political prisoners. Gandhi had the rare ability to transform a prison into a moral battlefield. If Gandhi were placed in the Cellular Jail, he would turn the entire Andaman penal colony into a centre of civil resistance. His presence would unite political prisoners, strengthen their resolve, and attract global attention. The British did not want the world to see Gandhi working under brutal prison conditions. They did not want hunger strikes and civil disobedience from a remote island becoming an international embarrassment. The empire recognised that Gandhi’s real power was moral. They could jail him in mainland prisons because it allowed them to manage public perception. But placing Gandhi in an island prison surrounded by torture would damage the imperial image beyond repair.

There was another reason. Gandhi did not believe in violent overthrow of the state. He did not run secret societies or armed groups. His philosophy of non violence allowed the British to manage him through conventional imprisonment. He could be jailed in Yerwada or Poona without creating a revolutionary storm inside an isolated jail. The British believed they could negotiate with Gandhi, postpone his campaigns, and use dialogue to reduce tension. None of this was possible with Bhagat Singh.

Therefore, Gandhi was always jailed within India. The British calculated that Gandhi’s politics, though powerful, could be contained by time bound imprisonment within mainland jails. But sending him to the Andamans would have created a martyr even more powerful than Bhagat Singh.

These three men demonstrate the three ways the British responded to political danger. Savarkar was transported because he could be broken and neutralised. Gandhi was kept in mainland prisons because his influence depended on public visibility and the empire could manage the optics. Bhagat Singh was executed because no prison, no island, and no negotiation could contain his ideas.

Bhagat Singh refused compromise. Savarkar accepted compromise. Gandhi negotiated but never surrendered his principles. The British understood these differences with clarity. Savarkar was the prisoner they could manage. Gandhi was the leader they could imprison but not silence. Bhagat Singh was the mind they could not afford to let live.

Bhagat Singh chose the gallows. Savarkar chose the petition. Gandhi chose the path of resistance through suffering. Each man created a different legacy, but history remembers who bowed and who stood firm. The empire calculated its moves based on fear. And the man they feared the most was the young revolutionary who embraced death with calm dignity.

---

Author Introduction
Siddhartha Shankar Mishra is an Advocate in the Supreme Court of India. He writes on history, politics, law, and society. Email id: ssmishra33@gmail.com

References
Lahore Conspiracy Case Records
British Government Ordinance for Special Tribunal, 1930
Collected Works of Bhagat Singh
Jail Notes of Bhagat Singh
National Archives of India documents on Savarkar
Cellular Jail Records and Petitions of Savarkar
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi
British India Home Department Prison Records