Joining the Dots: When Ideology Pulled the Trigger on Gandhi
On January 30, 1948, Mahatma Gandhi was shot dead at Birla House. The
assassin was Nathuram Godse. But assassinations are never solitary acts. They
are the final outcome of a long process — of ideological grooming, public
incitement, moral sanction, and social rehearsal. Bullets may end a life, but
ideas prepare the ground.
Gandhi was not merely murdered. He was systematically silenced.
Savarkar: The Blessing Before the Bullets
Any serious examination of Gandhi’s assassination collapses if Vinayak
Damodar Savarkar is airbrushed out. The most incriminating evidence pointing to
Savarkar’s role came not from conjecture, but from sworn testimony during the
trial.
Digambar Badge, an arms dealer and close associate of Nathuram Godse and
Narayan Apte, turned approver in the case. His statement is part of the court
record and is reproduced in detail in Tushar Gandhi’s Let’s Kill Gandhi: A
Chronicle of His Last Days, the Conspiracy, Murder, Investigation and Trial.
Badge testified that on January 17, 1948, barely thirteen days
before the assassination, Godse suggested that the conspirators take a final darshan
of “Tatyarao” Savarkar. They went to Savarkar Sadan in Bombay. Godse and
Apte went upstairs, returned after five to ten minutes, and were followed by
Savarkar himself, who blessed them with the words:
“Yashasvi houn ya” — Be successful and return.
In Maharashtrian cultural context, such words are not casual pleasantries.
They are uttered before acts of consequence — journeys, battles, or decisive
missions. Badge stated that he regarded Savarkar as a devta until the
end of his life. That reverence makes his testimony harder, not easier, to
dismiss.
Savarkar was acquitted due to lack of corroborative evidence. But acquittal
is not moral exoneration. Criminal law demands proof beyond reasonable doubt.
History asks a different question: why would assassins seek Savarkar’s
blessing on the eve of murder, and why would he give it?
Savarkar did not need to issue instructions. His blessing functioned as
moral sanction. It told the assassins that what they were about to do was not a
crime, but a duty.
An Ideology That Could Not Tolerate Gandhi
Savarkar’s Hindutva was fundamentally incompatible with Gandhi’s India.
Gandhi believed the nation belonged equally to all its people. Savarkar
believed it belonged primarily to those who fit a cultural and civilisational
definition of Hindu identity. Gandhi saw non violence as moral strength.
Savarkar dismissed it as weakness.
To extremist nationalists, Gandhi’s insistence on Hindu Muslim unity, his
fasts to stop communal violence, and his demand that India honour its financial
commitment to Pakistan were unforgivable. Gandhi was no longer a leader to be
debated. He was an obstacle to be removed.
Public Incitement: When Killing Became a Slogan
By January 1948, hostility towards Gandhi had spilled openly onto the
streets of Delhi. Contemporary accounts record slogans such as “Gandhi ko
marne do, humko ghar do” being shouted publicly. Gandhi’s fast further
enraged extremist groups who saw his moral authority as a direct threat.
On January 20, 1948, Madanlal Pahwa attempted to assassinate Gandhi
with a bomb. He failed. Ten days later, Nathuram Godse succeeded.
Even before the murder, Gandhi’s death was being publicly rehearsed.
At Connaught Circus, about four kilometres from Birla House, a group
of RSS men in khaki shorts, white shirts, and black caps were seen exercising
vigorously and shouting slogans at the top of their voices:
“Buddhe ko marne do” — let
the old man die.
The idea of Gandhi’s death had already been normalised.
RSS and the Sewak Reports: Preparing the Ground
The Sewak Reports — declassified intelligence files submitted to the
court — contain transcripts of speeches made by MS Golwalkar, then
Sarsanghchalak of the RSS. In early December 1947, Golwalkar addressed over
2,500 RSS volunteers in Delhi.
According to the report, Golwalkar said:
“The law cannot meet force. We should be prepared for guerrilla warfare on
the lines of the tactics of Shivaji. The Sangh will not rest content until it
has finished Pakistan. If anyone stands in our way, we will have to finish him
too, whether it is the Nehru Government or any other government.”
And more directly:
“No power on earth can keep Muslims in Hindustan. Gandhi wants to keep them
for Congress votes. But by the time elections come, not a single Muslim will be
left here.”
These were not abstract speeches. They articulated the ideological logic of
silencing Gandhi.
Days later, Gandhi was silenced.
The Weapon and the Act
On the evening of January 30, 1948, Nathuram Godse fired three
bullets from a Beretta Model 1934 semi automatic pistol, an Italian made
handgun, at point blank range. Gandhi collapsed.
Godse did not flee. He did not deny. He believed he had performed a
necessary deed.
Celebration After the Murder
India mourned. But not everyone.
Investigative records and witness testimonies reveal that sweets were
distributed in certain Hindu Mahasabha circles after news of Gandhi’s
assassination spread. In Gwalior, a Hindu Mahasabha leader distributed
sweets to party members and asked them to tune in to the radio that evening.
After Gandhi was shot, sweets were again purchased and distributed among
friends and family.
One individual described the killing as “a good deed,” stating that an
opponent of Hindu religion had been eliminated and Hinduism would now be safe.
Gandhi was referred to as an “avatar of Aurangzeb.”
Another witness recalled hearing it said openly:
“Gandhiji ko marne wala
apna aadmi tha.”
The man who killed Gandhi was one of ours.
This was not madness. It
was ideological approval.
Godse Was Not a Loner
Godse was not an outsider. He had been associated with the RSS, worked with
the Hindu Mahasabha, and revered Savarkar as his guru. His newspaper Agrani
reflected deep resentment against Gandhi and Muslims.
The claim that Godse had left the RSS before the assassination collapses
under scrutiny.
On November 15, 1949, as he walked to the gallows, Godse recited the
RSS prayer “Namaste Sada Vatsale Matrubhoome.” Even in death, he
reaffirmed ideological belonging.
Years later, his brother Gopal Godse stated in an interview that
they had never truly left the RSS and that it was like a family to them.
Golwalkar After the Assassination
Within twenty four hours of the murder, public opinion swung sharply
against extremist groups. The Hindu Rashtra project collapsed overnight.
Golwalkar rushed to salvage the organisation.
On February 1, 1948, he issued a statement invoking love and
service, directing swayamsevaks to maintain harmony. This language stood in
stark contrast to the venom directed at Gandhi weeks earlier, when he had been
described as disloyal to Hindus and even threatened with being “silenced.”
The shift was tactical, not ideological.
Conclusion: An Unfinished Reckoning
Savarkar supplied the
justification.
Golwalkar supplied mobilisation.
The RSS shakha supplied discipline and fraternity.
The Hindu Mahasabha supplied political direction.
Godse supplied the bullets.
The bullet was Godse’s.
The blueprint was older.
Courts deal in proof.
History deals in patterns. And the pattern behind Gandhi’s murder is
unmistakable.
If Gandhi’s death is to
mean anything, it must compel us to confront uncomfortable truths — not with
garlands or slogans, but with honesty.
Because bullets may kill
a man once. Ideologies that justify them can kill a nation repeatedly.
About the Author
Siddhartha Shankar Mishra is an advocate at the Supreme Court of India and a
commentator on law, politics and society. His writings blend legal insight with
social critique and aim to provoke reflection on power, justice and public
conscience.
References
1.
Appu Esthose Suresh &
Priyanka Kotamraju, The Murderer, the Monarch and the Fakir, Juggernaut
2.
Tushar Gandhi, Let’s
Kill Gandhi, Rupa
3.
Dhirendra K. Jha, Gandhi’s
Assassin: The Making of Nathuram Godse, Penguin
4.
Justice J.L. Kapur
Commission Report
5.
Sewak Reports,
Intelligence Bureau Records
6.
A.G. Noorani, Savarkar
and Hindutva, LeftWord
7.
Christophe Jaffrelot, The
Hindu Nationalist Movement and Indian Politics, Penguin
8.
Ramachandra Guha, India
After Gandhi, HarperCollins
9.
Frontline magazine,
interview with Gopal Godse
10.
Gandhi Murder Trial
records identifying the weapon as a Beretta Model 1934 pistol
Disclaimer: This piece is a historical analysis based on court records, commission reports, and established scholarship. Views expressed are the author’s interpretation of documented events and are intended solely for public understanding.
No comments:
Post a Comment