The Hindvasi Sedition Case- Conclusion
By: Late Prof. Dr. Allah Rakhio Butt
Extract from the Judgment:
It would be interesting to reproduce
an extract from the judgment for the benefit of
the present day historian. The verdict was published in the Daily Gazette,
Karachi dated 9 July 1919 and reeds as under:
The accused is the man of education;
he is a writer in Sindhi of considerable fluency and skill. He occupies as
editor of the Hindvasi (having circulation between 800 and 900 copies) a position
from which he can exercise his powers to accomplish a considerable amount of
good, or a considerable amount of harm… the Hindvasi, at the time the article “Martyrdom
in Delhi” was published, was one of the most important vernacular Peppers in
Sindh… The Hindvasi catered for a class of readers, the majority of whom, it is
safe to say, looked to it for the formation of their opinions on events of
which they had no first-hand knowledge of their own… Now there can be no doubt
of the bad effect of the writing of the accused upon a certain type of mind
very common among the Hindus of the rising generation in Sind. The accused in
this specific instance so far from endeavoring to put the true facts before his
class of readers, deliberately used the very arguments and incitements most
calculated to inflamed their minds. The responsibility of a man, who does this
is great even at the best of times. Much more so is it when we consider the
times through which India was passing, when the article was written… That is to
say in a peaceful province, he deliberately launched that the thunderbolt of
the 5th April… In the public interest it is essential that an example
should be made of the slipshod journalism that has characterized the methods of
Hindvasi. It is necessary in the best interest of India itself that such
writing should cease and that his case should serve as a wholesome warning to
others. In passing sentence I have carefully considered the law. At the same
time I cannot forget that a feature of the recent lawlessness, caused by
precisely the kind of doctrine which the accused has preached in this article,
was the deliberate attacking of individual European by Indian mobs. The
responsibility of the accused therefore is great for disseminating the racial
hatred at a time when it was necessary in the best interest of India itself
that the communities should see the good in each other. There is practically no
difference between the gravity of the two offences of which the accused has
been convicted. I do not consider that the accused should receive any lighter
punishment for the 153-A offence than he fully deserves for the 124-A offence.
In my opinion four years would not be excessive for the 124-A offence. I have
no powers to pass such a sentence directly but under section 35 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, I have power to award imprisonment up to four years four
separate offences. This is plainly a case for using that power. In the first
place it provides a punishment which exactly fits the first case; then the
second it avoids the necessity of committing the case to sessions court, as
would have been necessary otherwise. I hereby direct that Jethmal Parsram
Gulrajani, who had been convicted of an offence punishable under section 124-A
rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years; and that in respect for the
offence punishable under section 153-A he shall undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of two years, and I further direct that the second sentence shall
take effect on the expiry of the imprisonment awarded in respect of the offence
punishable under section 124-A I.P.C.
The above judgment is
self-explanatory and reveals that the magistrate failed to distinguish between
a respectable citizen and a hardened criminal and treated Jethmal like the
letter merely because he demanded from the ruling race social justice. In the capacity of an editor, learned man and
a political leader Jethmal was committed to better the lot of the downtrodden
of his country. There is no doubt that he discharged this duty faithfully and
landed himself in hot waters. Immediately after Jethmal’s conviction the
Hindvasi ceased its existence and the Sindh
Bhaskar Press on which the paper was printed was dismantled. The
management was however, fortunate that the security of Rs. 2000 deposited with
the government by the press as a guarantee of good conduct was returned to
them.
A bail application was moved
before E. Raymond, Additional Judicial Commissioner of Sindh, but was rejected
on the grounds that the same had no merit in it. On 21st July
1919, the prisoner was moved from the Hyderabad Central Prison to the Poona Jail.
Partisan of the Magistrate:
The extract from
the judgment in the above case suggests that how young bureaucrat in charge of
justice was influenced by certain peculiar political and racial compulsions and
acted in partisan. This reflects upon the fact that judicial system of the
British Raj was extremely prodigious particularly in the cases where the
interest or the ruling race was involved. There is every reason to believe that
the court of justice itself was all out to achieve all-embracing objects of
that gagging the voice of dissent. This was mainly because the justice was
administered by the administrative officers belonging to the ruling race.
The injustice meted out to
Jethmal convinced him that the lower court had acted contrary to the spirit of
the justice and had abused its authority. There was no other way out except
knocking the doors of the upper strata of the same system. Consequently an
appeal was filed in the Superior Court at Karachi. The appeal case commenced on
29 October 1919, before the High Court Bench at Karachi comprising Messrs
Kincaid and Raymond of the Judicial Commissioner’s court. Mr Joseph Baptista of
Bombay who had defended the accused in the lower court appeared before this
bench also. He argued that: “the magistrate was not competent to try the case;
that it was illegal for the lower court to exceed its powers of inflicting of
only two years imprisonment. On 30 October Baptista concluded his address and
left for Bombay. The following day public prosecutor gave his arguments. On the
same day Hardaram Mewaram, a local lawyer made a brief reply on behalf of the
appellant.
The High Court believed that the
lower court exercised poor judgment and abused its power, therefore, reduced
the sentence from four years to two years rigorous imprisonment.
Power of the Press:
The manner in which the Hindvasi
case was disposed of and a popular organ was stifled reflects the paranoia of
the colonial regime. In fact the Sindhi-owned press at that time had developed
into a powerful institution and the fear of so powerful influence was natural.
The Sindhi-owned newspapers and especially those in the hands of the Home Rule
League supporters inevitably endangered British supremacy in India. Alleged
inciting hatred and contempt and libelling all officers, the press lived under
severe surveillance of the Press Act 1910, the Defence of India Act 1914 and
those who succeeded in escaping the above net of repressive civil laws were
intercepted and punished under the criminal and penal laws.
The real fact was this that the
press in general lived in the climate of mutual suspicion and mistrust. During
the Great War government contempt of the press especially for those labeled as
revolutionary touched its climax and the Hindvasi belonged to that class of
newspapers. In 1917 the Commissioner in Sindh stamped this paper as “the most
extreme political agitator”. In 1918, it was classed as: “the most truculent
paper” and in the January of the same year it was banned by the Government of
Bombay to be subscribed by the registered libraries in the Presidency, and for
receiving government notices and advertisements. In March 1918 as Security of
rupees 2000 (an extremely drastic punishment) was deposited by Sindh Bhaskar
Press, where the Hindvasi was printed. In August 1918 the rival European on the
Daily Gazette pronounced Jethmal as: “the most extremist element of Sindh
politics”, merely because he criticized the repressive tendencies of the Sindh
bureaucracy. In 1919, the most fateful year the Hindvasi severely criticized
the infamous Rowlott Act, the Delhi and Jalianwalla Bagh massacres and was
amply punished by the autocratic and hostile rulers.
Return of the Hero:
In fact fighting for the rights
of his people cost Jethmal heavily. He went through physical and mental
torments of losing his job, money and imprisonment and above all deportation
from his home. On the other hand his sacrifices did not go un-rewarded.
Jethmal acquired the reputation
of the most formidable fighter against the British hegemony in Sindh. On the New
Year Day of 1920, as a result of Royal Amnesty he was released from the jail.
On his arrival at Hyderabad he was accorded “hero’s” welcome. The fact of the
matter is this that he had attained the giant like status in Sindh politics and
commanded universal respect of the people of Sindh. This is borne out by what
the bitter rival, the Daily Gazette dated January 1920 had to say on this
subject:
On 5 January 1920 Jethmal Parsram
arrived at Hyderabad by Bombay Mail. He was given a reception from the people
such as neither Mrs. Besant nor Mr. Gandhi received. There was a huge crowd of
thousands of people at the station and he was taken in a long procession of
garris bicycles and pedestrians with Mr. Jethmal’s carriage drawn by boys in
front. The whole bazar wore the bridal look decorated with paper flags and
buntings and many shops were also beautifully decorated. All along the way
there were cries of “Bande Matram” and “Bahrat Mata Ki Jai” Mr. Jethmal was
garlanded and presented with dupattas and such things. At several places tea
and drinks were provided graits and shopkeepers showed great enthusiasm in
honoring the released martyr, as they called him. Mr. Jethmal visited the
Khilafat conference their Muslim participants embraced him. Some kissed his
hands and many showed marks of honor. Mr. Jethmal spoke on the unity of the
Hindus and Muslims which had come above. He was quite happy in the jail as he
had the consolation that he was there for serving his country. What he saw
after coming out delighted him. Only three Sindhis (other two being Durgdas and
Mariwala) had gone to jail, but great good will follow if 300 or 3000 went to
jail. It took about 3.1/2 hours for the procession to go through the bazaar and
Hirabad and then towards home. The scene closed with a demonstration outside
Mr. Jethmal’s residence.
We can notice that the morale of
the released prisoner was high. His fighting spirit and enthusiasm were young
and ready to strike again for the sake of people. In fact Jethmal was made up
of such stuff who never regretted making personal sacrifices for the cause of
his people. His Hindvasi was reborn as the Bharatvasi and on his release he
wasted no time to join the paper. On his return he published an interesting
story of his jail experience in the new daily. In the Bharatvasi and from other
platforms he opposed the newly started non-cooperation movement which he
thought was against the larger interest of the people and on this point he was
opposed to the Congress leadership.
References:
1- The Daily Gazette, 2 April, 1919, p3
2- The Daily Gazette, 10 April, 1919, p4
3- The Daily Gazette, 14 April, 1919, p5
4- The Daily Gazette, 31 May, 1919, p5
5- The Daily Gazette, 5 June, 1919, p4
6- The Daily Gazette, 7 June, 1919, p5
7- The Daily Gazette, 25 June, 1919, p12
8- The Daily Gazette, 8 July, 1919, p12
9- The Daily Gazette, 8 July, 1919, p12
10- The Daily Gazette, 9 July, 1919, p10
11- The Daily Gazette, 9 July, 1919, p10
12- The Daily Gazette, 29 October, 1919, p5
13- Annual report on Indian Papers published in the Bombay
Presidency fot the year 1918, p50
14- The Daily Gazette, 8 January, 1920, p5
Comments
Post a Comment