|
|
|
Saturday, March 25, 2006 |
|
The museum established by the
Punjab and Haryana High Court, as part of its golden jubilee celebrations,
throws light on the lesser-known facts of the trial of Shaheed Bhagat Singh and
others in the Lahore Conspiracy Case, finds out Maneesh
Chhibber
FOR the first time ever, documents and various exhibits on display in the museum set up by the Punjab and Haryana High Court as part of its golden jubilee celebrations allow a glimpse into the many grey areas of the trial of Shaheed Bhagat Singh and other patriots. Their trial related to the killing of British police officer J. P. Saunders and the bomb blast in the Central Assembly hall. Many important but little known aspects of the trial are on display for the benefit of the public. So much so that the trial itself appears in an entirely different light from the way in which it has been depicted so far. These documents, including extracts of the judgment of the special tribunal constituted by the British to try the patriots, clearly tell a story of a government that leveraged the legal set up to have its way as it wanted to teach "bloody Indians" a lesson. While it is common knowledge that Bhagat Singh and the other main accused refused to defend themselves during the trial, it now comes out that the prosecution did everything, including enacting new laws, to take advantage of this. The constitution of a special tribunal vide ordinance number III of 1930 dated May 1, 1930, to try the case was in itself a clear signal that the prosecution was determined not to allow the patriots go scot-free. The draconian law was enacted to dispense with the normal trial as per the Code of Criminal Procedure. The decision to constitute a
special tribunal to try the 24 accused, of which only 18 had actually been
nabbed, to replace the court of special magistrate who had been earlier hearing
the case also highlights the same.
Needless to say, the British denied to the patriots the safeguards available to all accused under the law prevalent then. Notes Punjab and Haryana High Court lawyer Malwinderjit Singh Waraich, who has authored a book on the hanging of Bhagat Singh, "The patriots wanted to prolong the trial in order to gain mileage for the freedom struggle. Saving their lives was the last thing on their mind. Sensing this, the prosecution was eager to finish the trial at the earliest." The trial related to the killing of Assistant Superintendent of Police J.P. Saunders and the throwing of a bomb in the hall of the Central Assembly at Delhi by Bhagat Singh and others. The prosecution examined 457 witnesses to strengthen its case. It concluded its evidence on August 26, 1930, and the very next day, the tribunal ordered that the recording of statements of the patriots facing trial be dispensed with. Called upon to lead evidence in support of their contentions, the patriots were, in a sudden move, ordered to close their evidence on September 5, 1930 — within just eight days. In about a month’s time, on October 7, 1930, the tribunal pronounced its judgment, awarding death sentence to Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru. On March 23, 1931, all three were hanged in the wee hours in Central Jail, Lahore. Bhagat Singh was cremated at Ferozepore. He was just 23 at that time. The High Court museum also has on display a copy of the telegram sent by the Home Secretary, Punjab, to the Home Department, New Delhi, dated March 17, 1931, which ordered that the death sentence be advanced to March 23, 1931. Originally, the hanging was fixed for March 27, 1931. Interestingly, Indian members of Central Assembly, including Muslim league leader M.A. Jinnah, had attacked the setting up of the special tribunal to try the patriots. "But, the trial of Bhagat
Singh and his associates can’t be seen from a purely legal point of view. The
main aim of the freedom fighters was to create awareness among the masses and
ensure that Inquilab Zindabad resounded in every nook and corner of the
country. In fact, when Bhagat Singh was asked by his comrade Jaidev Kapoor
about his refusal to defend himself, he said that he had put his life at stake
for the object of making people realise about the necessity of a revolution. He
added that his job had been accomplished," Prof Waraich observes. |