DOCSLIB.ORG

Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of English and American Studies English Language and Literature Martin Hulman Partition of India and its Leading Figures (1935-1947) Bachelor‟s Diploma Thesis Supervisor: Stephen Paul Hardy, Ph.D. 2013 I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently, using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography. …............................................ Author's signature Acknowledgements I would like to thank you my family for unconditional support and ever-present encouragement during my studies. Table of contents Introduction 5-7 1. On the Road to Partition (1935-1939) 8 1.1 1935 Act and Provincial Elections 8-10 1.2 Aftermath of the Elections 11-13 1.3 The Rise of Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the Muslim League 13-16 2. In the Shadow of the War (1939-1945) 16 2.1 The Congress resignation 17-18 2.2 Jinnah-Linlithgow co-operation and 'Lahore Resolution' 18-22 2.3 The British proposals – 'August Offer' and 'Cripps Mission' 22-27 2.4 The Quit India Movement 27-31 2.5 Towards the Peace 31 2.5.1 Gandhi-Jinnah talks 31-33 2.5.2 The Simla Conference 33-35 3. Endgame of the British Raj and Partition (1945-1947) 35 3.1 Elections and the 'Cabinet Mission' 34-44 3.2 The Direct Action 45-48 3.3 The Breakup 48-52 3.4 Mountbatten Plan and Partition of India 52-59 Conclusion 59-60 Bibliography 61-65 Introduction The history of the struggle for independence and partition of India from British stronghold have been subjects of countless studies and academic publications. The fact that it caught the attention of so many scholars and historians certainly speaks volumes about the importance of these events. This thesis concentrates primarily on the latter, even though both events were necessarily interconnected. The emphasis is going to be laid on the timeframe from 1935 to 1947 when the actual partition happened. From the 1935 Government of India Act, which had started the course of events leading to the partition, all the way to the 3 June Plan of 1947 which eventually decided the fate of millions of people. During the process, important figures raised and made crucial decisions behind the negotiating table. Their influence was of huge importance for the history of India and ethnically diverse communities. Therefore, it is going to be studied in detail for the purposes of better understanding of the whole issue of partition which brought about one of the worst human tragedy in modern history. The main aim is to present how the state of Pakistan came into being by a configuration of forces and events. Secondly, to find out whether the partition and enormous suffering of people could have been avoided and thirdly, who is to blame for such drastic operation. Partition of India was one of the most significant events in the history of this vast and multicultural subcontinent. Long-lasting struggle for freedom and independence from the shackles of the British Empire had finally come to an end and two new states emerged on the world map, India and Pakistan. However, the price of freedom and self-rule was enormously high. Resulting in a dislocation of millions of people, countless deaths, rapes and other atrocities which spread across the new-established borders as well as inland. It was, indeed, its hastened nature, imposed implementation by the British authorities, along with seemingly unsolvable differences in attitudes and priorities between the two principal communities of the sub-continent, Hindus and Muslims, which led to colossal communal violence and misery. The discrepancies among these two ethnic groups had existed long before the British arrival but grew out of proportion under the aegis of imperialism. The Indian subcontinent was divided on the forceful demand of the Muslims represented by Muhammad Ali Jinnah and the Muslim League. They admittedly feared united India, especially after the debacle in 1937 elections, in which Muslims would be a minority. It was neither the goal of the British nor the dream of the Hindu Congress to see India divided. The fact that Pakistan was, nonetheless, created speaks volumes of a leader's perseverance and a nation's will to sacrifice for the cause of independence (Ali 115-16). India was partitioned in August 1947 and power was transferred from the British hands to India and Pakistan on the basis of dominion status in accordance with the 3 June Plan, which was accepted by and acquiesced in by the principal Indian leaders. It was a task of tremendous responsibility and entailed all the complications of partition of territory and division of resources, at a time of heightening tension and turmoil (Mansergh and Moon xi). For this purpose, British government appointed new viceroy, Lord Mountbatten, who played probably the most crucial role in the whole process. As Mushirul Hasan put it: “the destiny of millions light on him” (4). The British decided to divide India mainly along the religious lines and failed to foresee or imagine the consequences of such division. India had never been a homogeneous entity and therefore, not one that could be easily handed over and governed. Actually, majority of common people was for 'One India', but it was this communal divide between the Hindus and the Muslims, which brought matters into cry for partition. After all political negotiations in the early 1940's had reached an impasse, the British started to believe that the partition remained the only option to avoid outright civil war and anarchy, and the only way to conduct a graceful retreat. However, this 'graceful retreat' turned into a tragedy and some scholars, e.g. Gyanendra Pandey or Urvashi Butalia, even use the term 'holocaust' with casualties of around 1 million, some 15 million refugees and thousands of women raped. The critical element in the planning of the partition was time and unsettled disputes between political leaders. Mountbatten established his credibility by designating the precise date - 30 June 1948, by which the British intended to retreat and make a peaceful transfer of power. It gave the British a mere 15 months to wrap up an empire which political, administrative and constitutional decisions were far too tricky to be resolved in such a short period of time. In reality, they even dared to shorten it by almost a year in order to prevent violence and sustain an image of 'peaceful liberators' in the eyes of the world. On the top of that nobody knew where the new borders would be drawn. 1. On the road to Partition (1935-39) First chapter maps the events which set the country on the road to partition, particularly provincial elections and an immediate aftermath which considerably deteriorated Hindu-Muslim relations and undeliberately gave rise to the Muslim League and Muhammad Ali Jinnah who became one of the most influential figures of the partition history. It was the fear of Hindu domination, after its landslide victory in 1937 elections, and Jinnah's insistence that Hindus and Muslims constituted two different nations, that gave the ground for the Pakistan demand. 1.1. 1935 Act and Provincial Elections The early decades of the twentieth century saw a growing demand, from the educated middle class Indians, for power sharing and responsibility to run their own institutions, to which the British response was reluctant and evasive (Panigrahi 1-2). “Protests against British rule and the rise of nationalist consciousness had risen in tandem, bringing with it unintended divisive elements between Hindus and Muslims, which had surfaced with call for unity between these 'two nations' in India” (McMenamin 71). Realizing the need for gradual introduction of parliamentary democracy, the British promulgated a series of bills, reforms and acts guaranteeing increased representation and greater participation of Indians in legislative matters to assuage the common sentiment of the population. Probably the most critical one that sharpened relations between two major forces of political spectrum, the Muslim League and the Indian National Congress, and set the country on the road to Partition, was the 1935 Government of India Act and subsequent provincial elections two years later. The Act provided for the establishment of full responsible Government subject to „safeguards‟ in the eleven provinces of British India; It provided also for a federation of India, comprising both provinces and states, with a federal central Government and legislature for the management of all subjects except foreign affairs and defence (Philips 188). It became operative on 1 April 1937 except its second part, the Federal Structure, which could not function until a specific number of princely states had joined the Federation (Coupland 2). Jawaharlal Nehru, the future leader of the Congress, initially rejected the Act entirely, declaring that the New Constitution offered India only responsibility without power (Shakoor 7) because the principle of autocracy was retained (Menon 14). The Congress, with its avowed nationalist and democratic-socialist view demanded absolute authority in the provinces and at the centre (Shakoor 8). It also stated that the future constitution of India could only be framed by a Constituent Assembly based on adult franchise (Singh 2). Nevertheless, they decided to participate in 1937 elections with the Manifesto dwelt upon the economic crisis in India, poverty, unemployment and resistance to British imperialism with ultimate goal of free united India (Sitaramayya 12-24). With regard to the Muslim League, “it was in a state of hopeless confusion, with interests clashing at all levels, provincial, local and personal” (Shakoor 9). It had existed only 'on the paper' and without a leader until Muhammad Ali Jinnah returned from England in 1936. Despite his tireless effort to unite Muslims in all parts of the country, he could not bring together all the factions of fragmented Muslim politics.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Freedom in West Bengal Revised
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ResearchArchive at Victoria University of Wellington Freedom and its Enemies: Politics of Transition in West Bengal, 1947-1949 * Sekhar Bandyopadhyay Victoria University of Wellington I The fiftieth anniversary of Indian independence became an occasion for the publication of a huge body of literature on post-colonial India. Understandably, the discussion of 1947 in this literature is largely focussed on Partition—its memories and its long-term effects on the nation. 1 Earlier studies on Partition looked at the ‘event’ as a part of the grand narrative of the formation of two nation-states in the subcontinent; but in recent times the historians’ gaze has shifted to what Gyanendra Pandey has described as ‘a history of the lives and experiences of the people who lived through that time’. 2 So far as Bengal is concerned, such experiences have been analysed in two subsets, i.e., the experience of the borderland, and the experience of the refugees. As the surgical knife of Sir Cyril Ratcliffe was hastily and erratically drawn across Bengal, it created an international boundary that was seriously flawed and which brutally disrupted the life and livelihood of hundreds of thousands of Bengalis, many of whom suddenly found themselves living in what they conceived of as ‘enemy’ territory. Even those who ended up on the ‘right’ side of the border, like the Hindus in Murshidabad and Nadia, were apprehensive that they might be sacrificed and exchanged for the Hindus in Khulna who were caught up on the wrong side and vehemently demanded to cross over.
    [Show full text]
  • INTERNATIONAL GCSE History (9-1) TOPIC BOOKLET: Colonial Rule and the Nationalist Challenge in India, 1919-47 Pearson Edexcel International GCSE in History (4HI1)
    INTERNATIONAL GCSE History (9-1) TOPIC BOOKLET: Colonial rule and the nationalist challenge in India, 1919-47 Pearson Edexcel International GCSE in History (4HI1) For fi rst teaching September 2017 First examination June 2019 Contents Page 1: Overview Page 3: Content Guidance Page 16: Student Timeline Overview This option is a Depth Study and in five Key Topics students learn about: 1. The Rowlatt Acts, Amritsar and the Government of India Act, 1919 2. Gandhi and Congress, 1919-27 3. Key developments 1927-39 4. The impact of the Second World War on India 5. Communal violence, independence and partition, 1945-47. The content of each depth study is expressed in five key topics. Normally these are five periods in chronological order, but some options contain overlapping dates where a new aspect is introduced. Although these clearly run in chronological sequence, they should not be taken in isolation from each other – students should appreciate the narrative connections that run across the key topics. Questions may cross these topics and students should appreciate the links between them in order to consider, for example, long-term causes and consequences. The teaching focus should enable students to: gain knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of historical periods develop skills to analyse historical interpretations 1 develop skills to explain, analyse and make judgements about historical events and periods studied, using second-order historical concepts (causation, consequence and significance). Outline – why students will engage with this period in history Students study a period of huge significance in the challenge to British colonial rule and the creation of new states in the sub-continent.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIT 20 PRELUDE to QUIT INDIA* Prelude to Quit India
    UNIT 20 PRELUDE TO QUIT INDIA* Prelude to Quit India Structure 20.1 Introduction 20.2 Political Situation in India 1930-39 – A Background 20.3 British Imperial Strategy in India 20.4 Resignation of Ministries 20.5 Individual Satyagraha 20.6 Cripps Mission 20.7 Summary 20.8 Exercises 20.1 INTRODUCTION At the very outset of the World War II in September 1939, it became evident that India would be in the forefront of the liberation struggle by the subject countries. In fact, support to Britain in its war efforts rested on the assurance by the former that India would be freed from British subjection after the war. Imperial strategy as it was shaped in Britain was still stiff and rigid. Winston Churchill who succeeded Neville Chamberlain as the Prime Minister of Britain on 10 May 1940, declared that the aim of the war was, “victory, victory at all costs… for without victory, there is no survival… no survival for the British Empire…”. (Madhushree Mukerjee, 2010, p.3.) More than ever before, the mainstream political parties of India had to make their moves on the basis of both national politics and international developments. It is in this context that the Quit India Movement of 1942 heralded one of the most tumultuous phases in the history of the Indian national movement. The developments leading up to it were also momentous because of their long term ramification. In the course of this Unit, we will establish the pulls and pressures working on mainstream Indian politics and their regional manifestations prior to the beginning of the Quit India Movement of 1942.
    [Show full text]
  • Summit Failures and Cabinet Obstacles, August 1944–July 1945
    August 1944–July 1945 4 Summit Failures and Cabinet Obstacles, August 1944–July 1945 S THE UNITED STATES took upon itself the lion’s share of the Allied war against Japan, Roosevelt’s frustration at Churchill’s in- A transigence over India grew stronger. FDR’s personal envoy, Am- bassador Phillips, reported, after returning to Washington, that when he talked to Churchill about India, “Churchill banged the table and said ‘I have always been right about Hitler and everyone else in Europe. I am also right about Indian policy, any change in Indian policy now will mean a blood bath.’”1 Whenever Roosevelt himself tried to discuss India with Churchill he received “a blunt cold shoulder.” By late summer of 1944 he entirely agreed with Phillips’s forthright report of what needed to be done about British policy in India. Since India would have to become a major base of future operations against Burma and Japan, “We should have around us a sympathetic India rather than an indifferent and possibly hostile India,” Phillips wrote. Indi- ans currently felt that “they have no voice in the Government and therefore no responsibility in the conduct of the war. They feel that they have nothing to fight for as they are convinced that the professed war aims of the United Nations do not apply to them. The British Prime Minister in fact has stated that the provisions of the Atlantic Charter are not applicable to India.” The Indian Army was “purely mercenary,” Phillips told FDR, adding that Gen- eral Stilwell was quite worried about “the poor morale” of Indian officers.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Nation Theory: Its Importance and Perspectives by Muslims Leaders
    Two Nation Theory: Its Importance and Perspectives by Muslims Leaders Nation The word “NATION” is derived from Latin route “NATUS” of “NATIO” which means “Birth” of “Born”. Therefore, Nation implies homogeneous population of the people who are organized and blood-related. Today the word NATION is used in a wider sense. A Nation is a body of people who see part at least of their identity in terms of a single communal identity with some considerable historical continuity of union, with major elements of common culture, and with a sense of geographical location at least for a good part of those who make up the nation. We can define nation as a people who have some common attributes of race, language, religion or culture and united and organized by the state and by common sentiments and aspiration. A nation becomes so only when it has a spirit or feeling of nationality. A nation is a culturally homogeneous social group, and a politically free unit of the people, fully conscious of its psychic life and expression in a tenacious way. Nationality Mazzini said: “Every people has its special mission and that mission constitutes its nationality”. Nation and Nationality differ in their meaning although they were used interchangeably. A nation is a people having a sense of oneness among them and who are politically independent. In the case of nationality it implies a psychological feeling of unity among a people, but also sense of oneness among them. The sense of unity might be an account, of the people having common history and culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Ending the Raj
    0 BACKGROUND GUIDE: ENDING THE RAJ 1 BACKGROUND GUIDE: ENDING THE RAJ Greetings from the Director, Hello and welcome to UTMUN 2018! My name is Shanzae Khan and I will be your Director for ‘Ending the Raj.’ As this is a crisis committee, we have a highly skilled crisis team working with us. The Crisis Manager for this committee is Jennifer Ben, our Moderator is Roaa Shoukry and the Crisis Analysts are Laura Quon, Maya Li Preti, Akil Abrar and Aniket Ka. We have been working very hard over the past few months to bring you this committee and will be present during the conference to answer any queries you may have. I have been involved with Model United Nations (MUNs) for over nine years and this is one of the most interesting committees that I have been given the opportunity to be a part of. I have participated as a Delegate, Vice-Chair, Co-Director, Director and have recently endeavored towards the logistical aspect of MUNs by serving as Director General for Internal Affairs at a recent conference. Diplomacy and debates are one of the most interesting aspects within this committee, and I hope to help you all with any and all aspects of debate you encounter during the course of this conference. Due to the competitive nature of UTMUN, I would strongly advise you all to read this background guide, submit your position papers on time, and conduct the relevant research required for your character. This will not only help you with your debating and diplomacy skills, but will also ensure that you all have a fun and memorable time within the committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Jinnah and Cabinet Mission Plan 1946
    Al-Khair University, Bhimber Jinnah and Cabinet Mission Plan 1946 WALEED AKRAM [email protected] The Cabinet Mission Plan Background As the provincial election campaigns heated up, reports of Hindu Muslim riots, and of “poisonous propaganda” especially in Punjab, increased. The failure of the Simla conference had created a dangerous stalemate in Indian politics. It might be said that the body politic in India almost died of a surfeit of conferences. Moreover, Pethick Lawrence had concluded by then that it would be useless to leave the another round of political negotiations to the viceroy alone, and 2 nothing less than a Cabinet Mission to India was required to break the Hindu Muslim “deadlock”.1 Mr. Attlee made it clear that the Cabinet Mission would not take any definite proposals with them as had sir Stafford Cripps in 1942 nor would have any share in the constitution making. ‘India herself must choose’. He made a remark which was most significant from the point of view of the Muslims. He observed, ‘we are very mindful of the rights of minorities and minorities should be able to live free from fear. This remark welcome to the Congress leader while Muhammad Ali Jinnah replied ‘Muslims are not a minority in India they are a nation and self determination is their birthright’. The British Ministers examined the Muslim demand for Pakistan and came to the conclusion that neither a larger nor a smaller sovereign state of Pakistan would provide an acceptable solution for the communal problem. They referred to what they termed as ‘weighty administrative, economic and military consideration’ against the idea of partitioning of India and the setting up of two sovereign states.
    [Show full text]
  • 01720Joya Chatterji the Spoil
    This page intentionally left blank The Spoils of Partition The partition of India in 1947 was a seminal event of the twentieth century. Much has been written about the Punjab and the creation of West Pakistan; by contrast, little is known about the partition of Bengal. This remarkable book by an acknowledged expert on the subject assesses partition’s huge social, economic and political consequences. Using previously unexplored sources, the book shows how and why the borders were redrawn, as well as how the creation of new nation states led to unprecedented upheavals, massive shifts in population and wholly unexpected transformations of the political landscape in both Bengal and India. The book also reveals how the spoils of partition, which the Congress in Bengal had expected from the new boundaries, were squan- dered over the twenty years which followed. This is an original and challenging work with findings that change our understanding of parti- tion and its consequences for the history of the sub-continent. JOYA CHATTERJI, until recently Reader in International History at the London School of Economics, is Lecturer in the History of Modern South Asia at Cambridge, Fellow of Trinity College, and Visiting Fellow at the LSE. She is the author of Bengal Divided: Hindu Communalism and Partition (1994). Cambridge Studies in Indian History and Society 15 Editorial board C. A. BAYLY Vere Harmsworth Professor of Imperial and Naval History, University of Cambridge, and Fellow of St Catharine’s College RAJNARAYAN CHANDAVARKAR Late Director of the Centre of South Asian Studies, Reader in the History and Politics of South Asia, and Fellow of Trinity College GORDON JOHNSON President of Wolfson College, and Director, Centre of South Asian Studies, University of Cambridge Cambridge Studies in Indian History and Society publishes monographs on the history and anthropology of modern India.
    [Show full text]
  • Sri Aurobindo and the Cripps Mission to India
    Sri Aurobindo and the Cripps Mission to India (March- April 1942) Table of Contents Draft Declaration for Discussion with Indian Leaders 3 Messages of Sri Aurobindo about Sir Stafford Cripps’s Mission 6 Twelve Years with Sri Aurobindo by Nirodbaran (Extracts) 7 The Transfer of Power in India by V.P. Menon, The Cripps Mission 21 Struggle for Freedom by R.C. Majumdar (Extracts) 54 Annexure Mother’s Agenda, Vol 3, November 17, 1962 66 Mother’s Agenda, Vol 4, June 15, 1963 69 Prime Minister Winston Churchill's Announcement 71 Statement and Draft Declaration by His Majesty's Government 74 Sir Stafford Cripps Review of Negotiations 77 Sir Stafford Cripps Statement on India 81 Prime Minister Winston Churchill's Report to the House 86 On Wavell’s and the Cabinet Mission 92 2 Draft of Cripps Declaration for Discussion with Indian Leaders (as published) 30 March 1942 The conclusions of the British War Cabinet as set out below are those which Sir Stafford Cripps has taken with him for discussion with the Indian Leaders and the question as to whether they will be implemented will depend upon the outcome of these discussions which are now taking place. His Majesty's Government, having considered the anxieties expressed in this country and in India as to the fulfillment of the promises made in regard to the future of India, have decided to lay down in precise and clear terms the steps which they propose shall be taken for the earliest possible realisation of self-government in India. The object is the creation of a new Indian Union which shall constitute a Dominion, associated with the United Kingdom and the other Dominions by a common allegiance to the Crown, but equal to them in every respect, in no way subordinate in any aspect of its domestic or external affairs.
    [Show full text]
  • Remembering Partition: Violence, Nationalism and History in India
    Remembering Partition: Violence, Nationalism and History in India Gyanendra Pandey CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Remembering Partition Violence, Nationalism and History in India Through an investigation of the violence that marked the partition of British India in 1947, this book analyses questions of history and mem- ory, the nationalisation of populations and their pasts, and the ways in which violent events are remembered (or forgotten) in order to en- sure the unity of the collective subject – community or nation. Stressing the continuous entanglement of ‘event’ and ‘interpretation’, the author emphasises both the enormity of the violence of 1947 and its shifting meanings and contours. The book provides a sustained critique of the procedures of history-writing and nationalist myth-making on the ques- tion of violence, and examines how local forms of sociality are consti- tuted and reconstituted by the experience and representation of violent events. It concludes with a comment on the different kinds of political community that may still be imagined even in the wake of Partition and events like it. GYANENDRA PANDEY is Professor of Anthropology and History at Johns Hopkins University. He was a founder member of the Subaltern Studies group and is the author of many publications including The Con- struction of Communalism in Colonial North India (1990) and, as editor, Hindus and Others: the Question of Identity in India Today (1993). This page intentionally left blank Contemporary South Asia 7 Editorial board Jan Breman, G.P. Hawthorn, Ayesha Jalal, Patricia Jeffery, Atul Kohli Contemporary South Asia has been established to publish books on the politics, society and culture of South Asia since 1947.
    [Show full text]
  • Leo Amery at the India Office, 1940 – 1945
    AN IMPERIALIST AT BAY: LEO AMERY AT THE INDIA OFFICE, 1940 – 1945 David Whittington A thesis submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements of the University of the West of England, Bristol For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Faculty of Arts, Creative Industries and Education August 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii GLOSSARY iv INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTERS I LITERATURE REVIEW 10 II AMERY’S VIEW OF ATTEMPTS AT INDIAN CONSTITUTIONAL 45 REFORM III AMERY FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT OF 1935 75 UNTIL THE AUGUST OFFER OF 1940 IV FROM SATYAGRAHA TO THE ATLANTIC CHARTER 113 V THE CRIPPS MISSION 155 VI ‘QUIT INDIA’, GANDHI’S FAST AND SOCIAL REFORM 205 IN INDIA VII A SUCCESSOR TO LINLITHGOW, THE STERLING BALANCES 253 AND THE FOOD SHORTAGES VIII FINAL ATTEMPTS AT CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM BEFORE THE 302 LABOUR ELECTION VICTORY CONCLUSION 349 APPENDICES 362 LIST OF SOURCES CONSULTED 370 ABSTRACT Pressure for Indian independence had been building up throughout the early decades of the twentieth century, initially through the efforts of the Indian National Congress, but also later, when matters were complicated by an increasingly vocal Muslim League. When, in May 1940, Leo Amery was appointed by Winston Churchill as Secretary of State for India, an already difficult assignment had been made more challenging by the demands of war. This thesis evaluates the extent to which Amery’s ultimate failure to move India towards self-government was due to factors beyond his control, or derived from his personal shortcomings and errors of judgment. Although there has to be some analysis of politics in wartime India, the study is primarily of Amery’s attempts at managing an increasingly insurgent dependency, entirely from his metropolitan base.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Calcutta Killings Noakhali Genocide
    1946 : THE GREAT CALCUTTA KILLINGS AND NOAKHALI GENOCIDE 1946 : THE GREAT CALCUTTA KILLINGS AND NOAKHALI GENOCIDE A HISTORICAL STUDY DINESH CHANDRA SINHA : ASHOK DASGUPTA No part of this publication can be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the author and the publisher. Published by Sri Himansu Maity 3B, Dinabandhu Lane Kolkata-700006 Edition First, 2011 Price ` 500.00 (Rupees Five Hundred Only) US $25 (US Dollars Twenty Five Only) © Reserved Printed at Mahamaya Press & Binding, Kolkata Available at Tuhina Prakashani 12/C, Bankim Chatterjee Street Kolkata-700073 Dedication In memory of those insatiate souls who had fallen victims to the swords and bullets of the protagonist of partition and Pakistan; and also those who had to undergo unparalleled brutality and humility and then forcibly uprooted from ancestral hearth and home. PREFACE What prompted us in writing this Book. As the saying goes, truth is the first casualty of war; so is true history, the first casualty of India’s struggle for independence. We, the Hindus of Bengal happen to be one of the worst victims of Islamic intolerance in the world. Bengal, which had been under Islamic attack for centuries, beginning with the invasion of the Turkish marauder Bakhtiyar Khilji eight hundred years back. We had a respite from Islamic rule for about two hundred years after the English East India Company defeated the Muslim ruler of Bengal. Siraj-ud-daulah in 1757. But gradually, Bengal had been turned into a Muslim majority province.
    [Show full text]