Drishti CUET Coaching 2024, Best Online Portal For CUET Exam Preparation

Echoes of Sacrifice: Remembering the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre

« »
15-Apr-2024 | Maitri Singh

In the chapters of Modern Indian history, certain events stand out as stark reminders of the price paid for freedom. Among them, the Jallianwala Bagh massacre or Amritsar massacre of April 13, 1919, remains ingrained in India’s collective memory as one of the darkest episodes of British colonial rule in India. On the day of the massacre, at least 379 Indians were brutally killed and over 1,500 were injured by the British Indian army on the command of Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer, within the enclosed space of the public garden, without any prior warning. To commemorate the memory of the people who lost their lives in the massacre the government of India erected a monument in 1951. Following the same, a museum named ‘Yaad-e-Jallian’ was opened in March 2019 in the Jallianwala Bagh that offers an account of the tragedy and pays tribute to those who sacrificed their lives for India’s independence.

Historical Context

While the larger backdrop against this tragedy can be traced back to the discontent among Indians against the colonial rule, the aftermath of World War I that brought economic hardships, as well as the political disillusionment of the masses in India, the most crucial and significant reason behind the protest, was the introduction of the Rowlatt Act by the Central Legislative Council which was passed on 18^th march 1919.

Rowlatt Act of 1919

The Rowlatt Act, known as the Anarchical and Revolutionary Crimes Act of 1919 or Black Act was named after its primary author, Sir Sidney Rowlatt, who was a British jurist. The Act allowed for the detention of individuals suspected of engaging in revolutionary activities without trial for a maximum period of two years. It also included a provision that permitted the government to arrest and imprison individuals without following the legal process or in the absence of evidence of wrongdoing and curtailed the rights of individuals to challenge their detention or seek legal recourse against arbitrary arrests. Therefore, the government could arrest and detain anyone suspected of promoting or participating in anti-government activities, including political protests, strikes, or public demonstrations. Furthermore, the act imposed restrictions on the press, enabling authorities to censor or suppress publications deemed seditious or subversive. Thus, by analyzing the draconian nature of the law, it was not difficult to understand that it was introduced to suppress the resistance against colonial rule itself.

Rowlatt Satyagraha

As a consequence, Mahatma Gandhi on 6^th April 1919 called for a peaceful and non-violent Satyagraha and requested Indians to suspend work in response to the act. Many leaders like Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Madan Mohan Malviya, and Mazhar ul Haq resigned from the Imperial Legislative Council.

While on the one hand, many Indians followed peaceful disobedience, on the other hand, riots, attacks, and violent anti-establishment demonstrations had already started to erupt in Calcutta, Bombay, Delhi, Ahmedabad, etc. In Punjab, the situation became more critical as the region had previously dealt with forcible recruitments, wartime repression as well as many diseases. Soon the British government arrested Mahatma Gandhi and two other nationalist leaders Saifuddin Kitchlew and Dr. Satyapal. However, as the British establishment refused to scrap the law, the violence did not stop. On 10 April 1919, angry protestors marched to the Deputy Commissioner’s residence demanding the release of their two leaders. However, they were fired upon which resulted in further casualties. In retaliation, protestors used lathis and threw stones at any European who came their way. Among the incidents was the attack on Miss Sherwood, who was Superintendent of the Mission School in Amritsar. According to her testimony, on April 10, 1919, she was assaulted by a mob chanting "Kill her, she is English" and "Victory to Gandhi, Victory to Kitchlew''. She was beaten till she was unconscious, and later the mob left her under the assumption that she was dead.

Jallianwala Bagh Massacre

Due to the unrest across the country, public gatherings were not permitted and Marshal law was enforced. Unaware of the orders, a large crowd gathered in Jallianwala Bagh on 13th April 1919 to celebrate Baisakhi. However, the documents of the National Archives of India and the British say that the gathering was to discuss two resolutions— requesting the authorities to release the arrested leaders and to condemn the firing and violence that took place on 10th April. Soon the news reached General Dyer and he reached the bagh along with his troops. He deployed his troops and ordered them to open fire on the crowd without warning. The crowd attempted to reach the exit gate but Dyer ordered the soldiers to fire at the exit as well. As a result, around 379 people were killed, and over 1500 were injured, however estimates differ. The firing continued for 10 to 15 minutes, and as per records 150 bodies were extracted out of the well situated in the bagh. While many died due to the stampede, others succumbed to their injuries as they were not able to access timely medical attention due to the imposed martial law.

The Aftermath of the Massacre

The news about the massacre soon spread across the country despite the efforts of the British to suppress it. Soon martial law was imposed on Lahore, Amritsar, Gujranwala, Gujarat and Lyallpore due to widespread protests against the British establishment. Deeply saddened after hearing the news, Mahatma Gandhi gave up his title of ‘Kaiser-e-hind’ and withdrew the satyagraha movement on 18th april 1919 calling it a ‘Himalayan Blunder’and Rabindranath Tagore renounced his knighthood and other titles awarded to him. Even within the British Parliament, leaders like Winston Churchill and H.H. Asquith condemned the massacre. However, the Lieutenant Governor of Punjab, Michael O'Dwyer defended General Dyer, saying that unrest against the british rule was brewing in Punjab and the actions of Dyer were necessary.

Hunter Commission

After the massacre, the government formed the Disorders Inquiry Committee, commonly known as the Hunter Commission, chaired by Lord William Hunter to investigate the shootings. The committee included Indian members as well and condemned General Dyer's actions in its final report of March 1920. However, Reginald Dyer, who was the primary instigator of the massacre, faced limited consequences. He was removed from his army position, was denied promotion, and was prohibited from future employment in India. There was no trial conducted against him and he was relieved of his duties in 1920. Witnessing no serious disciplinary action against Dyer, widespread outrage against the report grew and people demanded justice and accountability. The Indian National Congress established a non-official committee, which included Motilal Nehru, C.R. Das, Abbas Tyabji, M.R. Jayakar, and Gandhi, to examine the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre. The committee called Dyer's actions inhumane and raised serious questions against the imposition of martial law in Punjab, citing the excessive use of force and the violation of civil liberties by British authorities. In 1922, responding to the recommendations of the Repressive Laws Committee, the Rowlatt Act was finally repealed in India.

On March 13, 1940, Udham Singh, a freedom fighter who had witnessed the massacre and been injured, sought vengeance by assassinating Michael O'Dwyer in London, who approved Dyer’s actions and was believed to be the main planner of the event. Despite being convicted for the assassination, Udham Singh was seen as a hero by many for his actions. He was eventually executed on July 31, 1940.

Conclusion

The Jallianwala Bagh massacre's legacy is not only a reminder of India's journey to independence, but also the sacrifices made for accountability in governance. It guides us in creating a more equitable society, where citizens speak out against injustice, uphold the system of checks and balances, and ensure that historical injustices are not forgotten.

References: