Justice Markandey Katju knows how to be in the news. And today, on the 86th death anniversary of freedom fighters Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru, the former Supreme Court judge created a stir through his furious Facebook post about his notion on Mahatma Gandhi and Bhagat Singh. Paying homage to the freedom fighters, Katju asserted that a real freedom struggle can never be non violent or unarmed.
He claimed that Gandhi was a “feudal minded hypocrite and British agent” who put no efforts to stop or defer the death sentence of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev, and Rajguru. Katju has accused Gandhi of allegedly calling these three the “militant Indian youth” and “misguided souls”. He also claimed that Gandhi was happy with the execution of Bhagat Singh otherwise his popularity and ‘Mahatmahood’ would have disappeared.
“It is common sense that no one gives up a huge empire because of hunger strikes, salt marches and other such Gandhian dramas. A real revolutionary struggle against British rule had begun through the abovenamed real freedom fighters,” he said applauding Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru.
Here is the complete piece posted by Markandey Katju on Facebook.
Long Live Bhagat Singh ! Inquilab Zindabad !
It is the evening of 22nd March here in California, USA, but it must be the morning of 23rd March in India
Today, 23rd March is the death anniversary of my greatest Indian hero Shaheed Bhagat Singh.
On 23rd March, 1931 Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru were hanged by the Britishers in Lahore jail, their bodies secretly burnt and their ashes thrown away in some unknown place.
Those other real freedom fighters, Chandrashekhar Azad, Ashfaqulla, Khudiram Bose, Ram Prasad Bismil, etc had been killed or hanged by the British earlier, and that great revolutionary Surya Sen ( Masterda ) in 1934
In my speech at Berkeley University, California in 2015 I said that a real freedom struggle can never be non-violent, because no one gives up his Empire without an armed struggle. Was the American War of Independence against the British ( from 1775 to 1781 ) non violent ? Did George Washington fight with the British by presenting them flowers and doing satyagrah, or by raising a Continental Army ? Did the Vietnamese fight against first the French, and then the Americans, by going on hunger strike ? Did Bolivar fight against the Spaniards in Latin America by salt marches, or by raising batallions ?
It is commonsense that no one gives up a huge empire because of hunger strikes, salt marches and other such Gandhian dramas. A real revolutionary struggle against British rule had begun through the abovenamed real freedom fighters, but it was still in its nascent stage when it was nipped in the bud by that cunning feudal minded hypocrite Gandhi, who successfully diverted this genuine freedom struggle from its revolutionary direction to a harmless, nonsensical channel called satyagrah, which meant presenting the other cheek when your enemy strikes you on one cheek, instead of bravely exchanging blow for blow.
Our real freedom fighters and patriots have been relegated to a footnote in our national historiography and painted as deviants and mavericks, while the cunning feudal minded hypocrite and British agent Gandhi has been portrayed as the ‘ Father of the Nation ‘ who gave us freedom ‘ bina khadak bina dhaal ‘.
Gandhi described Bhagat Singh and the militant Indian youth fighting against British Imperialism as ‘ misguided souls ‘.
When the British sentenced Bhagat Singh to death, Gandhi made no effort to save his life. He never wrote any letter to the British Viceroy to commute his sentence, and never issued any public appeal to that effect. In all probability he was happy that his rivals as freedom fighters had been eliminated, otherwise his popularity and ‘ Mahatmahood ‘ would have disappeared.
India got independence not due to the dramas of Gandhi but because in the Second World War Germany attacked England and weakened it ( in fact if America had not helped her it is possible that Germany would have conquered England ), and because of American pressure on the British
