CHAPTERII AUROBINDO AND REVOLUTIONARY TERRORISM

1. Secret Societies in Bengal Aurobindo did not write anything on political issues

after 1893 for about 12 years,1 although he continued

“his political work behind the scenes in silence.” He

had connections with secret societies like Chapekar

Club or organisation of similar type, either through

Bal Gangadhar Tilak (1856-1920) or through his other

friends, the details of which are shrouded in mystery.

His autobiographical notes say that he “had met a

member of the secret society in Western India and taken

the oath of the society and had been introduced to the

council in Bombay. He spoke of the Society and its aim

to P.Mitter and other leading men in the revolutionary

group in Bengal and they took the oath of the society

and agreed to carry out its objects on the line

suggested by Aurobindo”.2 His civilian friend Charu

Chandra Datta tells vaguely about a net-work of

1 Sri Aurobindo: Autobiographical Notes and Other Writings of Historical Interest: “His articles in the Indu Prakash were anonymous, although many people in Bombay knew that he was the writer…. It was in England while at Cambridge that he made revolutionary speeches at the meetings of the Indian Majlis which was recorded as a black mark against him by the India Office.” P. 682 Ibid; pp.69-70

underground societies set up by Aurobindo in Western

India; but there is no corroboration of Datta’s story3

from any other source. Aurobindo has, nevertheless,

admitted that “he had begun a work that was still

nameless and it was in the course of that work he went

to Bengal to see what the hope of revival was, the

level of political awareness of the people, and whether

the political condition conducive to a movement.”4

Contemporary official report observes that the Maratha

movement aimed at the revival of the Maratha nation

through socio-religious festivals like Shivaji Utsab

and political organisations like ‘the Chapekar Club in

Poona. “Two years later,” the official report

continues, “the Marhatta movement caught on to some

extent in Bengal, and the Shivaji movement began to

attract notice.”5 Aurobindo brought the secret society

idea from Bombay to Bengal. He even thought of

engineering a revolt of the Indian soldiers in the Army

and with that purpose he visited a regiment in Central

India. But he did not pursue it further.6

3 Charu Chandra Datta also refers to a revolutionary council of which he himself was a member, in his memoirs entitled ‘purano katha(Vol-III) But there is no corroboration of such a council and the net- work of secret societies.4 Sri Aurobindo: op.cit. P 69. The visits were between 1898 and 19005 F.C.Daly.: Notes on the Growth of the Revolutionary Movement in Bengal (1905-1911in Terrorism in Bengal, Vol.I. ),. Pp 10-11. See also J.C.Ker:Political Trouble in India: 1907-1917, Pp. 14-186 Sri Aurobindo: Op.Cit P 70.

58

In 1901, Satish Chandra Bose (1876-1948) founded the

Anushilan Samity being inspired by Bankimchandra’s ideal of

the fullest development of the physical and moral

qualities of man as the ultimate goal of human life,

and the happiness in life was to be sought in the

harmony of bodily vigour, knowledge and devotion

through a process of anushilan or continuous practice.

The Samiti housed at 21 Madan Mitra Lane was

apolitical, and the physical activities consisted of

training in lathi play, and other of indigenous methods

of physical exercise. A regular organising committee

took over the management of the Samiti from 24th march,

1902 and that date is generally accepted as the

foundation day. As Surendra Nath Banerji (1848-1925)

declined to be President, Pramatha Nath Mitra (1853-

1910) became president. Aurobindo Ghose 7and Chitta

Ranjan Das (1870-1925) were selected as vice-presidents

and Surendranath Tagore (1872-1940) as Treasurer.

People like Rashbehari Ghose (1845-1921) and Sarada

Charan Mitra (1848-1917) were patrons. In 1905 Anushilan

shifted to a more prominent and commodious location at

49 Cornwallis Street, Calcutta. Evidently the society

was not a secret society till then, though it had a

patriotic and social service agenda.

7 From 1901 Aurobindo’s visit to Calcutta was more frequent for political reasons. In April,1901 he married Mrinalini, daughter of Bhupal Chandra Bose, a Government official then posted in Shillong.

59

In the beginning of the twentieth century several other

societies with identical programmes grew up but only a

few only survived. Atmonnati samiti as a society for

self-development was launched in 1901; soon, however,

under the leadership of Bipin Bihari Ganguli (1887-

1954) and Indra Nath Nandi (1885-1935) it emerged as an

underground revolutionary society. Another gymnasium

was organised by Sarala Ghosal at about 1902 at her

father’s house at 26 Ballygunj Circular Road, under the

guidance of renowned Prof. Murtaza. She introduced

‘Beerastami brata’ and ‘Sashtra puja’ with a view to removing

the fear and inhibition about the use of

weapons,and‘Pratapaditya festival,’ in the line of

‘Shivaji Utsav’ to foist a Bengali icon. The official

assessment that” her field of work has been political

and no woman has ever wielded greater power over the

boys and men of her country,” is a gross exaggeration,

because her organisation became defunct with her

departure for Punjab in 1906.

2. Aurobindo’s Secret SocietyInspired by the secret societies in Western India,

Aurobindo sent Jatindra Nath Banerji (1877-1930), an

ex-soldier in Baroda State Army, to set up one such

society in Calcutta. The preliminary task was to impart

60

physical and military training to the Bengali youth as

a part of the programme of resurgence of Bengal. In

1902 Jatindra Nath set up a samiti camouflaged as a

riding club at 106 Circular Road, Calcutta to impart

military training along with horse riding, Young people

and even some of the Anushilan Samiti members joined

club. Jatindra Nath’s obsession with military training,

especially horse riding, generally disregarding the

character building aspect of the samiti, was irksome to

the leaders of the Anushilan, particularly to its

secretary, P. N. Mitra.

Aurobindo wrote, “After I had started my revolutionary

work in Bengal through certain emissaries, I went there

to see personally and arrange things myself. I found a

number of small groups of revolutionaries, all

scattered and acting without reference to each other.”

Aurobindo tried to organise them “under a single

organisation, with the barrister P.Mitter as leader of

the revolution in Bengal and a central council of five

persons one of them being Nivedita.8” The central

council, however, was ineffective from the beginning as

it failed to forge a unity among motley revolutionary

groups and individuals.

After about two years or so, Anushilan Samiti withdrew its

members from Jatindra Nath’s club on the ground of its

8 Sri Aurobindo: op.cit; A letter to Pavitra (Philippe Barbier Saint Hilaire) written by Aurobindo on 13 November,1946, P. 99

61

neglect of the self-development aspects. The group was

further crippled by rivalry between Jatindra Nath and

Barindra, who having had the ears of Aurobindo9, could

get Jatindra thrown out of the organisation on an

allegation of moral turpitude .There is no reason to

disbelieve Hem Chandra Kanungo who thought that the

story was fabricated by Barin with a view to ousting

Jatindra Nath and usurping the leadership. Barin, irked

by occasional interference by P. Mitter of Anushilan

samiti, shifted to a house at Grey Street and thus

separated himself from Anushilon Samiti.. Aurobindo’s

feeble effort to bring about reconciliation between

Barin and Jatindra also failed.10 Jatindra eventually

became a sannyasi with the name of Niralamba Swami.

Barin, by nature impervious to anyone’s advice,11became

the leader of Aurobindo’s society. He even compelled

his cousin brother Satyendra Nath Bose to leave the

Grey Street society lest this capable young man should

be a contender for leadership..12.

9 BBP: P. 24. Hemchandra writes that Barin carried a concocted tale of Jatin’s immoral involvement with a lady to Aurobindo, leading to the latter’s expulsion from the Samity. According to Hem Chandra even Satyendra, Barin’s cousin, who was a possible contender for leadership, was similarly blamed and eventually Satyendra had to leave Calcutta for Midnapur. The bitterness thus created persisted. 10 Peter Heehs: op.cit, Pp. 55-5611 Hem Chandra’s observation that Barindra was impervious to any sane advice is borne out by Upendra Nath Banerji who makes in his“Nirbasiter Atmakatha similar observation. 12 Ibid. P 24. There is no direct corroboration of this incident. But both Barin and Satyen used to dislike each other, as evident

62

Following the example of Aurobindo, his two cousin

brothers at Midnapur namely Jnanendra Nath Bose and

Satyendra Nath Bose along with Hem Chandra Kanungo

(1879-1950) set up a secret society, drawing

inspiration, according to Hem Chandra, from the

struggle for unification of Italy and the Boer war in

South Africa. The Italian leaders and the Boers could

succeed against “enormously powerful enemies13” because

of their secret societies. The idea of freedom as an

objective of the society was at that time somewhat

nebulous. It was more important to us “to rid ourselves

of the hatred, calumny and disgrace to which we were

subjected by the foreigners.”14Hatred for the ruling

class bred a spirit of revenge which was at the root

of terrorism.

When Aurobindo visited Midnapur in early part of 1902 a

secret society was already in existence and Hem Chandra

took Aurobindo and Barin to their secret firing range

in a ‘big ditch’ where both the brothers tried their

hands in firing a gun. So this society in Midnapur had

already chalked out their programme of training as a

secret society.15In next December Aurobindo visited

from their subsequent conduct.13 Hem Chandra: Account of the Revolutionary Movement in Bengal; P.414 Ibid, P.815 Ibid, P.13

63

Midnapur and formally initiated Hemchandra by

administering oath, when he stood with the Gita in one

hand and a sword in the other. The society however, did

not grow as fast as it was expected till the anti-

Partition Swadeshi movement broke out creating

unprecedented patriotic ferver in the province. Though

the Midnapur group worked in close co-operation with

the Calcutta group yet “it had a distinct

individuality.16”

Barin was frail and sickly, but full of ideas and

energy for action. He was impatient and impervious to

good counsel. Aurobindo had great affection for the

younger brother and was somewhat indulgent as Barin had

suffered much in his boyhood and early youth being

deprived of parental care, affection and proper

education.. In 1906, when Barin planned to stay with

Aurobindo’s father-in-law at Shillong for rest and

recuperation in the salubrious climate, Aurobindo

cautioned his father-in-law about his brother’s

nature. “You will find him rather wilful and erratic—

the family failing.” He was also in the “habit of

knocking about in a spasmodic and irregular fashion”17.

Under his brother’s protection, Barin became more and

more self-willed and whimsical.

16 Terrorism in Bengal, Vol.II, 17 Sri Aurobindo:op.cit; Aurobindo’s Letter to his father-in-law, dated 8th June,1906, Pp.147-148

64

Some youth organisations which came into existence to

help the Swadeshi movement, gradually veered round to

the underground terrorist parties and served their

cause.. Chatra Bhandar was ostensibly a swadeshi store

and Sramajibi Samabaya was a centre for supplying manual

labourers; but the former under the cover turned out to

be a centre for distribution of revolutionary

literature and for communication and exchange of

information and the latter was a ’post box’ for

contacting underground revolutionaries, for recruiting

and sending revolutionaries to desired destination, and

also safe shelter for them in times of need.

After becoming the unchallenged leader by removing all

his rivals, Barin had realised to his dismay that the

lofty idea of independence of the country from foreign

rule through violent action could not create much

enthusiasm among the people, consequent upon which

neither the Grey Street society nor the few district

units that came into existence at that time, could

attract new members. Aurobindo during his trips to

Calcutta visited some of the districts to uplift the

sagging morale of the members and had realised that

unless adequate patriotic ferver was created by a

popular movement the secret society scheme would not

get a boost. Barindra, however, was in agreement with

65

Debabrata Bose of the Society that unless the secret

society activities were linked with religion, people

would not be attracted to the struggle for freedom.

When the Society at Grey Street became virtually

defunct, Barindra left for his brother’s shelter in

Baroda. Having realised, perhaps, that Barin was not

made for politics, Aurobindo approached the Gaekwar in

December, 1904 for a job for his brother. The matter

was postponed due to Barin’s illness and in March, 1905

Aurobindo again approached the Gaekwar with the

assurance that his brother would do “whatever work was

assigned to him,” and Aurobindo also suggested that “a

start of Rs 50 or 60 would be enough to induce my

brother to settle here in preference to Bengal18”. Barin

evidently did not accept it. Ever since Barin had left

Calcutta, he was smarting under a sense of frustration

as he had failed to create sufficient to hold the boys

together. Inspired by Debabrata Bose’s advice he found

a remedy in religion and was seriously thinking as to

how religion should be grafted to secret society

movement. Spurning the offer of the job in Baroda,

Barin first prevailed upon Aurobindo to write a book

which would provide an outline for the religious

18 Sri Aurobindo: Autobiographical Notesand Other writings of Historical Interest, 2006,

66

training of the young men who would dedicate their life

to the service of the Motherland. The result of Barin’s

prodding was Bhawani Mandir19 by Aurobindo. Next Barin

travelled in the hills of Western India in search of a

man of religion to take the leadership and a suitable

place for setting up Bhawani Mandir. He found neither. He

however, contracted some kind of hill disease which

kept him confined for some time.

At the initial stage of its formation, religion had

almost no role in the secret society, except the use of

the Gita as a sacred book at the time of initiation for

taking of oath, which was in Sanskrit but had secular

meaning. Jnanendra Nath Bose of Midnapur tried to keep

Midnapur society totally free from religious influence,

and except the formality of using the Gita, and a

portrait of Kali hanging from the wall of Tantshala

there was no trace of religion in Midnapur society. Hem

Chandra admitted that during first two years of its

formation in Bengal, Aurobindo did not associate the

Society with any religious practice or religious

ideals. He himself did not appear to be religious19 James Campbell Ker: Political Troubles in India: 1907-1917, Ker writes,” This pamphlet first came to notice in August, 1905 when acopy was sent anonymously from Baroda to the Head Clerk to District Magistrate, Broach.”

67

minded and there was very little religion in his

activities. What then made Aurobindo turn to religion?

According to Hem Chandra, he had to do it under the

force of circumstances. If Aurobindo had a capable

leader in the organisation to translate his ideas into

practice, then the secular character of the secret

society would have been strengthened on its own merit.

Hem Chandra hints at the incompetent leadership of

Barindra who was brought to the position of leadership

by Aurobindo, but he failed to control and guide his

brother. Barin, according to Hem, was greatly

responsible for giving a religious tilt to the

activities of the secret society.

Barin got the idea of religion as panacea for the

crisis from Debabrata Basu of the Circular Road

society, who was a deeply religious man, and was well-

informed about political developments and secret

society movements in other countries of the world. He

was an excellent raconteur, and used to write articles

both in Bengali and in English news papers, including

Bipin Chandra Pal’s New India. Debabrata argued that

many ascetics and yogis living in remote areas away from

human habitations were endowed with immense spiritual

power which should be brought to bear on politics and

political mobilisation for struggle against the foreign

rulers. Barin conveyed this idea to Aurobindo, but

68

there is no evidence to show that Aurobindo was in

agreement with it. On the contrary, Aurobindo later on

narrated his own interaction with Debabrata at that

time, “He made a journey along with Debabrata Bose,

Barin’s co-adjutant in the Yugantar, partly to visit

some of the revolutionary centres already formed, but

also to meet leading men in the districts and to find

out general attitude in the country and the

possibilities of the revolutionary movement. “His

experience in this journey persuaded him that secret

actions or preparation by itself was not likely to be

effective if there were not also a wide public movement

which would create a universal patriotic fervour and

popularise the idea of independence as the ideal and

aim of Indian politics. It was this conviction that

determined the later action.”20Therefore it was not

religion but a “universal patriotic fervour’ which

according to Aurobindo would rejuvenate the secret

societies with inspiration and new recruits. “Our first

duty was,” Hem Chandra writes about Midnapur society,

“to utilise the partition agitation for the spread of

revolutionary cult.” This facilitated not only

recruitment to the secret societies but also enhanced

the urge for action. “As a matter of fact we too on our

part were anxiously longing for “action” which was

20 Sri Aurobindo: On Himself; Sri Aurobindo Trust, 1985, P.16. Alsosee Sree Aurobindo and the Freedom of India,P.48

69

synonymous with murder of Englishmen, plunder,

dacoities etc.21”

By writing Bhawani Mandir Aurobindo did not have any

scheme of reducing the revolutionary terrorist movement

into a quasi religious movement.22 Clarifying the

background of the writing of Bhwani Mandir23Aurobindo

wrote it “was more Barin’s idea than his”. The book

was written in Baroda in 1905 and it first came to

public view in August 1905 when one copy was received

at the DM’s office at Baroda.24 This happens to be

Aurobindo’s first religious writing which bears the

influence of the Marhatta movement, the central theme

of which was Shivaji and Bhawani, the goddess he

worshipped. Aurobindo visualized Bhawani as a” source

of infinite energy and strength.” Even if there was

some political meaning in the booklet, it is much too

implicit. The temple scheme, would have turned the

secret society movement into something like Anandamath

adventure; but that was never followed either in form

or in spirit.

The writer was strongly influenced by the religious

sentiments and practices of Western Indian people and21 Hem Chandra: Account of Revolutionary Movement in Bengal,, Calcutta,1928, P1922 Amales Tripathi: The Extremist Challenge; P.6423 James Campbell Ker: Political Troubles in India: 1907-1917, Ker writes,” This pamphlet first came to notice in August, 1905 when acopy was sent anonymously from Baroda to the Head Clerk to District Magistrate, Broach.”24 James C. Ker: Political Trouble in India, P 23

70

consciously adopted the name Bhawani, the goddess of

infinite energy, who gave strength and inspiration to

Shivaji. In the name of Bhawani, it was apprehended by

the intelligence, the infinite spiritual and physical

energy of the Indian people would be harnessed against

the mighty British power.

The worship of Bhawani by constructing a Bhawani temple

in the hills, where all who undertake the life of

Brahmacharya for the Mother will have “to vow themselves

to her services for four years,” and thereafter they

will work “for the poor, for the middle class and also

with the wealthy.” This, in nutshell, is the religious

programme of creating an order of selfless workers

suffused with strength and energy. Japan’s emergence as

a world power has been cited as an example. “The source

of that mighty awakening the source of that

inexhaustible strength” according to the author were

drawn from religion. “All great awakenings in India,

all her periods mightiest and the most varied vigour

have drawn their vitality from the fountainheads of

some deep religious awakening”25. The influence of

Debabrata Bose appears to be lurking behind these

lines.

The intelligence officials, however, interpreted the

scheme in Bhawani Mandir, with characteristic suspicion

and apprehension. According to some of them it “was not25 All the quotations are from Bhawani Mandir

71

to train people for assassination but for revolutionary

preparation of the country, 26” and some others27 have

overrated the booklet as “political and spiritual

dynamite.” J.C.Ker thought that the pamphlet “explains

the idea underlying the revolutionary movement centered

in the Maniktala Conspiracy,28” and the Rowlatt

Committee called the pamphlet, a publication of “ a

mischievous or especially inflammatory kind”. The

assessment of the Raj officials is marked by the

colonial anxiety about possible consequences of a

mixture of religion and politics, which might once

again threaten the foundation of the Empire.

Strangely, some historians,29 following perhaps the

intelligence officials’ assessment, have attached much

importance to the booklet as a potentially explosive

writing, comparing it with some great political

literature of the world like Areopagitica, wherein John

Milton had argued for freedom of the press. In reality,

however, Bhawani Mandir was merely a plan of founding a

religious order; if it had a political objective, it

has never been explained or pursued. Understandably it

26 Sri Aurobindo: Bande Mataram, P. 32527 G.C.Denham scrutinised the documents seized in the Alipur case to assess their prosecution needs and intelligence value.. He had,therefore, a tendency to attach exaggerated importance to the documents. 28 I.C.Ker” op.cit, P.3329 Prof. Amalendu De has quoted from K.R.S.Iyenger’s Sri Aurobindo—A Biography and History, in the Introduction to Agniyuger Agnikatha (Ed. Angshuman Bandopadhaya) . Pp 10-11

72

could make little impact on the revolutionary movement

in Bengal. It may be noted that only four copies of

Bhawani Mandir could be seized by the police from

private possessions in course of searches and none from

the Muraripukur Garden, the nerve centre of the

conspiracy by Aurobindo’s group or from the rich

library of the Anushilan Samiti at Dacca, although

several copies of the Gita, the Chandi and the Anandamath30 were

found there. Bhawani Mandir was never widely read, nor

was there any serious effort to implement the plan. Hem

Chandra records a perfunctory effort to construct

Bhawani Mandir in an arid and rocky area called Chenda

Pathar on the border of Midnapur and Bankura districts

in 1906..31 Aurobindo said later on, “The idea of

Bhawani Mandir simply lapsed of itself. Sri Aurobindo

thought no more about it, but Barin who clung to the

idea tried to establish something like it on a small

scale in the Manicktala Garden.32”

Aurobindo told Sister Nivedita when he met her in 1904

at Baroda that he was impressed by he book, ‘Kali-the

Mother’. “She had heard, she said, I was a worshipper

of Force, by which she meant that I belonged to the

30 Terrorism in Bengal, Vol.III. See pages 77-149 for a complete list of books found in the the libraries of Dacca Anushilan Samiti and a useful discussion on the relevance of each book and picture to the revolutionary movement by H.L.Salkeld, Magistrate on Special Duty and a former DM, Dacca.31BBP: Pp.64-6832 Sri Aurobindo: Autobiographical Notes; P75

73

secret revolutionary party like herself.33” Kali like

Bhawani was the source of infinite spiritual and

physical energy and as such the worshippers of Force

should draw energy and strength from Kali. He also

perceived that“ the motherland in all her beauty and

splendour represents the Goddess Durga of our worship”34

But Aurobindo certainly did not try to introduce Kali

or Durga worship in the secret organisations which he

created and led, There is no evidence that he had

ever tried to introduce any religious worship or

practice in his organisation. He, at the same time, did

not interfere with the religious classes that Barin and

Upendra introduced in Manicktala Garden. Aurobindo

himself had started Yoga from 1904 onwards for energy

and strength. Even in Alipur jail he alone used to

practice Yoga and never tried to impose his views and

the practice of Yoga on others. As he stated time and

again that his Yoga was “personal and apart” and he did

it alone ‘to get strength and light’.

But not only the Nationalist leaders like Tilak, Bepin

Pal and Aurobindo but many Indian patriots across the

factional divide used to revere the country as

embodiment of a Mother Goddess such as Durga, Kali or

Bhawani depending on the prevalent form worshipped

locally. The British officials, who were somewhat

33 Ibid, P 7434 Amales Tripathi: op.cit, P.68

74

scared of politics being mixed up with religion, found

this trend as ominous. They explained

“such .deification transcends patriotism as far as

religious ferver transcends egoistical emotion. It is

this connection between the stormy strife of to-day and

the calm decrees of the Eternal that makes the Hindu

Nationalists feel that the day of glory is not far off

in his country.35” The reasoning except as a generalised

statement’ is unacceptable, as to call one’s country as

Mother was not exactly deification in the Christian

sense. The revolutionaries used to accept the country

as Mother, and in the context of grim struggle with the

foreign power the Mother image of the country lost its

divine aura and appeared as the Mother whom they were

seeing in countless homes of India. The Mother in

reality was not a geographical area with its

magnificent physical features, but a symbol of the

poverty-stricken, oppressed people of India. Their

interpretation of Mother-image as deification of the

country was as much wrong as their apprehension that

the revolutionary terrorist movement would be reduced

to Hindu nationalist movement.

Rejecting the Moderate prescription of “turning away

from politics and dedicating our strength in the

village and township developing our resources, our

35 Terrorism in Bengal, Armstrong’s Report on Revolutionary Organisationa, P.336

75

social, economic and religious life regardless of the

intrusive alien,” as impractical because “the

subjection was the one curse which withered and

blighted all our national activities,” Aurobindo write

in 1907 that the only course left open to the people of

the country was “to rise and fight and fall and again

to rise, to fight and fall waging the battle for ever

until this once great and free nation should again be

great and free.” For strength, Aurobindo invoked the

Mother who is not a mythological goddess of religious

cult, but the mother image of his country in bondage.

He gave a stirring call, not in the name of religion

but in the name of the Mother in bondage, “Let Maya

pass out of us, let illusion die; let us turn with

clear eyes and sane minds from these pale and alien

phantoms (the instruments of British rule) to the true

reality of our Mother as she rises from the living

death of a century, and in her seek out our only

strength and our sufficient inspiration.36” The message

of repeated fight despite failures to free the Mother-

in-bondage, an imagery which brought to the mind of a

revolutionary his experience of the people under alien

rule, became an abiding inspiration of the

revolutionary terrorist movement in India.

36 Bande Mataram:

76

3. PROGRAMME OF ACTION

In the beginning the anti-partition Swadeshi and boycott

movement had a limited objective of annulment of the

Partition, as the Congress party could not think of any

political objective beyond that. Soon however, the idea

of complete independence found expression in the

speeches of the leaders and in the writings in the news

papers and periodicals. The true meaning of swaraj, the

nature and scope of colonial self government and the

course of actions to be adopted for attaining it were

clarified through discourses in the radical papers like

New India of Bipin Chandra Pal, (1858-1932),started in

August, 1901, Sandhya of Brahmabandhab Upadhaya (1861-

1907) first published in December,1904, Jugantar, first

published in Marsh,1906,and Bande Mataram in

November,1906. managed by Barindra and Aurobindo

respectively, Keshari and Mahratta ( both started

publication in 1880) of Bal Gangadfhar Tilak and many

other revolutionary and even non-revolutionary papers

and journals. Over and above, pamphlets and booklets

issued and circulated by the secret societies exhorted

the people on crucial political issues. Many such

leaflets and booklets were printed in the Jugantar

press, and sometimes politically significant articles

and editorials from the news papers were reprinted and

77

circulated as leaflets or booklets. Thus dissemination

of political thoughts and ideas took place in an

unprecedented scale. Often the booklets were published

in a series, each one of the series containing new

writings. Swadhin Bharat, and Liberty were published in

this manner and circulated throughout India. Besides,

publications like Sonar Bangla, Raja Ke, Mukti Kon Pathe (in four

parts), Bartaman Rananiti, Biplab-tattwa, Bande Mataram, No

Compromise and many such pamphlets in various languages

were clandestinely circulated37. It may however be

mentioned that a few of the fiery writings were marked

by strong anti-British feelings and racial hatred.

Two such early leaflets entitled Raja ke and Sonar Bangla

(two parts) circulated in July-August,1905 created

some sensation in the Anglo Indian press which used to

act as watch dog tracing sedition in vernacular

publications. Official report states, “Towards the end

of July the violent seditious leaflets began to pour

in. The first example of this was a leaflet in Bengali,

headed “Raja Ke?” (Who is our King?). The violent

vituperation against the English contained in this

leaflet and the call for violence and bloodshed, was

the public commencement of propaganda of murder and

37 Initially majority of such leaflets were printed secretly in the press where Jugantar was printed and circulated by Barin’s group.Later on many other presses outside Calcutta started printing and circulating them and new ones clandestinely.

78

carnage.”38 It was suspected that Brahmabandhab Upadhaya

was the author of the pamphlet. Another pamphlet

entitled “Sonar Bangla” in two parts, was “equally

mischievous and violent” according to official report,

and was circulated at the same time (July-August,

1905). Though it did not attract much official

attention at that time; but after about a year had

passed the Anglo-Indian press started a campaign to

warn the Government of consequences if such seditious

writings were overlooked. Thereafter the Bengal

Government ordered an enquiry by the Special Branch,

the report of which identified Brahmabandhab Upadhaya

as writer of the article and also fixed the press where

it was printed, The Government however, ignored the

recommendation of prosecuting Upadhayaya for sedition.39

According to Bhupendra Nath Datta, the leaflets were

circulated by the members of a ‘Calcutta Revolutionary

Samity40’. But the use of certain characteristic

expressions and the overall style of the leaflets

clearly indicate Upadhayaya’s authorship. They might

have been distributed by the members of one of the

societies.

38 F,C,Daly:Notes on the Growth of the Revolutionary Movement in Bengal, 1905-1911, See Terrorism in Bengal Vol. I, P. 739 Haridas Mukhopadhayaya and Uma Mukhopadhaya: Upadhayaya Brahmabandhab and Indian Nationalism; 1961`,Pp 98-10740 Ibid, P197

79

The leaflets generally appealed to the patriotism of

the youth of the country for ending the British

oppression and exploitation of the Indians and asked

for of the British; but sometimes they often contained

discourses on the objectives and the methods of struggle

against the British and the techniques of warfare. As a

matter of fact, in 1906-07 there was an underpinning of

violence in the tone of most of these publications,

though any open call to violence was eschewed. Bipin

Pal who was an advocate of Swaraj or complete

independence for long differed on the issue of violence

and said that such ideas that the British could be

driven out by force could be found in lunatic asylums

alone. But from the middle of 1908 the tone and temper

of such political literature completely changed. The

series of Swadhin Bharat and Liberty leaflets were issued

not only to rouse intense patriotic feelings and to

highlight the glory of self-sacrifice for freedom. “If

swords are denied, let daggers dash; if guns are

prohibited, let bombs boom”41.True to their promise, in

the following issue they gave a recipe for making

picric acid and other types of bombs .Through such

pamphlets the techniques of building underground

organisation were also taught. Some of the pamphlets

contained an excellent discourse in support of

terrorism and a logical rebuttal of the view of one Mr.41 Terrorism in Bengal, Vol. iv, pp. 389 and 392-393

80

Stead of England that “bombs will not secure the

independence of the country.” As modes of struggle the

techniques of guerrilla warfare and insurrectionary

movements, and even the strategies of modern warfare

were discussed, debated and appropriate points were

recommended for adoption. Such publications were a very

useful means of communication with the people at large

for creating a constituency of support42.

The revolutionary ‘action’ as understood by the members

of the secret societies started in Bengal after a

decision to that effect was taken in a secret meeting

presided over by Aurobindo. Hem Chandra has recorded,

“It was towards the beginning of 1906 Aurobindo

returned to Calcutta. He was followed by Charu Chandra

Datta, an ICS officer serving in Western India but with

deep sympathy for revolutionary terrorist movement. The

two together with a few others convened in Calcutta a

meeting of the secret society where it was decided,

among other things, to commence “action,” to establish

temples of Bhawani at suitable places and to publish an

organ of the revolutionary party.”43 The meeting was

42 The matter has been further dealt with in Chapter XI43 Hem Chandra Kanungo: Account of the Revolutionary Movement in Bengal; withannotations by the Intelligence Branch ,Bengal. Hem Chandra’s bookBanglay Biplab Prachesta” was first serialized in Basumati from October,1922 to February,1928 as Banglar Biplab Kahini. When it was published as a book,in June, 1928, it was renamed as Banglay Biplab Prachesta”. The Intelligence Branch,Bengal got the serialized version translated into English.

81

held in the house of Raja Subodh Mullik44, at 12

Wellington Square where Aurobindo used to stay

occasionally, and was attended by some members of

Barindra’s group and a few others from the Midnapur

Samiti as well. The ‘action’, it was expected, would

draw ‘the attention of the public and thereby

facilitate the diffusion of revolutionary ideas among

them’, and at the same time killing of Englishmen and

commission of dacoity would instil enthusiasm and

courage in the members, and help shake off the inborn

and habitual aversion to manslaughter, cruelty etc.and

invest the member with war-like qualities. Looting of

money preferably from the Government treasury or from

British merchants was also approved45 as revolutionary

action. The resolution to set up Bhawani Mandir at a

suitable place was approved but the modalities of

setting up a temple were not discussed.

The third resolution to publish a newspaper as

mouthpiece of the secret society was however, taken up

44Amalendu De :Raja Subodh Chandra Mallik and His Times, P.85-86. Bhupendra Datta and Jadu Gopal Mukherji have mentioned about the meeting in their memoirs. Jadu Gopal has, as usual given some wrong information such as ‘Jugantar was a mouthpiece of Anushilan Party” or ,”Sometime after the publication of Jugantar Aurobindo became president of the group.”

45 Hem Chandra used the phrase “robbing a widow of her pot” meaning ‘robbing poor people of their pittance’. in disapproval of dacoity as a means for collecting funds. He says this method was not approved in the meeting. But later on it became a common practice. .

82

in right earnest and implemented with vigour. Such a

publication was expected to give cohesion and direction

to the disorganised thoughts of the revolutionaries,

help evolve a programme of concrete action and, above

all, engender a sense of unity among the isolated

groups with identical views and objectives.

In early 1906 Sandhya of Brahmabandhab Upadhyaya was

the only vernacular paper which adopted an aggressive

mood towards the firinghis and eventually. as Bipin

Chandra Pal wrote later, “It brought the people of

Bengal to a particularly resistful attitude to-day.”46

In accordance with the resolution of the secret

meeting, Barin with Aurobindo’s approval collected Rs

400/ as capital and launched a vernacular paper and

named it Jugantar. The name was taken from Shivnath

Sashtri’s novel of the same name. The paper “was to

preach open revolt and absolute denial of the British

rule and include such items as a series of articles

containing instructions for guerrilla warfare.”

Aurobindo himself wrote “some of the opening articles

in the early numbers”.47

, The old secret society got impetus from Aurobindo’s

continued presence in Calcutta, from articles published

in Jugantar denouncing British rule and inculcating a

46 Quoted by Haridas and Uma Mukhopadhyaya: Upadhayay BrahmabandhabO Bharatiya Jatiyatabad,, from Bande mataram, Weekly edition24th November,1907, P. 6447 Sri Aurobindo: Autobiogrphical Notes, P50

83

fearless attitude and above all, a patriotic upsurge in

the Swadeshi movement. The paper was “published from a

hired house at Kanai Dhar Lane of Champatala area of

Calcutta..48” Beginning as a weekly, in May 1908 Jugantar

became a daily and a powerful instrument of militant

nationalism, advocating complete independence and

propagating the ideas of revolutionary struggle against

the British. The articles in Jugantar created a stir in

the country attracting more and more young men to the

new ideology and to the secret societies. It was not a

mouthpiece of any particular group but of the entire

revolutionary terrorist movement in Bengal. A group of

writers with excellent penmanship such as Barindra

Kumar Ghose, Bhupendra Nath Datta, Abinash

Bhattacharya, Debabrata Bose and Sakharam Ganesh

Deuskar, Upendra Nath Banerje enhanced its popularity

and increased its circulation. Soon it exceeded thirty

thousand marks, quite unusual for a vernacular daily in

those days.

Just as Jugantar reached the pinnacle of popularity in

the second half of 1907, Barin with bravado announced

through the columns of the paper that the society would

now go underground and practice what they had been

preaching so long. and so they would now move to a

different place. Later on Barin explained that his real

48 Hem Chandra: An Account of the Revolutionary Movement in Bengal, P 25

84

intention was to avoid the vigilance of the police as

the police was already making enquiries about news

papers with extremist views. As a matter of fact,

notices were issued on 7 June,1907 to Jugantar, Sandhya and

Bande Mataram warning them not to publish articles which

would incentive to violence and lawlessness. Within a

few days on 1 July the Jugantar office was searched and,

on charge of publishing two seditious writings entitled

“Do Not Fear” and “Medicine of Big Stick.” Bhupendra

Nath identified himself as editor,”49 and was prosecuted

with printer and publisher.” Bhupendra was jailed for

one year.

Whether the society was shifted from Jugantar office to

avoid police vigilance or it was made over to a more

competent group for better financial management, was

not very clear; but the fact remains that the tone and

temper of the paper and its high anti-government pitch

remained unchanged. Even if “the aim of Jugantar was

more to excite hatred against the British than to

inculcate the love of the country;”50 there was nothing

unusual in it, as under colonial rule love for the49 Sri Aurobindo:Autobiographical notes and Other Writings of Historical Importance, 2006, P.77Aurobindo criticises Bhupendra because he “in a spirit of bravado declared himself the editor of Jugantar, though none was named as editor”. Besides he tried to defend himself in the court though asmember of a revolutionary party he could not do that. But Aurobindo vigourously defended himself when he was charged with sedition as editor of Bande Mataram in September, 1907. 50 Hem Chandra: Accounts of the Revolutionary Movement in Bengal. P. 27

85

country would generate hatred for the ruler. There was

no hatred preached against the ruling race in the

initial months of its publication. Aurobindo argued

that, “If the British exploitation were to cease to-

morrow, the hatred against the British race would

disappear in a moment.51” More importantly Jugantar

stressed the unity of the Indians of all sects and

declared that “Jugantar will gather together the forces

of the country and will try as much as it can to move

them towards the common future.52” The government was in

no doubt that Jugantar was the most seditious paper

because as many as 48 articles from Jugantar, 17

articles from Sandhya, one from Navashakti were marked as

exhibit in the Alipur Bomb Trial as evidence of

sedition53.

While the paper and other publications from the press

at Champatala provided inspiration, the house gave the

party a much–needed shelter and a centre for meeting

and discussion. “The ground floor of the office was

occupied by the press. In one small room there was a

wooden safe which was believed to contain arms.54” But

actually the arms holding of the party at that time was

negligible. Sometime in the middle of 1907 Barin51 Sri Aurobindo: The Morality of Boycott,; Bande Mataram, P. 12652 Suchana or the Beginning in the 18th March,1906 issue of Jugantar. Ex. 1307/1 in Alipur Trial. Terrorism in Bengal, Vol. III, P524-52553 Terrorism in Bengal, Vol.IV, Pp 521-646; Exhibit Nos 1307-135154 Hem Chandra: op.cit; P. 26

86

shifted the secret society to the Manicktala Garden,

which he got mutated in the names of Aurobindo and

Barindra.

For sometime after its publication in November, 1904

Sandyha, was fiercely critical of the Firinghi culture vis-

à-vis the Hindu culture, though its editor

Brahmabandhab Upadhayaya (1861-1907) was a catholic by

faith. From the middle of 1905 its vitriolic criticism

was directed towards the Fereinghi government and the

paper turned out to be an advocate of complete

independence, thus becoming a forerunner of Jugantar.

In September, 1907 the editor and the printer of

Sandhya were prosecuted for publishing three allegedly

seditious articles.55 Upadhyaya during trial refused to

defend himself and issued a bold statement taking the

“entire responsibility of the publication, management

and conduct of the newspaper Sandhya,” on himself.

Bipin Pal’s weekly “New India” first published in

December, 1904, urged for ‘complete national self-

government’ and advocated passive resistance as the

means of struggle. But Pal’s reaction to terrorist

actions and swadeshi dacoity was rather strong. “No one

outside a lunatic asylum will ever think of or counsel

any violent or unlawful methods in India, in her

55 The articles were, 1.Theke gechi premer daye, 2.Seditioner hurum durum, firingir akkel gurum and 3. Bachcha sakal niye jachchen sri brindaban,

87

present helplessness, for the attainment of civil

freedom.”

When Bipin Pal started Bande Mataram in August 1906,

with Rs.500/, donated by one Haridas Haldar, Aurobindo

adopted the English paper for propagation of

Nationalist/Extremist ideals. He on Pal’s request

agreed to be an assistant editor. He “called a private

meeting of the Nationalist leaders in Calcutta and they

agreed to take up Bande Mataram as their party paper

with Subodh and Nirod Mullik as the principal financial

supporters”56A company was formed to run the paper.

Bipin Pal was editor for sometime, and then on account

of some difference with the editorial staff, which

included some able writers like Hemendra Prasad Ghose,

Bijay Chatterjee and Shyam Sundar Chakrabarty, Pal

resigned. Aurobindo started managing the paper without

being formally declared as editor, except for a day,

when Aurobindo was absent due to illness, his name was

printed as editor. He was prosecuted “for a letter

written by somebody to the Editor” and for “publication

of the articles on the Jugantar case,57” and not for his

editorial articles. As it could not be proved that

Aurobindo was editor, the prosecution failed. Bipin

Chandra was asked by the court to depose on this point,

but he declined to do so, inviting prosecution for

56 Sri Aurobindo: Autobiographical Notes, 2006, P7957 Ibid, P81

88

contempt of court and eventually being awarded six

months’ imprisonment. Bande Mataram had an all India

circulation and its sale also steadily rose. After

Aurobindo’s arrest in Alipur case Bande Mataram was

prosecuted, eventually leading to the confiscation of

the press and final closure of the paper.

Douglas Kingsford as chief presidency magistrate sat on

judgment over majority of the prosecution against the

press, including the prosecution of Bipin Chandra Pal

and of Sushil Sen. Pal was sentenced to six months’

imprisonment because of his refusal to be a witness in

the case against Aurobindo, and Sushil was awarded 15

lashes for assaulting a sergeant. Inspector Purna

Chandra Lahiri of the Bengal CID was in charge of the

enforcement of the press laws had searched the press

and the newspaper offices and arrest the editor,

printer etc on charges of sedition. The Bengal CID was

responsible for detecting, investigating and

prosecuting press offences and since Lahiri and

Kingsford were handling these cases, they were marked

as targets by the revolutionaries for ‘action’.

Besides the one mentioned above, another meeting of all

the leaders of the secret societies of Bengal was held

in the house of Subodh Mullik in December, 1906, just

in the wake of the Annual Session of the Congress in

Calcutta. Bhupendra Nath Datta, who was present in the

89

meeting, has given an account of it in his “Dwitiya

Swadhinatar Sangram” while the account given by Jadu

Gopal Mukherjee, based apparently on hearsay, is not

reliable. The meeting was presided over by P.N.Mitra of

the Anushilan Samiti and attended by representatives of

the districts and branches in Calcutta58. The conference

began with an introductory speech by P.N.Mitra. Mitra

asked for an assurance of absolute obedience of the

members to the discipline of the revolutionary

organisations. He also suggested that the Samity should

purchase a plot of land for building a secret centre

for training in armed combat. He also asked the members

“to support Jugantar paper.59.Delegates assured, on being

asked, that they would take the responsibility of

organising revolution in their respective districts. It

is, in fact a preparatory meeting intended to

streamline the discipline of the organisation, to

expand the organisational net work and to keep them in

readiness. From Bhupendra Nath Datta’s account of the

meeting, it appears that no common programme of action

was discussed or adopted; it would not have been

58 The persons who attended the meeting were: Sri Aurobindo,MunsiffAbinash Chakrabarty,Annada Kaviraj, Jatindra Nath Mukhopadhaya,Abinash Bhattacharya, Barin GhoseDebabrata Basu, Bhupen Datta, Satish Basu of Calcutta Anushilan Samity, Lalit Kumar Chattopadhaya (Nadia),Pares Lahiri (Mymensingh),Nikhil Ray Moulik (Chatra Bhandar), Jnanendra Nath Basu of Midnapur,Indra Nath Nandi of Atmonnati Samity, Bireswar Chattopadhaya of Jessore.Besidea many other people from the districts were present. 59 Amalendu De: Raja Subodh Chandra Mullik and His Times, P87-88.

90

prudent either to do that in a meeting like this.

However, the group led by Aurobindo had already adopted

a programme of action, as noted above, and in pursuance

of that Jugantar paper had been published, and a team

consisting of Barindra, Prafulla Chaki and Hem Chandra

pursued Bamfylde Fuller with bombs and revolvers

without success. A dacoity attempt was aborted. But

understandably many had no inkling of such

revolutionary ‘actions,’ nor did Aurobindo or any

member of his party disclose them in the meeting held

in December, 1906. In this meeting Jugantar was accepted

as a paper of all revolutionary groups. Aurobindo was

recognised as the undisputed leader of the underground

revolutionary groups in Bengal. The effect of this

preparatory meeting became evident when in the

aftermath of the Muzaffarpur incident and Manicktala

arrests a series of violent action took place in

Bengal60.

4. IN THE TRAIL OF A LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR

60 Neither the Central nor the provincial Special Branches had any information about these two important meetings of the revolutionary groups..

91

The Barisal atrocities61 in April 1906 on the national

leaders, though somewhat magnified in the nationalist

press, greatly agitated the people of the province.

Singing of Bande Mataram was prohibited in several

districts. Lt. Governor Bamfylde Fuller was held

responsible as had been trying to break the Swadeshi

movement in the new province by creating divisions on

the basis of religion and caste. While the swadeshi

leaders and the landed gentry were annoyed with him for

his divisive tactics to create discord among the

communities, the young men in the secret societies,

angry with his oppressive measures were restless for

revenge.62

In their excitement “even some Moderate leaders were

agreeable to Fuller’s assassination”. In fact a member

of the zamindar family of Uttarpata offered one

thousand rupees for killing Fuller. Barin took the

bait, but in the end he had to return the money as he

failed to accomplish the task after an “honest

attempt”.63. When Barin failed in his contract to kill

Fuller, he had to return the money.

61 ‘The Provincial Conference at Barisal was broken up. Suendra Nath Banerji was arrested and others like Bepin Pal, Bhupendra Bose Brahmabandhab etc were either beaten up or threatened to be beaten. A punitive police force was billeted there for a long time’.Account of the Revolutionary Movement in Bengal, P.2862 BBP: P. 4763 This appears to be ‘contract killing’ ( in to-day’s under-world parlance it may be called ‘supari killing) and in IB’s English translation the advance has been described as “earnest money”)

92

Fuller’s murder was discussed in the meeting of the

leaders in Mullick’s house where besides Aurobindo,

Subodh, Charu Datta and Barin were present.

Presumably .Hemchandra was also present as he was then

in Calcutta with his family. Aurobundo had no

hesitation in approving of Fuller’s assassination.

Since Hem Chandra was readily available he was selected

as a member of the assassination team.64 It was arranged

that Barin would proceede ahead to select the

convenient place for attack on the Governor and to make

other preparations. When everything was fixed he would

ask Hemchandra to join.

But how would they kill the Governor? Obviously with

revolver or bomb or with both. Revolvers and pistols

were available, but bombs were not much heard of. Guns

were sold in the market, if not of this country, of

other countries from where they could be

surreptitiously brought. But bombs were not available

in the market anywhere in the world. They were to be

made and for that knowledge was needed. Bombs would not

only kill they would destroy too. The bomb was the

most mysterious and most romantic weapon of the

revolutionaries. Hem Chandra has written, “The bomb has

a magical power. Even a rational man becomes spell-

bound after seeing a bomb; he will not then ask any

question about the revolutionary party or about the64 Hem Chandra: op.cit. PP.78

93

power of the bomb. He will accept every thing on the

face value.65”

But bomb has further implications in an anti-colonial

struggle. “Since the purpose of the bomb is usually to

destroy the body. The bomb is also ‘modern’ not only in

the sense of mobility but also in its randomness and

amplitude. It is the violent analogue of amplification,

the expansion of what a single voice or a single body

is able to do. In this sense body and bomb are

connected: the bomb is the super-body.66”

The bomb manufactured by Indians had given them a sense

of liberation as their aptitude for acquiring the

knowledge and capability for manufacturing the bomb

would make everyone sit up and listen to them. It gave

a new self-confidence and new strength. After the bomb

attack at Muzaffarour (30 April, 1908) Bal Gangadhar

Tilak wrote two articles both in Kesari--one entitled

“The Country’s Misfortune” published on 12 May, 1908

and the other, ”These Remedies Are Not Lasting”,

published on 9 June,1908, explaining why the Bengalis

had taken to bomb. in the 20th Century the ‘turn-headed

men’ now had access to the bomb and could make everyone

sit up and listen. “Muskets and guns can be taken away

from the subjects by means of Arms Act and the

65 Ibid;. P.7766 The Body and the Bomb:Technologies of Modernity in Colonial India by ChritopherPinney in Picturing the Nation : (Ed) Richard Davis’ 2007, P. 51-52

94

manufacture too of the guns and muskets without

permission may be stopped: but is it possible to stop

or do away with the bomb by means of laws or

supervision of the officials. The bomb has more the

form of knowledge; it is a kind of witchcraft (Jadu), a

charm (mantra) an amulet (todga).67” The main component

of the bomb that the “turn-headed young men” made was

knowledge. The bombs that are used in war are made in

big factories and so are the guns and muskets. Their

production needs technology in a big scale. But for

making bombs indigenously the ingredients needed are

insignificant; the knowledge component is all

important. And that knowledge is also not very

complicated one. “The formula of the bomb does not at

all appear to be a lengthy one and its process is very

short indeed.”68 This is a view of terrorism as a

knowledge economy, terrorism as the result of cunning

and commitments, liberated from the constraints of

technology and elaborate manufacturing process.

The prosecution, however, was bewildered as to how a

bomb could be witchcraft, amulet or charm. That the

intent of the phrase became the central focus of the

trial 69is intriguing. “The ambivalent colonial anxiety

67 Quoted from the Court Papers in the essay of Christipher Pinney,P55.68 Ibid.P.5569 Tilak was sentenced to six years transportation to Mandalay in Burma.

95

centred on the possibility of a ‘deformed’ political

theology—the fusing of Hinduism with politics of

alterity—in the analysis of which the ordinary

political theory would be useless. The prospect of this

paradigmatic shift that might transform rational

political action into a cosmological strategy was at

once thrilling and terrifying.70”As a matter of fact in

1911-12, when within a short span of time bombs were

used in Moulavi Bazar in Sylhet, Dalhousie Square (it

did not explode) in Calcutta, in Lahore and in Delhi,

the last one nearly killing the Viceroy, the colonial

administration had the terrifying experience. They

recovered the formulae common to all these bombs which

were used across the country, but they had no clue to

its origin for more than a year.

Even “the little knowledge required in indigenously

manufacturing a bomb” was not readily available at the

beginning when bomb was needed for ‘action’. No account

of the first bomb is available either in the official

records or in the statements and memoirs of the

revolutionaries except in Hem Chandra’s book. In his

confessional statement in the Alipur Bomb Trial, Barin

stated,” After press prosecutions became numerous, we

began to think of using explosives; and wherever we

went for money we were encouraged to use explosives”71.

70 Ibid. P.5671 Alipur Trial Records

96

Barin evidently withheld the fact of chasing Fuller

with bombs and revolvers in early part of 1906. Barin

succeeded in getting made two big cast iron rounds

filled with “a mixture of sulphide of arsenic and

chlorate of potash, though highly dangerous, is

commonly used in bazaar fireworks”72 with the help of a

couple of students of chemistry73. These were the first

bombs that the Aurobindo and Barin’s society got

manufactured with ‘little knowledge and less

technology’. Barin, with these two bombs and a couple

of revolvers set out for Assam and Eastern Bengal on a

reconnaissance tour to watch the movement of Fuller and

to select a suitable place from where attempt on him

was likely to be successful.

On being selected as the probable murderer of Fuller,

he sent his family home at Midnapur and waited for the

call. When it came he left for Shillong with two

revolvers. Hem Chandra, though not a confirmed atheist

at that time, did not have much faith in conventional

religion. In his book he has recorded, as far as his

memory served him right, with lucidity the thoughts

and emotions that crossed his mind at that time. His

72 Daly, F.C, op.cit. P2673 Hem Chandra has written that Barin used to claim that he had learnt the techniques of bomb-making from a head-mechanic in the ordnance factory in Nepal. But that has not been corroborsted. BBP: P.76

97

friend, Bhupendra Nath Datta came to see him off at

Sealdah station. Bhupendra made a queer request to Hem

Chandra. Since Hem was sure to die, Bhupendra asked him

to let him know, by whatever means available, the

experience of the ‘other world’! Bhupendra was not

joking; he was serious.

Hem Chandra was then a middle-aged man (he was then 35)

with three children. But by choice he had put himself

in a situatiin where death, and most likely a violent

death, was almost certain within a few hours. He was

not an adventurous youth, inspired more by passion than

by reason, but a rational man with a family dependent

on him.He thought of death, of life, of other world,

but did not for a moment regret joining the society

which had sent him to court sure death. He was not

critical of the leaders for the decision, nor nervous

in the face of the prospect of a violent death. He did

not try to find solace in philosophical thoughts about

transitory nature of life and the cycle of death and

rebirth. As a member of a revolutionary organisation he

was aware that killing of a person who was not

personally known or with whom he had no enmity was an

inviolable directive of the society and in consequence

his own violent death was inevitable. He did not even ,

try to idealise such deaths as sacrifice to the alter

of the Mother because the imagery was not quite

98

attractive to him. On the contrary, the realist as he

was, he thought of loss and wastage not only of his own

life but also that of his would-be victim. Like a true

revolutionary he loved life and the possible

destruction of life anguished him; and yet like a

disciplined and dedicated person he did not raise any

question about the propriety or otherwise of the

programme of action of the society.From the account of

chase given by him in his memoirs, it appears he, in

fact, did notcome very close to making an attempt on

Fullar’s life and as such he did not have any real

brush with death.

Even before Hem Chandra’s arrival , Barin had decided

to abandon Shillong as a site for action in

consequence of a mishap in which the revolver Barindra

was carrying accidentally went off injuring his local

associate. The Police, however, had no inkling of it,

yet Barin as a measure of precaution cancelled the plan

at Shillong.

Haning received the information that the Lt. Governor

would go to Barisal, Barin and Hem Chandra followed him

to Barisal in steamer and reached in time to see that

Fuller entered into the town through the cheering

crowd, while two intending murderers with bombs and

revolvers in their bags impotently looked on. They

expected to “find a big secret society” in Barisal, or

99

at least an angry mood of the people in view of the

police repression in April last. There was no trace of

the either. Frustrsted they started enquiring about

lesser officias like district magistrate Kemp and

superintendent of police Emerson as suitable targets.

Barin tried to explain their objectives to one of the

leaders of the local samity and sought his help. The

leader expressed his inability to help and so cleverly

threatened them with arrest that Barin and his friends

were obliged to leave Barisal next morning after giving

one of their revolvers to the leader.

The third attempt was planned at Rangpur by planting a

bomb under the railway track and the fuse of the bomb

whould be connected by wire with an electric dry cell

so that as soon as the train arrived on the line the

bomb could be detonated from a distance. Hem Chandra

was sent to Calcutta to bring some money from Aurobindo

and purchase some necessary materials for the new

device. At Calcutta Aurobindo could give only twenty

five rupees to Hem Chandra. When Barin asked for more

money from Aurobindo he sent Naren Gossain with seven

rupees only and asked Barindra to procure funds by

committing dacoity.

Commission of dacoity as a part of the ‘action’ was

approved in the secret meeting; but the priority

100

targets were Government cash, cash from the foreign

merchants and companies. Rich Indians would not

ordinarily be made targets. On receipt of Aurobindo’s

advice they tried to locate suitable houses and having

found none they ultimately selected the house of a

widow who was reportedly having some cash. Hem Chandra,

whose scrupples were severely jolted at the thought of

committing a dacoity, refused to participate in it on

the plea that he was sent for assassination and not for

dacoity. Barin, however, threatened him that in that

case he would be violating the order of the supreme

leader, Aurobindo, and also the oath he had taken and

therefore, he would be declared as a traitor74. Hem

Chandra participated; but the attempt was abandoned

when the party on reaching the outskirts of the village

learnt that “a police sub-inspector was present at the

village with his party on some local investigation. So

they had to turn back and were glad to do so. 75”.

The plan to blow up the train was not put into

operation as the Lieutenant Governor travelled to

Goalando by steamer as heavy rain had washed away the

railway line at places. Barin asked Hem Chandra and

Prafulla Chaki, who joined the Party at Rangpur, to

make an attempt at Goalando with revolvers. The

74 Hem Cgandra: BBP, P. 10475 Hem Chandra: Accounts of the Revolutionary Movement in Bengal. P37

101

fairwell function having been cancelled, Fullar

eventually left for Calcutta by special train. Hem

Chandra and Prafulla had also left immediately by

train. The plan was to make a desperate attempt when

Fuller would detrain at Sealdah. At Naihati Station

finding Governor’s special standing there they got down

and waited for the Governor’s special to move when

they would get into the slow-moving train and force

their entry into the saloon to shoot the Governor down.

But unfortunately the train moved in the opposite

direction, as it was proceeding towards Howrah station

and not Sealdah. They did not have correct idea about

the destination of the train. In this attempt Fuller

escaped by luck. The threat this time was more real

because a determined and desperate Prafulla Chaki was

in the team and he was not inclined to listen to words

of caution if he had got the reasonable chance of

facing Fuller. Hem Chandra in the company of Prafulla

Chaki would be left with no option but to follow him

and then die or live with him. Aurobindo heard from

them the whole story in silence and then simply asked

them to go home.

Hem Chandra has ascribed the failure to the inherent

weakness of Bengali character. “How terrible it is for

a Bengali Hindoo brought up in a non-violent and

spiritual atmosphere to kill a man without provocation!

102

So Hem Chandra admitted that lack of opportunity was

not really the reason for which they had failed. At

least he had moral reservations in his mind about

killing a person without provocation. Hem Chandra

explains,” the want of requisite frame of mind led to

nervous breakdown, as sufficient power of self-control

was lacking in the revolutionaries.”76 Hem Chandra

suggested that proper training would help overcome such

weaknesses. The Western societies inspired the Indian

leaders to set up secret societies in India, but,

“neither we nor our leaders recognised that it was

necessary to receive training in foreign revolutionary

methods.77”Despite their tall talk about revolution,

they had remained deficient in mental strength of a

revolutionary, and there were no arrangements for

training to enhance their ideological conviction and

the strength of mind”.

Hem Chandra concluded that killing was not Barin’s aim;

he wanted merely to impress the bhadralok class, without

caring for secrecy, about the preparation he had been

making for armed struggle with the British, and once

they were impressed they would be generous in helping

the society with funds78. No doubt procurement of funds

was one of Barin’s objectives, but a sensational act of

76 Account of the revolutionary Movement in Bengal, Pp39-4077 Ibid.P 40, 78 BBP: P94

103

killing was his primary objective. It is, however,

true that Barin, unlike a true leader, could not lead

from the front and tried to keep himself away from the

scene of action on some pretext or the other and thus

trying to avoid direct culpability.

Hem Chandra has ascribed the failure to accomplish the

mission to some fundamental weaknesses in the character

of the Bengali Hindoos and according to him such

weaknesses should have been removed by proper training

and ideological orientation. He has, however,

overstressed Barin’s tendency to self-glorification and

self advertisement, which, according to him, was

responsible for the rather comical finale of the

project of assassination of Fuller. He compared their

endeavour with Don Quixotic adventure in which Barin

was Don Quixote and he played the role of Sancho Panja.

In his heart of hearts he knew that he was equally

responsible for the failure of the mission; for Don

Quixote alone without Sancho Panja could not have made

a complete comic story. Barin and Hem Chandra together

scripted the story of comical failure.

During this ‘expedition’ the relationship between Barin

and Hem Chandra soured considerably, primarily because

of Barin’s flamboyant conduct and Hem Chandra’s

critical and heavily sarcastic remarks about Barin’s

104

activities and behaviour. Barin with his inflated ego

was hardly amenable to reason or inclined to listen to

anyone’s advice. When Aurobindo learnt about the

failure of the mission, he did not apparently express

any reaction, nor is there any evidence to show that he

tried to improve the efficiency of the members by

arranging proper training of the members or the quality

of the weapons of the revolutionaries. He however,

approved of Hem Chandra’s training abroad and even gave

a letter of introduction to Khasi Rao of Baroda, then

staying in Geneva.

Soon after his return from the chase of the Governor,

Hem Chandra left Calcutta for France at the end of July

1906 and rejoined the society only in the beginning of

February 1908.

5. SECRET SOCIETY AND EXTREMIST POLITICS

Besides acting as principal of the Bengal National

College, Calcutta, Aurobindo was the editorial writer

of Bande Mataram in the columns of which he gave

expression to his new thoughts and ideas about freedom

struggle. The paper, because of its audacious plea for

complete independence and his thoughts on passive

resistence as a method of struggle, soon attracted the

attention of the political leaders and the

105

intelligentsia all over India79 and inspired the younger

generation. He was also an active campaigner during the

swadeshi and boycott agitation. Thus he came to occupy

an important position in the national Congress

politics.

At the same time he had been the badakarta or the head

of the secret society located under cover in the

Muraripukur (Manicktala) Garden besides being

associated with other secret societies too. On the eve

of the annual Copngress session in Calcutta, Aurobindo

was vice-president in a secret meeting of the combined

body of several terrorist groups held at the house of

Subodh Mullick’s Wellington Square house on 23rd

December,1906. A few days later when the Congress

session held in Calcutta, Aurobindo played a

significant role in getting a few radical resolutions

on swaraj, swadeshi and boycott adopted. At this stage

some prominent members of the secret society took part

in open Congress politics evidently in aid of Aurobindo

and the Extremist or Nationalist group to which he

belonged. Having realised that the Extremist faction

was in the minority these volunteers under the

leadership of Barindra and others of the Manicktala

society tried to impose their will by force on others

and get the desired resolution passed. In Midnapur

79 Even Rabindra Nath Tagore decided to send Bande Mataram in stead of Statesman to his son who was in America at that time.

106

Conference the volunteers armed with lathis and led by

Satyendra Nath Bose broke up the conference while

Aurobindo was silently watching from the dais. An eye-

witness account is as follows: I attended meetings on

those days of the District Conference. Several

volunteers were present: Satyendra was captain. Besides

him Khudiram, Probash, Jogjiban, Santosh Dass who is

now being tried under the Explosives Act, were also

volunteers. They wore pagris and circular metallic

badges with the words “Bande Mataram”inscribed on them,

and carried lathis. The volunteers on that day were

acting as a body. Mr. K. B. Dutt presided. When he

rose to speak, Koilash Chandra Dass Mahapatra, a

mukhtar, rose and said unless Mr. Dutt gave an

undertaking that he would speak in Bengali and on

Swaraj he would not be elected as President. The

volunteers shouted their approbation, waved their

lathis over their heads and made a great row. Mr. Dutt

tried to speak but failed, there was a great row and he

had to sit down again. Both extremists and moderates

were there. The extremists made most noise and seemed

to be greater in numbers. The volunteers sided with

the extremists. Arabinda was present. Trailakya Nath

Pal appealed to him on behalf of the moderate to

pacify the volunteers and spoke for 3 or 4 minutes:

while he spoke there was a row. He had to stop. During

107

that time Arabinda took no part. He did nothing to make

peace: I did not see him rise”. The President-elect of

the conference, K.B.Dutta made this statement in the

Alipur court, “I appealed to Arabinda, who was present.

I introduced myself and asked him to use his influence

to stop the rowdyism, as it was disgraceful in my

opinion. I selected him as my belief was that he had

influence over the boys who were making the row. He

neither said nor did anything in answer to my appeal.

The row went on for about 20 minutes before I could

read my speech. Arabinda was present throughout.”

Barindra was absent in the Midnapur Conference as he

was then busy trying to blow up Lt. Governor’s special

train,80 near Kharagpur. A few days later in Surat, the

Extremists consciously adopted similar methods to break

the Surat Congress by a larger group under the

leadership of Barindra, and joined by the volunteers of

Tilak’s faction in Bombay presidency. The Moderates too

were not disinclined to forcefully uphold their views.

On the eve of thebegining of the session, the

80 Barindra stated in his confession before the magistrate “Weplaced the mine there and between 11 and 12 at night (on 5th

December) 1 alone went back to Narayangarh and went by the last

down passenger to Calcutta. I left behind the 2 boys and they

placed the fuse on the line when the special came.”

108

Extremists held a restricted meeting “on the 24th

December in the afternoon. Babu Arvind Ghose, of the

Bande Mataram fame, presided. It was the object of the

Conference to enforce the views of the Nationalists on

the Indian National Congress and to make the Congress,

which had hitherto been a body for the concentration of

opinion, a body for the concentration of work. He then

called upon Mr. B.G. Tilak to state in detail the

object of the Conference”81. In explaining his presence

in the Surat Congress as a delegate, Barin wrote that

despite the inviolable rule of the secret society that

none should participate in open political meetings and

conferences, lest the participants should be marked by

the police, when “in the morning someone came and gave

me a railway ticket for Surat, I packed up my things in

a canvas bag and set out in the afternoon as a delegate

to the Congress.”

Besides Barin, Satyendra, Chandra Chakraborty etc of

the secret society went as delegates to the Surat

Congress. Chandra Chakraborty writes” On reaching Surat

possibly a day earlier I purchased all bamboo sticks,

possibly 150 in number from the local shops. I reported

this to Aurobindo Ghose that force was the only

practical means to capture the Congress pandal” He81 Extract from the CID report on a meeting of the Extremists on25th December, 1907, P,4

109

continues, “At about 3-30 AM when all were asleep in

the room, took with me the kerosene bottle and the

match box and proceeded towards the vicious gate.

Finding none nearby, I sprinkled kerosene on cloth

covering and the bamboo frame and set fire to it82.” The

Maharasthra contingent led by Tilak was even bigger and

equally aggressive.

His presence in the Surat session of the Congress was

not as fortuitous as he wants us to believe. It was the

result of a careful planning.

Additionally Barin had planned “to bring all secret

societies under one umbrella,” as he was, perhaps,

under the impression that like Aurovindo, other

extremist leaders like Lajpat Rai and B.G.Tilak had

been organising underground societies in their own

provinces. According to Police report Aurobindo

addressed a meeting exclusively of the Extremists at

Haripara Ghukanta Wadi at 5 PM on 28th December, 1907

and spoke on the split of the Congress. He was not in

favour of joining the Moderate convention by signing

their ‘declaration’ and then “swamping the Congress” by

the Extremists. On the contrary, Aurovindo advised that

the Extremists should adhere to their ideals. But

Barindra after flexing his muscles in the Congress

session was planning to hold a meeting of the

extremist/revolutionary leaders for taking a stock of82 C.K.Chakraborty: New India, P 5-6

110

the underground movementin the country. At this time on

27th December, he was supposed to have written the

famous “sweet letter” to Aurobindo though both of them

were in Surat, but were staying in different camps for

the delegates. Yet there was no problem in verbally

communicating this message in stead communicating

through written words. The letter is as follows:

“Dear Brother,

Now is the time. Please try and make them meet for our

conference.We must have sweets all over India ready for

imergencies. I wait for your answer.

Your affectionate,

Barindra K.Ghose”

The letter clearly indicates that Barin had already

proposed to Aurobindo to convene a meeting of the

Extremist leaders to discuss the preparation for

terrorist actions in emergencies. Judging by the facts

that the writer of the letter and the recipient were in

the same place and meeting each other every now and

then, it is difficult to find a convincing ground for

Barin’s action.83 Barin had presumed that all leaders of

the extremist faction were eager to opt for bomb making

and terrorism and that is why he had suggested that

bomb-making should start all over India. According to

83 During the trial the judge suspected the genuineness of the letter as certain terms like the mode of address, were unusual. But in Surat staying with thousands of delegates from all over India, influence the normal mode of expression.

111

the Police report, a secret meeting84 did take place on

29th December, at 2PM at Surat. This ‘strictly

confidential’ meeting and ‘was presided over by

Arabindo Ghose.’ The police report, however, does not

clearly nention the subjects discussed; but contrary to

Barin’s expectation the meeting was poorly attended.

Even Extremist leaders like Tilak, Ajit Singh and

Lajpat Rai did not attend on some pretext or the other.

It became clear that all extremist leaders did not

endorse terrorism and that there was no underground

organisation worth the name outside Bengal. A well-

coordinated secret society movement encompassing all

the provinces of India under the Extremist leadership

remained a dream. Barin and his comrades, however,

earned the dubious distinction of being the pioneers in

the use of muscle power in suppressing opponents in

surface political organisation.

6. SEARCH FOR A GURU

In the beginning of 1907 Bhawani Mandir became, by and

large, irrelevant to many including its author; but

Barin had been still toying with the idea of creating a84 Government of India, Home Department, Political A, Numbers 33-40, pp. 70-71.

112

religious-cum-revolutionary order for armed freedom

struggle under the guidance of a ‘godman’ who would use

his supernatural power to lead the volunteers to

victory. With that end in view, he endeavoured to

build, if not a mandir, at least an ashram, for the

training of the members and as convenient camoflage.

Upendra Nath Banerji, who had been a wandering

mendicant for two years before he joined the society

sometime in the second half of 1906, was a regular

contributor to the Jugantar and was also on the

editorial staff of the Bande Mataram. He had hardly ever

raised any question about Barin’s erratic activities,

and so he became a perfect ally of Barin. In 1906-1907

religion was no longer essential for alluring the

recalcitrant and Upendra Nath himself wrote, “The

enthusiasm was infectious and new faces were seen every

day in the Jugantar office.85” Yet Barin was bent on

making religion a way of life in the society’s

headquarters in the Garden.

Barin has stated in his autobiographyhe (Bariner Atma-

kahini) that long before the center at Maniktala Garden

was set up, probably soon after the publication of

Bhwani Mandir in 1905 he went out in search of a site

and a Guru in the hills86of Gujarat. Aurobindo recalls

later on, “The selection of site and a head of the

85 Upendra Nath Banerji: Nirbasiter Atmakatha,P. 2486 Barindra K.Ghose:op.cit, P31

113

monastery must have been simply an idea of Barin. He

had travelled along the hills, cought hill fever and

had to abandon the search and to return to Baroda. The

idea of Bhawani Mandir simply lapsed of itself.87” But

Barin continued the search as noted above and there is

no evidence to show that Aurobindo directed the inmated

of the Garden to go out in search of a religious man.

The expedition in the autumn of 1907 was led by Barin

and Upendra “for a spiritual guide as the deliverance

of India was not possible without spiritual power”88. In

Swami Brahmananda’s Asram at Chandote on the banks of

the river Nurbada, they did not find any godman capable

of leading the party, but Barin found for himself a

guru named Sakharia Swami, and met an eminent yogi

named Vishnu Bhaskar Lele, who later on was introduced

to Aurobindo and taught him Yoga. In the early part of

1908 Upendranath Banerji and Debabrata Bose made

another trip to Prayag, Vindhyachal and Amarkantak in

central India with the same objective, but their search

was in vain89. Again Upendra along with six inmates of

the Garden went up to Nepal ostensibly on a pilgrimage

but actually in search of a suitable guru and a good

place for ashram90. This was the last futile attempt to

87 Sri AurobindoL Autobiographical Notes; P 9788 Barindra’s unpublished diary in the library of Aurobindo Ashram,Pondichery89 Upendra Nath banerji: Nirbasiter Atmakatha,Pp 10-1690 Ibid:Pp.17-24

114

transpose the Bhawani Mandir/ Anandamath fantasy into the

reality of an anti-colonial struggle. Having failed to

find a suitable guru to lead them against the British,

both Barin and Upendra tried to act as guru in the

Garden, which some people used to call ashram.

Barindra invited his guru, Sakharia Swamy to attend the

Surat Congress91 and the Swami’s followers hand in hand

with a section of the Bengal delegates, helped disrupt

the Congress session. When Aurobindo was in a

disturbed state of mind after the Congress had ended in

a pandemonium, Barindra told him about a wonderful Yogi

named Vishnu Bhaskar Lele. Barindra writes: “Aurobindo

hearing about him from me had expressed a desire to

meet this wonderful devotee of love. I wired to Lele

requesting him to come to Baroda to meet Aurobindo.”

When they reached Baroda station, crowds with flags and

national cries followed us from the station and

students unyoked a carriage and putting Aurobindo,

myself and Sakharia Swami, on it, pulled it for some

distance. In the midst of a surging crowd we reached

Khasirao’s bungalow at 8 a.m. and immediately after our

arrival Vishnu Bhaskar Lele arrived. I left Aurobindo

alone with him for half an hour. When Lele had left I

asked my brother how he found the man. Aurobindo said

91 Charu Chandra Datta: Prano Katha, P. 25

115

in his characteristic cryptic way, “Lele is a wonderful

Yogi.92”

Lele formally initiated Aurobindo to the methods of

Yoga in an undisclosed place, and Aurobindo remained

unavaiable to the people for more than a week. Barin

did not succeed in finding a man with supernatural

power to guide the secret society movement; but he

found someone who turned his brother into a spiritual

leader.

When Aurobindo expressed his anxiety as to how he would

address the public meetings as he could not prepare his

speeches, Lele assured that he need not worry as the

words would automatically come to his mouth. And it

happened like that. From 13th January to 2nd February,

1908 Aurobindo addressed several well attended public

meetings at Poona, Nasik, Dhula, Amaravati and Nagpur

and returned to Calcutta in the first week of

February93. In all the meetings he had explained the

ideals and aims of the nationalists and everywhere he

was lustily cheered and listened to with rapt

attention. He had almost emerged as a national leader.

In early February, 1908 Aurobindo returned to Calcutta92 Barindra K.Ghose: “Sri Aurobindo (As I Understand Him)”Unpblished manuscript. The story is identical with one told inAtmakahini.

93 Aurobindo’s speeches were widely reported in the press and the police intelligence also kept records of the speeches.Some of themwere produced before the court during Aurobindo’s trial.

116

when his friend Charu Chandra Datta was in the city. He

tells us that Aurobindo was in need of the company of

Lele for the peace of his ruffled mind after his return

from a hectic tour of western India. Barin asked Lele

to Calcutta, and “he stayed in the residence of my

brother Aurobindo Ghose at Scots’Lane for a few days.”94

Barin took Lele to the Garden 95 for some appropriate

invigorating discourse, as the boys and their leaders

were somewhat demoralised at the sudden death of a

bright young man named Prafulla Chakrabarty while

testing a bomb on 29th January, 1908, at Deoghar. But

Lele struck a discordant note. He warned Barin that “a

work like this demands clear hearts; otherwise it will

end in useless bloodshed,” and prophesied that India

would achieve freedom without bloodshed and violence.

He asked them to come with him to practise Yoga in a

remote area. If they did not get any result they would94 Barindra K.Ghose: Atmakahini; P 39 Alipur Trial Exhibit No. 302/1,. Lele’s letter to Aurobindo dated 10.2.1908 from Khandwa, Nagpur

95 Barindra Kumar Ghose: Atmakahini, P. 38-43. Lele spent a few dayswith Aurobindo in his Scot’s Lane residence, visited Deoghar and Manicktala Garden. C.CDatta’s claim that Aurobindo with Lele visited their Panihati garden house for a week, has no corroboration. In the Garden Lele warned Barin of violent methods as they would soon face danger.. While leaving Calcutta he wanted to take Prafulla Chaki with him to teach him yoga; but Barin and Upendra prevailed upon him to leave Chaki behind.C.C.Datta gave a different account of this incident, but his story on the face of it is not dependable.Hem Chandra saw Lele in February ,1908 in Aurobindo’s house being massaged by two disciples. Hem Chandra mentions it with considerable sarcasm, BBP P153

117

be at liberty to come back and continue their work.

Upendra and a few others were half convinced by such

exhortation.and with a view to testing the supernatural

power of the yogi were agreeable to accompany him to his

place. But Barin was caught in a dilemma. He was so

involved in the preparation of the revolutionary

movement that he was incapable of either postponing the

bomb making or keeping the activities in the Garden on

hold for six months. A bewildered Barin asked Lele,

“How could I stop work now? I have taken thousands of

rupees from many a people; I have taken a pledge by

touching a sword and the Gita.” Hem Chandra also

corroborates that Barin had collected funds giving

assurance that they would fight the British with arms96

and so he was unable to go back on his words. It is

ironical that the same leaders who were frantically

looking for a man with supernatural powers to take the

leadership of the society, declined to obey a guru with

‘exceptional spiritual powers.’97 It became difficult to

desert the political creed and various temporal

obligations associated with it. The faith in the

divinity lost out to the compulsion of the political

reality. Even Lele’s prediction that India would gain

her freedom through peaceful means,-- which, in fact,

96 Peter Heehs: Bomb in Bengal, P136. Heehs’ contention does not appear to be correct.97 Aurobindo’s autobiographical notes, P. 291

118

took the bottom out of the secret society movement--

failed to persuade Barin to give up the current

activities. Upendra, because of his past experience as

an ascetic, had initially agreed to go with Lele; but

when the time for departure came the call of the Garden

became irrestible and he preferred to stay back.

Prafulla Chaki was specially chosen by Lele because of

his calm demeanour; but he was also persuaded to come

back. Lele had to return empty handed. Even his

forecast of an impending disaster was in vain. Barin

and Upendra continued to pursue their objectives in the

Garden. The dynamics of the secret society and the

concomitant violent actions would now take the

inexhorable course. Even a spiritual leader was

incapable of changing the track.

Hem Chandra Kanungo, an agnostic, if not an atheist,

was away in Paris when the hunt for Guru was going on.

After rejoining the party he witnessed Lele’s visit to

the Garden. Lele’s talks, and his forecast that India

would be independent without armed conflict and

bloodshed, made some impression on his mind.98

Evidently Barin had tried hard to introduce religious

practices in the secret society movement and in doing

so he used his brother’s name to silence his critics in

the party. Aurobindo, had deep affection for his

whimsical brother and he could not take him to task or98BBP, P 154-155

119

even assert his own judgment and will. Regarding

religion in the secret society Aurobindo wrote in a

letter,”My Yoga began in 1904, had always been personal

and apart; those around me knew I was a sadhak but they

knew little more because I kept all that went on in me

to myself.99” He very categoricaiy stated that he did

not practice Yoga in group nor asked others to do so.

He was aware of the religious classes in the Garden;

but he did not interfere with what his brother had been

doing in the Garden. As a matter of fact, he never

visited the Garden while the secret society was located

there. Once he came very close to visiting it; but at

the last moment he cancelled the visit on the ground of

his other engagement and told Nalini Gupta, who came

from the garden to take him there, that he would visit

next time.

7. ACTIVITIES IN THE GARDEN

The Garden at 32 Muraripukur Road from where 14 out of

36 accused persons of the Alipur Bomb Case were

arrested was projected by the Prosecution in the Alipur

Trial as the nerve centre of the conspiracy to wage war

against the British Emperor. A deserted and derelict

garden house in the middle of a sprawling area guarded

from the public view by a jungle of a few tall trees99 Sri Aurobindo: Autobiographical Notes; P98

120

and mostly thick undergrowths, was located on the outer

side of the Marhatta Ditch which demarcated the

original jurisdiction of Calcutta. An inmate wrote,”It

was all open compound without any fencing or wall”100

Barindra had a scheme to shift the society to the

Garden from 1906 onwards, but that was not immediately

possible as aillthe four brothers and one sister were

owners of the Garden101was in a fluid state. By March

1907 Barin persuaded his two other brothers and the

sister to surrender their legal title in favour of

Aurobindo and Barindra.and thereafter he shifted the

society to the Garden. .Aurobindo, however,wanted to

sell it to repay his father’s debt.

“There was no garden at all,” writes Nolini Kanta Gupta

who was arrested from there, “for all was primitive

jungle, a tangle of shrubs and trees and creepers with

all sorts of insects and reptiles roaming within.” 100 Nalini Kanta Gupta: Reminiscences, (1969), P 21101 The Garden was in the name of Dr.K.D.Ghose, and since hedid not make any will, on his death, the Garden was inherited byfour brothers and one unmarried sister. Barin persuaded twobrothers namely Monomohan and Binaybhusan and sister Sarojini torelinquish their right in the Garden in favour of Aurobindo andBarindra. Their relation B.B.Bose (PW 88) deposed in Alipur courtas follows: .”Barindra gave me the documents to file in the courta prayer for mutation of names.He asked me to engage a pleader.. Ido not remember if I had seen his signature before. I do not knowhis signature. The title deed and the signatures of brothers andsisters were handed over for mutation” He also testified that theGarden was under his charge from 1903-1906 and Aurobindo onseveral occasion asked him to sell the Garden., and even inSeptember,1907 he requested Bose to arrange immediate sale.(Records of Alipur Trial)

121

The life in the Garden was expectedly Spartan. “We did

the cooking ourselves and washed the dishes. The

cooking was done perhaps only once a day and almost

everyday it was khichuri.”102 Nolini states,the dishes and

utensils were not of brass, they were all earthenware

vessels, the seizure list of the Garden reveals that

there were “one large brass handi, 5 brass utensils,

two bell-metal thalis, one bell-metal bowl,six earthen

pots, one nickel cup, iron spoon and scoop and bucke”t.

Despite the “unhygienic living conditions, the inmates

were rarely afflicted with ailments. The abundance of

vitality and enthusiasm and joy kept at bay attacks of

diseases.”103

Barin as leader was responsible for running the

establishment. In his confession Barindra stated: “I

collected money from different people for

supporting those staying there. The object was to

teach them and send out missionaries for

anarchical work”. Papers found in the Garden reveal the

names of subscribers to the fund.104

102 Nolini Gupta: Reminiscences, Pp15-16103 Nolini Gupta: op.cit, P 16.Also see the Seizure list; Alipur Court Records104 Ex. No 227 which is a subscription list in Barin’s notebook.AB—30/, B.G—100/, C, Ch.—Rs 20/Sb—5/, Sashi—1/, Nandi—50/. BG stand for Barin Ghose and it was not his personal contribution buthis periodic total collection C.Ch appears to be Charu Chandra Dutt ICS; Nandi was Indranath Nandi, son of Col. Nandi.. Daly, however, says in his “ Notes” that C.C.Dutta used to subscribe Rs 30/ per month

122

By the end of 1907 about 20 boys were living in the

Garden, of whom about 15 used to remain generally

present, while others used to move about in connection

with the work of the society or on private business.

Among the bright boys who courted the hard life in the

Garden was Ullaskar Datta, who had left Presidency

College, after thrashing Russell, professor of Logic

and Philosophy, with a slipper for racist remarks.

Trying unsuccessfully some odd jobs in Bombay, he

returned to Calcutta and eventually joined the Garden.

Prafulla Chakraborty and Nolini Gupta from Rangpur had

left Presidency College while in BA class and joined

the Garden. At the end of 1907 many more were willing

to join but the number of recruits had to be restricted

due to constraint of funds. There was hardly any

screening of the new-comers and so infiltration was not

difficult.

According to Barindra’s notebook105 the Garden was known

as Ashram on account of some moral and religious

lessons imparted there. The major part of the day was

spent in non-religious training and work. Ullaskar in

his confession stated, “We had a religious and moral

training class for new comers. I used to read the

Upanishad (a sacred book) there. I also used to prepare

and experiment with explosives”.Nalini Gupta stated,

105 Ex. No. XXVIII contains the routine for the inmate of the Ashram

123

“We began with the reading from the Gita and this became

almost a fixed routine where everybody used to take

part.”106 Even in the bomb manufacturing centre at Sil’s

Lodge near Deoghar, “we would get up an hour before

sunrise, sit down in the calm atmosphere in a

meditative pose and recite aloud with deep fervour and

joy the mantras of the Upanishads.107” In the Garden, the

Gita and the Upanishads were regularly taught by Upendra

Nath and meditation was a part of the Garden

discipline. According to Hem Chandra any inmate not

taking part used to incur the wrath of the leaders.

Morning classes in the open with students and teachers

in saffron clothes reciting Sanskrit verses carried the

impression of the Garden being an ashram. The police

during the search seized 10 sets of saffron robes108

from the Garden.

Records of intelligence department also underscored the

religious character of the society109, and cautioned

that in the context of the rebellion of 1857 and the

movement in the wake of the Age of Consent Bill, 1891

such a trend in the armed underground organisation had

dangerous portent. According to the report, “the

anarchist society founded by Arabinda and Barendra

106 Nolini Gupta: op.cit. P10107 Ibid P27108 Ex.No 257. “Ten saffron coloured clothes worn by sadhus.” 109 The Sedition Committee ( Rowlat Committee ) Report, 1918, P. 17

124

Ghose in the Maniktala Garden in Calcutta, was semi-

religious in character; it was called an Ashrama, word

usually applied to a place where sannyasis live, and the

the persons who frequented the Garden combined the

study of the Bhagbad Gita with the preparation of bombs,

explosives and revolver practice. The Gita’s “principle of

absolute surrender to the Divine Will”, contendede one

Justice Mukherjee in delivering judgment in a

conspiracy case, “were employed by designing and

unscrupulous men as portent meansto influence and

unbalance weakminded personsand thus ultimately bend

them to become instruments in the commissions of

nefarious crimes.” The Committee marked three books,

namely the Bhagbad Gita, the writings of Vivekananda and

the lives of Mazzini and Garibaldi were “of a

mischievous and specially inflammatory kind.”110

“It was in fact a strikingly faithful reproduction of

real life of the Anandamath or Abbey of Bliss of Bankim

Chandra Chatterji,” Stevenson-Moore noted the

similarity of Maniktala Ashram with the setting of the

Anandamath novel, “with the difference that the

novelist’s patriotic league was formed to review the

Hinduism and free the country from the ruins of Muslim

misrule; whereas the purpose of the Maniktala Ashram

was to end British tyranny. In both cases the religious

element was conspicuous in the order. The disciples110 Ibid, P 17-18

125

dressed in sadhu garb studied the Bhagabat Gita and were

bound by a strong religious vow to save the

Motherland”.111

Upendra in his confession also revealed the religious

objective of the society, “I thought it necessary to

found a sort of religious political society for the

cause of Indian regeneration. I joined Barin and

engaged myself in teaching the boys about the state of

our country and the need of independence and that the

only way left to us is to start secret societies to

propagate ideas, collect arms and rise up in

rebellion.112” Naren Gossain gave details of various

training programmes which he divided into “religious

training, political training and physical training113”.

In no other contemporary secret societies like the

Anushilan Samity of Calcutta and Dacca, Atmonnoti Samity of

Calcutta, there was such a mixing of religion with

violent anti-colonial struggle, as in Maniktala Garden.

Even the Midnapur Samity, an associate of the Manicktala

society, remained by and large, aloof from religion.

Significantly, none of the members was in politics in

later life, except Upendra Nath who was marginally in

Congress politics in the 1920s for a short while. Many

111 File No 353 of 1910, Circular No. 2 of 1909 issued by Stevenson-Moore Director Central Criminal Intelligence, Simla.112

113 Statement of the Approver, Vide Court Records of the trial.

126

inmates moved to Pondichery to settle there and Debrata

Bose became a sannyasi in the Ramkrishna Mission.

The Garden had a collection of about four hundred

books. Though the list is not available, it is clear

from the statements of the inmates that they were non-

religious books. Some inmates like Nolini and Prafulla

were members of the Imperial Library. The Gita and the

Upanishads were taught in the morning, followed by

classes on modern techniques of warfare and Ullaskar’s

bomb making classes. The latest literature on

sophisticated bomb making which Hem Chandra brought

from France was copied and studied in the Garden,114 and

almost all of them were seized by the police. According

to the explosive expert’s testimony115 in the court, the

“Hand-book on Modern Explosives” and the “Book on Nitro

Explosives”116 contained the most modern methods of

using nitro explosive material for making bombs.

Except at the very beginning when Ullaskar joined the

society in the middle of 1907, bombs were never

actually manufactured in the Garden. They erected a

114 From the Garden Police seized i) A Book on Nitro Explosives by Sanford, ii) A Hand-book on Modern Explosives by Eissler, iii) Manuscript copy of “On Explosives intended for a revolutionary prople”. The last named was brought from France, presumably copiedfrom Safranski’s notes. This was copied in the Garden for individual members and for revolutionaries outside. A few such copies were also seized. See court rexords, Exhibit Nos.XIX, to XXV115 Examination-in-chief of Government explosive expert, Major Black. Vide court records of the trial.116 Ex.No. 34 and 35

127

thatched shade in the compound where large and small

bellows were set up and moulds of various sizes used

for making the cast iron shells for bombs. Besides

training was given in the use of small firearms, and a

mango tree near the pond bore visible marks of bullets.

Firearms were procured by purchase, theft or donation.

It was somewhat easier to import firearms in French

Chandernagore due to less stringent French laws; but

that channel of arms procurement could not be used

successfully for various constraints.

8. BOMB MAKING BY THE SOCIETYThe first two bombs manufactured for the society at an

undisclosed place with the help of a couple of

Chemistry students, were carried by Barindra carried to

Assam and East Bengal for killing Bamfylde Fuller. The

bombs were “a mixture of sulphide of arsenic and

chlorate of potash,”117 in a cast iron round shaped

shell, with a fuse attached to it. Hem Chandra

described, it as “so-called bomb”. It is said that the

bomb was carried to Simultala to get the blessings of

Surendranath Banerji, who has confirmed this in his

autobiography. He asked them to drop the scheme and

paid their return fare to Calcutta118. Both Barin and

117 Daly, F.C, op.cit. P26118 Surendranath: Nation in Making, Pp217-218

128

Hem Chandra had grave doubts about the effectiveness of

the bombs.

The amateurish first bombs strengthened the resolve of

Hem Chandra to go abroad to learn sophisticated

techniques in France as in India the latest techniques

of bomb making119 were not available. After Hem

Chandra’s departure for France in July,1906, there was

a lull in the serious bomb-making effort of the society

till Ullaskar Dutta joined it in the later half of

1907. He “gave all his thoughts and energy to the

making of a bomb,” and learnt the techniques all by

himself by reading various books on Chemistry and

piecing out information on explosives and

simultaneously carried on some experiment in the small

laboratory of his father, Dwijadas Datta, professor of

Agriculture in Shibpur Engineering College. Eventually

he succeeded in manufacturing bombs with dynamite and

picric acid fuse, and the bombs were used to blow up

Lt. Governor’s train on three successive occasions. In

November, 1907 they tried to plant the bomb near

Mankundu station and second time near Chandernagore

station and on both the occasions they failed to place

the bombs properly under the line. The bombs with119 Peter Heesh: Bomb in Bengal, P 110. Nolini Gupta has written in his “smritir pata” that Prafulla Chakraborty had approached J.C.Bose through Sister Nivedita to allow Nolini to use his laboratory for making bomb with the help of P.C.Ray. Peter Heesh has quoted the story. With out independent corroboration the story does not appear to be acceptable.

129

picric acid and dynamite sticks procured from the mica

mines at Giridih owned by Manoranjan Guha Thakurata,120

were manufactured presumably at 24 Goabagan Lane,

Baghbazar.

The third and more powerful bomb, manufactured at the

same Goabagan house, was planted under the railway

track between Kharagpur and Naraingarh stations on 6

December, 1907. “We had with us a mine made of 6 Ibs of

dynamite charged in a thick iron vessel with a lid at

the top. The lid had a hole in the centre. We had a

fuse made of picric compound and picric compound powder

was placed in a paper tube; we used a leaden pipe in

case it should get choked by ballast.”121Barin gave a

detailed account of the bomb with a sketch, when

examined by Morsehead, IGP, Lower Bengal soon after his

confession was recorded.

After Naraingarh attempt the bomb manufacturing team

under Ullaskar was shifted to a house called Sil’s

Lodge at Rohini near Deoghar122 while in the Garden only

120 Barin in his confessional statement said ,””With his (Ullaskar)help we began preparing explosives in small quantitiesin the garden house at 32 Muraripukur Road.” Barin.s statement has many small inaccuracies designed to protect persons and places, But it may also be true that for a short while Ullaskar tried to manufacture bombs here.121 Confession made by Barindra Kumar Ghose. Those who planted the bomb were Bibhuti Sarkar, Prafulla Chakraborty and Barindra Ghose.Ullaskar, however, said that there was 5lb dynamite in the bomb.122 Peter Heehs writes in his “Bomb in Bengal” (P.135) with referenceto biblio-bomb, “ Around this time Barin and Ullaskar decided to shift the society’s bomb-making activities to Deoghar.” Biblio-bomb was manufactured and planted in March 1908. Bomb-making at

130

cast iron shells were manufactured. Ullaskar, assisted

by Prafulla Chakraborty, Nolini Gupta and Bibhuti

Sarkar, started the work, determined to make still more

powerful bombs. Eventually he succeeded in making one

by using picric acid and fulminate of mercury. On 29

January 1908123 Barin, Ullaskar, Prafulla Chakraborty,

Bibhuti Sarkar and Nolini Gupta went to nearby Dighiria

hillock to test the bomb. While throwing it from the

top of the hillock, it exploded prematurely in the air

killing Prafulla instantaneously and injuring Ullaskar.

The tragic accident claimed the brightest of the

revolutionaries in the group124 and a pall of gloom

descended on the Garden.. Thereafter the bomb

manufacturing centre at Sil’s Lodge was dismantled. Hem

Chandra had, by that time, returned from abroad and

took up the job of bomb making.

Sil’s Lodge near Deoghar commenced after the attempt on Andrew Fraser on 6th December, 1907, and it was closed after the accidentthat killed Prafulla Chakraborty on 29th January,1908. So Peter Hehhs’s contention is erroneous.123 See demi-official no.175D dated 28 December, 1908 from G.C.Denham, Special Assistant, to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Crime and Railways.. Denham wrote, “Prafulla Chakravarty is reported to be dead , the top of his skull having been blown off at Deoghar on 29 January,1908 while an experiment being made with a picric bomb.”. 124 Nolini, Prafulla’s close friend since their school days, has written in some details about the incident.See Nolini Gupta, op.cit, Pp 30-35

131

Hem Chandra had returned in January, 1908125 and reached

Calcutta in early February to meet the leaders of the

society. Now that he had taken training abroad in the

techniques of secret society organisation and in bomb

making, he had expected that his counsel in respect of

party organisation and bomb making would receive some

importance.

But he encountred a different situation in Calcutta.

Two close friends of Aurobindo and top leaders of the

society as well126 advised him not to see Barin

(Aurobindo was in Bombay Presidency at that time),

because Aurobindo would not listen to any one except

Barin and it was Barin’s nature to act contrary to the

suggestions given to him. He was apprehensive that

Barin would soon find himself in the clutches of the

police with all others. So Charu Datta advised Hem

Chandra to start a new society and for funds,127 he125 He landed in Bombay in the first week of January,1908. He spenta few days in visiting the secret societies in Baombay, Nasik and Nagpur before arriving at Midnapur first. Spending a few days there with the family, he went to Calcutta.126 Hem Chandra has not mentioned names of the top leaders. The existence of a revolutionary council has been mentioned by Jadu Gopal Mukhupadhaya but on the basis of hearsay. Naren Gossain in his confessional statement mentioned about a decision making bodyconsisting of three persons, namely Aurobindo, Subodh Mallick and Charu Chandra Datta. Two of them namely Subodh Mallick and Charu Datta started distancing themselves from the society due toBarin’s conduct.127. Hem Chandra has not mentioned these two leader by name, but has mentioned one as ‘Ga’ Babu.who according to his description was a “highly educated, England- returned and experienced “leader is none other than Charu Chandra Datta. Hem Chandra has identifiedhim in the revised edition of his book as Charu Datta. According

132

introduced Hem Chandra to a rich man, a zamindar of

Midnapur, 128 before leaving for Bombay. The proposed

new secret society did not materialise as the assured

funds was nover available. Disappointed Hem Chandra

had to go back to Aurobindo, who in a dismissive way

asked him to see Barin. So with diminishing confidence

in the capability of Barin and Aurobindo as secret

society leaders, Hem Chandra started working as a bomb

maker of the society.

The first explosive device made by Hem Chandra was the

most ingenious one. It was till then unknown in India

and not common even among the Western terrorists. This

was a book bomb made for Kingsford who was selected as

a presumably by the council of three129 sometime before

Datta’s departure from Calcutta in the third week of

February, 1908. As a matter of fact the entire novel

plan of planting a book bomb was conceived and

implemented130 by Hem Chandra with the help of his

to Datta’s Memoirs, “Purano Katha –Third Part, he was in Calcuttafor afew months till third week of February, 1908. The conversation took place in first part of February when both were in Calcutta. The second person, is Subodh Mallick. 128 Hem Chandra tells us of one, but Binoyjiban Ghose tells us of two,namely Brajendra Roy Choudhuryof Mymensingh and Raja of Narajole.129 Accoding to Naren Gossain’s (Approver) statement “ Barindra, Ullaskar, Hem Das, P.M.Bapat and I were among those who decided upon this “ Barin wrote later in 1948 that Aurobindo,Subodh Mullick andCharu Datta selected the target.130 Charu. C. Datta: Purano Kaths: III, Pp.25. Datta wrongly claimsthat the everything was done under his supervision, The bomb was manufactured and despatched in March, 1908 when he was not in Calcutta.

133

comrades. He procured a copy of a thick 1075-page book

entitled “A Commentary on the Common Law, designed as

Introductory to its Study”, by Herbert Broom, LLD and cut an

oblong hole in the book. He then placed a Cadbury cocoa

tin containing picric acid, detonator and a trigger

device in the excavated space. The book-bomb was then

wrapped in a brown paper131. An envelop was kept inside

the book in such a manner that a portion of it was

visible from outside; but the book was tied with a tape

in such a fashion that the letter can not be taken out

without untying the tape.132 The device was intended to

be a camouflage and a challenge. The use of a book on

Common Law and the Cadbury cocoa tin would evoke a

British image while the loud report of explosion and

the damage caused would pose a challenge to the British

might. As soon as the book is opened the trigger would

be activated and the bomb would explode It was neatly

packed and sent to Kingsford through Pares Moulik of

the Garden dressed in postal peon’s uniform, cleverly

procured by Hem Chandra himself. Though the parcel was

delivered to Kingsford in his Garden Reach residence,

he did not care to open it. As a matter of fact,

because of his mounting unpopularity he was under order

of transfer to Muzaffarpur where he reached on 26th

131 Christopher Pinny: The Body and the Bomb: Techiologies of Modernity in Colonial India. An eassay in Peter Davis (Ed) Picturing the Nation, P.53132 Hem Chandra, op.cit, P 163

134

March133. He did not open the parcel even later. The

unopened book-parcel remained in his study when he had

moved to Muzaffarpur. It was detected only after “a

well-known revolutionary, when in custody, said that

before this outrage134 a bomb had been sent to Mr

Kingsford in a parcel. Upon search being made a parcel

was found which Mr Kingsford had received but not

opened thinking it contained a book borrowed from

him.”135 The Sedition Committee did not reveal the name

of the informer, but gave enough hint for

identification. The Report further stated, “ Fifteen

were ultimately found guilty (in Alipur Bomb Case)

including Barindra Kumar Ghose, Hem Chandra Das and

another who made the statement already alluded to and

strictly confirmed as to the sending of a bomb in a

parcel to Mr Kingsford.136” It was not Barin, Hemchandra

or Naren but some one else who gave the information

while in custody. Parcel bomb till then was a novel

weapon even to the terrorists of Europe. The society,

however, got little opportunity to use Hem Chandra’s

expertise in more acts of revenge.

133 Deposition of Kingsford in Muzaffarpur Bomb Case,134 Muzaffarpur blast took place on 30 April,1908135 Report of the Sedition Committee,, P 32. 136 Hem Chandra has written about regular meeting of the CID officers with the revolutionaries in jail and scramble for giving information to CID. It became so wide spread that a question aboutthe moral justification of such acts was discussed, and Aurobindo said that the sin of the informer would be washed off if on release he dedicated himself to country’s work morevigorously!

135

Hem Chandra made three more bombs at Gopi Mohan Datta

Lane, one of which was used for experiment and found to

be satisfactory. The other was made in a hurry as Barin

wanted it within a short time. Hem Chandra though

sick produced a bomb promptly from the materials

available in the Garden; but it was not perfect in all

respects. This bomb was thrown into the dining room of

Mayor Tardivel of Chandernagore in the evening of 11

April, 1908; but it did not explode as at the time of

throwing the detonator got detached from the main bomb.

Major Black, the Explosive Expert of the Government,

stated before the Sessions Court: “I found the tin

case filled with fused picric acid. Possibly the

detonator was not powerful enough to explode the

contents of the tin case. That quantity of picric

acid would be sufficient to wreck an ordinary sized

room and would probably kill any one who happened to

be in it”

Hem Chandra parted with all the documents including

those on organisation of secret society with the

expectation that eventually the members would seriously

follow the model and methods contained in them. But

Barin was not agreeable to follow the instructions on

secret society organisation on the ground that the

Western models of secret society were not applicable in

India as India was not a materialist country like

136

Europe137. Barin, however, did not raise any such

objection while adopting the Western technique of bomb

making.

Regarding the contents of the books and notes that

Hem Chandra brought, the Explosive Expert testified,

“On 2nd May I went to 32 Muraripukur Road, with Mr

Plowden and Mr Corbet at about 12 o’clock. In my

presence a book138 containing instructions for

preparing explosives was found at the Garden. I have

read it carefully. It contains detailed information

about picric acid and picrates in a language readily

intelligible to a layman. It would facilitate

preparation of explosives by non-experts. It contains

valuable information about explosives. I have no

personal knowledge of the source whence the

information comes. I have never before seen it to be

available to general public”.

These notes that Hem Chandra brought from France were

cyclostyled and circulated to various underground

groups all over the country to facilitate bomb

making. Later on Police recovered copies from distant

places like Punjab, Bombay and Madras.

137 Hem Chandra adduced the same argument to his teachers in Pariswhen they refused to teach bomb-making on the ground that India had no well-organised secret society protected by a capable intelligence net work. 138 Ex.738

137

Apprehending search and arrest in the aftermath of any

violent incident that might take place in Muzaffarpur,

the bombs and bomb making materials from Hem Chandra’s

factory in two houses at Raja Naba Krishna Street and

Gopi Mohan Dutt Lane were packed in trunks and bags and

sent to 134 Harrison Road on way to Shibpur where they

were to be safely stored. But the CID was smarter and

the removal and storage at Harrison Road house took

place under their watchful eye. On 2 May the police

found in the trunks one spike bomb with 24 spikes139,

and two bombs with detonating studs, along with bomb

shells, bottles of picric acid and other chemicals and

bomb making materials.

9. LEADERSHIP OF THE SOCIETY

Aurobindo was merely figurehead, while Barin exercised

the authority on the society’s activities. Barinlacked

the qualities of leadership, but he tried to make up by

his indefatigable energy and hard work. As a matter of

fact, Barin used to run the society in Aurobindo’s name

and often used to circulate his own instructions as

Aurobindo’s. Though, perhaps, totally ignorant of

Barin’s activities, he never cared to interfere in the

affairs of the society. He, more often than not, would

139 Ex. No. 610 and 614. Major Smallwood, the explosive expert decommissioned the bombs at Park Street PS.

138

accept Barin’s words as truth, apparently more out of

brotherly affection than being convinced by the force

of logic. An instance of such condescension from the

memoirs of Abinash Bhattacharya, who was present at the

time of conversation, may be cited.140

Before the attack on M.Tardivel, the Mayor of

Chandernagore, Barin went to take the permission of

Aurobindo.

Barin, (To Aurobindo): Sejda, it is necessary that the

Mayor of Chandernagore should be killed.

Aurobindo: Why?

Barin: He stopped a Swadeshi meeting in Chandernagore

and torturing the local people.

Aurobindo: That is why he ought to be killed? Then how

many people you are going to kill this way? I cannot

give my consent. Nothing will come out of it.

Barin: No, Sejda, I do not agree. If this is not done

the oppressor will never learn the lesson. We must

teach them.

Aurobindo: Very well. If you think like that, then do

it.”

140 Abinash Bhattacharya: “Aurobindo” A short memoirs in a Bengali journal “Galpa-Bharati” 1357 BS, Pp 829-850. Incidentally Abinashhad stayed continuously with Aurobindo from the middle of 1907 till he was arrested with Aurobindo on 2 May,1908, except for three mnths when he was jailed for a skirmish with the police in front of Jugantar office. He used to look after the household of Aurobindo.

139

The above conversation reveals the state of leadership

and the mode of taking decisions141even on as serious a

matter as killing of an important official. When Hem

Chandra objected to the target selection saying that

stoppage of a meeting was not provocative enough for

murder and added that in the French settlement the

firearms were easily available.and the settlement was

somewhat safe place for the fugitives and as such the

place should not be disturbed, Barin argued that the

Mayor was trying to pass a law to restrict firearms in

the settlement. Not being able to convince Hem Chandra

about the justifiability of the action, Barin took his

trump card out and said that the action was approved by

Aurobindo. “At that time,” writes Hem Chandra, “I had

blind faith in Aurobindo. When such a wise man has

ordered, it must be justified.142” Later on, in course

of an argument on this issue, Barin took a somewhat

different cover that Aurobindo had received a ‘divine

command’ (Bani)143 !

Barin was energetic and irrepressible. In his eagerness

to get things done quickly he threw all rules of safety

and security to the wind and ran the society in a

manner that he himself described as “open-secret”141. Naren Gossain who was a participant in the attempt also statedthat stopping of the meeting was the reason for making the Mayor atarget, 142 Hem Chandra:op.cit, P149143 Peter Heehs has written this without quoting any source of information,

140

society. When warned about the presence of unknown

faces near the Garden and along the roads near by and

positive indication of CID surveillance on the houses,

he made fun of the capability of the Police and the

CID,144 and when Aurobindo, on being reported by Subodh

Mullik and Charu Datta, cautioned Barin of his

wreckless conduct, Barin explained by saying that some

members of the society were raising the bogy of Police

as they were afraid of doing the revolutionary work.

Aurobindo, as usual, accepted Barin’s explanation as

correct.

With such a state of leadership of the secret society

in early 1908, it was not expected to survive for long.

Subodh Mallick and Charu Datta145 being disenchanted

with Barin’s behaviour and activities had distanced

144 The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) was created in 1906under a Dy I G and the Provincial Special Branch (SB) of the Bengal Presidency was placed under him.For a full account see Chapter XI. Barin’s disdainful remarks about the efficiency of theCID and SB was justified, as in those formative years their expertise and efficiencywere rather poor. 145 Charu Datta left for his place of his posting in Bombay Presidency bythe third weekof February and thereafter he had not met Aurobindo till 1940. Datta had to suffer departmental punishment of pay-cut but was eventually his pay was restored and he served the government till his retirement in1925. In his memoirs Datta has not disclosed his rift with Aurobindo’s secret society, as he became his disciple in 1940 and lived in Pondicherytill his death in 1952. Subodh Mallick suffered internment for a little more than a year and on release snapped all connections with the Secret Societies.Datta, according to his memoirs, was hesitant to see Aurobindo after his retirement, in spite of his wife’s prodding. Why this prolonged hesitation? Is it because he was critical and disloyal to him in 1908?

141

themselves from the Society, making the so-called

supreme council totally infructuous.

Hem Chandra has accused Barin of a rigid attitude

towards those who incurred his displeasure, especially

by defying the routine of religious training in the

Garden. Nirapada Ray, who livwd in the Garden for some

time, told him that Barin would try to get rid of the

recalcitrant elements in a still more devious way by

sending them for dangerous action such as

assassination. Hem Chandra cites the example of Sushil

Sen who was critical of the religious training and

reluctant to practice of Yoga was first sent out of the

Garden to assist Hem Chandra in bomb making at 78 Russa

Road house sometime in the middle of March and then in

April he was selected for assassination of Kingsford at

Muzaffarpur,146 as he as he had earlier been punished

by Kingsford with 15 lashes. Prafulla Chaki and Sushil

Sen were sent to Muzaffarpur for a preliminary survey

in the first week of April 1908. Hem Chandra was much

impressed by the intelligence and agility of the boy as

he very cleverly collected all relevant information

about the movements of Kingsford and Inspector Purna

Chandra Lahiri. The latter was also targeted for his

role in the prosecution of the press. On Hem Chandra’s

request Barin condescended to spare Sushil and asked

Hem Chandra to select another young man. Hem Chandra146 Ibid. Pp149-151

142

eventually brought Kshudiram Bose from Midnapur as a

substitute for Sushil. They were asked, inter alia, to

put on the dress of the local people while going for

action, to throw away the revolvers if the bomb served

the purpose, and if caught, not to say anything to the

police except through a lawyer. In the third week of

April Kshudiram accompanied Prafulla Chaki to

Muzaffarpur with a bomb manufactured by Hem Chandra.

Kshudiram was given one revolver but he took onr more

without Hem Chandra’s knowledge. Prafulla took a

Browning pistol out of those which Hem Chandra brought

from France and ‘afterwards Prafulla shot himself with

the very pistol’147.

Hem Chandra’s allegation that Barin had an ulterior

motive in selecting Sushil for assassination does not

appear tobe sustainable. The inspiration to do

something difficult in the face of great danger was a

challenge to the youths in the secret societies. If

Kshudiram’s selection, done by Hem Chandra himself, is

attributed to his strong urge to kill a foreign

oppressor, Sushil was equally eager, if not more, to

kill Kingsford, and so was Prafulla who had gone

previously on at least two failed missions148. As a

147 Terrorism in Bengal, Vol. III. Pp. 531-532148 In 1906 Prafulla accompanied Hem Chandra to kill Bamfylde Fuller and went to loot a widow’s house at Rangpur. Both failed. He was sent to Darjeeling to kill Andrew Fraser at the instance ofCharu Datta. This also failed.

143

matter of fact, a strong wave of selfless patriotism

was in the air at that time. Apart from inspirations

derived from objective conditions in the country, the

ambience in which the revolutionaries lived in the

secret societies stilled for self-sacrifice. The

Jugantar was prosecuted six times, and every time its

printer and publisher were given varying terms of

imprisonment, another set of printer and publisher was

ready to take their places. This continued till the

press was confiscated and the paper stopped publication

in 1908. These employees were no emotional young men

but middle aged men with families, fully aware of the

consequences of their action. That was the spirit of

the time. In the Garden young members, lured by the

glory of self sacrifice for the country, were eager to

participate in action. In this context, it will not be

harsh to say that Barin used to get rid of his critics

through manipulative selection for dangerous action.149

In his memoirs Hem Chandra was self critical about his

attitude towards Barin.. “He (Barin) had reasons for

regarding me with disfavour. From the incident of the

Rangpur dacoity he came to see that I was unfit to

become a blind admirer of his. He had further come to

know of my attempt to organise a party with those who

were against him. Moreover I really belonged to

Midnapur Secret Society, and Satyen Bose, who was the149 Hem Chandra: op.cit. P 150-151

144

leader, and a blood relation of Barin, was an eyesore

to him. Satyen was disinclined to treat him as a leader

of the Calcutta Central Committee and freely criticised

him in presence of others.” 150 Yet Barin was so

strongly self-willed that even good relations between

the two would not have changed the destiny of the

society in the Garden.

10. MUZAFFARPUR EXPLOSION

Aurobindo wrote in Bande Mataram dated 29th April, 1908.

“The disapprearance of the old Congress announces the

end of the preparatory stage of the movement, the

beginning of a clash of forces whose first shock will

produce chaos. The fair hopes of an orderly and

peaceful evolution of a self government, which the

first energies of the new movement had fostered, are

gone for ever. Revolution, bare and grim, is preparing

her battle field mowing down the centers of order which

were evolving a new cosmos and building up the

materials of a gigantic downfall and a mighty new

creation. We could have wished it otherwise, but God’s

will be done.”151 There is a clear hint that “a clash of

forces” producing chaos was in the offing. Evidently

Aurobindo had the knowledge that two young boys set off

150 “Account of the Revolutionary Movement in Bengal” Pp 53-54151 Sri Aurobindo: Bande Mataram, P.891

145

for Muzaffarpur around 21st April to assassinate

Kingsford152. The Bengal CID also had precise knowledge

that two boys aged about nineteen years had gone to

Muzaffarpur with bombs and revolvers to kill Kingsford.

Halliday, Commissioner of Calcutta Police sent a

messenger with a letter153to Armstrong , SP,

Muzaffarpur, and asked him to provide adequate security

to the District Judge. After about a week Armstrong

wrote to Halliday on 29th April, “I am sending SI

Madhusudan Chakrabarty back to Calcutta as it is

useless keeping him here any longer. The most thorough

and searching enquiries have been made but with no

result.The CID appears to have been misinformed or the

plot was abandoned.”154 The CID officer “had left

Muzaffarpur only some six hours prior to the

outrage.”155 The bomb exploded in Muzaffarpur at 20.35

hrs on 30th April.

From the evidence of a sketch map of the District

Judge’s bunglow and its neighbourhood and a receipt156

152 Hem Chandra : Account of Revolutionary Movement,P.64. Accordingto Hem Chandra a week before the explosion they had started for Muzaffarpur.153 Letter of Halliday to Armstrong dated 20th April,1908, The letter was carried by Sub-inspector Madhusudan Chakrabarty. A guard was posted at the gate of District Judge’s bunglow from 23rdApril onwards.154 WB State Archives” File No. 615 of 1908, Armstrong to Halliday, dated 29th April, 1908.155 National Archives: Confidential Home Department Notes on Muzaffarpur Explosion, Nos112-150, Halliday’s report, P.56156 Ex.No.879 in Alipur Bomb Trial

146

of money order sent from the Garden to one Dinesh

Chandra Ray of Muzaffarpur on 6th April, 1908, found in

the Garden during the search it is evident that a party

of two from the Garden visited Muzaffarpur to recce the

place and fix convenient locations for making attempt

on Kingsford. Their selection of place and time was

quite convenient for the task, but the youngmen in

their excitement were oblivious of the difficulties in

distinguishing the target’s phaeton from other such

carriages in the darkness of the evening. By frequently

moving about in the area, they had made their faces

known in the neighbourhood and while fleeing they left

tale-tell objects to connect them with the incident.

Although Hem Chandra claims that they were “instructed

not to make any statement, in case of arrest, without

properly consulting a pleader,”157 yet Kshudiram soon

after his arrest promptly made a confession.

Police had circulated the description of the two boys

as stated by two constables at the gate of the District

Judge. In the morning of 1st May when after a 24 miles

trek during the night Kshudiram “was drinking water in

front of a mudi's ( grocer’s) shop, about 10 paces

north of the station”two constables Fateh Singh and

Shew Prasad saw him. He was between 17 and 20 years,

barefooted, bareheaded and wearing a stiped coat as157 Hem Chandra: op.cit, P.65

147

described in the message from Muzaffarpur. The

constables in plain cloth approached him “and asked,

“Where he came from, where he was going, and what was

his name?” Kshudiram fumbled some answer, but being

nervous tried to run and the constables caught him.

“The man had two pistols: when I caught him, one fell

on the ground, the other was in his waist cloth.

The one that fell was large. It was not loaded. The

smaller one was in his waist cloth, it was loaded. On

search 32 cartridges of three separate bore were found

in his court pocket.His hands were tied and a rope was

put round his waist”158. In the afternoon he was brought

to Muzaffarpur by SP Armstrong and in the station club

DM Woodman recorded Kshudiram’s judicial confession.

A day later on 2nd May, Prafulla while travelling from

Samastipur to Mokamah by train, “dressed in new

clothes, new ‘kurta’ and wearing a pair of absolutely

new patent leather shoes,”159became very conspicuous and

he talked too much with his co-passenger without

knowing his identity and showed unusal inquisitiveness

about the incident at Muzaffarpur to make him a

suspect. When attempt was made to arrest Prafulla on

the crowded platform of Mokamah Ghat “he ran down the158 Court Records ; P.W.139 Constable Fateh Singh in Alipur Bomb Trial.159 Report of J.E.Armstrong, SP Muzaffarpur to L.F.Morsehead Inspector General of Police on the arrest of Kshudiram Bose and suicide of Prafulla Chaki. Terrorism in Bengal, Vol..III, Pp.1379-1380

148

platform pursued closely by sub-inspector Chaturvedi

Ramadhar Sharms and a constable Shewsankar Singh. The

constable was gaining on him fast and was at his heels

when a GRP constable Zameer Ahmed Khan coming up from

the opposite direction made a rush for the Bengali, who

drew a Browning pistol and fired at him fortunately

missing him.” The odds were heavy against Prafulla. The

two constables “closed on the fugitive and held him

with the man’s right hand in which he held the pistol

was pressed down against his breast, and he was able to

direct the pistol against himself before he could be

secured. The first shot was high up on the left breast

and would not have proved fatal; realising that the man

put the pistol under the chin and fired again killing

himself stone-dea, apparaently shot through the

brain.”160

The dead body was brought to Muzaffarput via Barauni

where it was photographed by one requisitioned from

Bankipur. In the waiting room of the station Kshudiram

identified the body in presence of the DM as the body

of his companion Dinesh Chandra Ray. Thereafter the

body was taken tro Muzaffarpur Civil Hospital where

Post Mortem161 which was done by the Superintentendent

Col. T. Grainger, who found two entry wounds. Two

bullets were found in the body. One bullet pierced the

160 Ibid, P 1380161 High Court Calcutta : Records of

149

upper left side of the chest and went up to be embedded

in the left collar bone. The second bullet pierced the

chin and went up to the brain. The second bullet caused

instantaneous death.

Thereafter the most brutal and barbaric act was

committed by the administration on the body of the

dead, by violating the rules which government framed in

this regard. Though Kshudiram identified the body as

that of his companion Dinesh Ray, and photograph of the

body was taken, yet the CID had a suspicion that the

real name of the dead man was not Dinesh Chandra Ray.

SP Armstrong thought of sending the deadbody to

Calcitta for identification and he wired Commissioner

of Police, Calcutta on 2nd May “to arrange reception

of the body. “162

But after the Post Mortem was done on the deadbody on

the 3rd May afternoon, DM Woodman reported, “the head

was then preserved in spirit and sent to Calcutta for

further identification, necessitated by the discloser

that had been made on the previous day in Calcutta of

an organised anarchical conspiracy.”163 The news papers

also reported that “on the order of the Police

Headquarters the head was severed from the body and

162 File No. 615 of 1908; Telegram of SP to CP, Calcutta, dated 2ndMay, 1814 at 1730hrs.163 Home Departments Notes Nos. 112-150,DM’s letter to the Chief Secretary, Bengal, P.52

150

sent to Calcuuta,”164 though the dead man could have

been identified from the photograph. Such shocking

brutalitiy, strongly criticised in the nationalist

press, was unusual even in the colonial administrative

standard; and it will not be off the mark to say that

an element of vengeance pervaded at least a section of

the legal-administrative establishment on account of

the death of two European ladies in the explosion. The

trial was also marked by a convenient interpretation

and application of law which would ensure the harshest

punishment to a teen ager. The judiciary was

indifferent to the fact that Kshudiram went undefended

by a lawyer at committal enquiry stage and at the early

stage of Sessions trial when he made judicial

confession which turned out to be the most crucial

evidence in the trial. A campaign by the local British

officials aided by anti-swadeshi Indian elements against

the Bengalis who were by insinuation held collectively

responsibe for the crime was quietly carried on and

searches in several Bengali houses and detention and

harassment of Bengali visitors so much terrorised them

that no lawyer, not to speak of Bengali lawyers, would

come forward to defend Kshudiram. Criticism of the

much-touted British justice in the nationalist press

eventually awakened Sessions judge Cranduff to the need

of a defence lawyer though by that time Khudiram had164 The Statesman, dated 8th May,1908.

151

made confession, which an unhappy Chief Secretary

described as “purely personal”165 as he had not

implicated others in the conspiracy. In reply to

Cranduff’s question in the trial court Kshudiram had

pleaded guilty and the judge had recorded it when

Kshudiram had no lawyer to defend him. After the

crucial evidence were recorded the judge asked pleader

Kalipada Basu to defend and at that stage it was

impossible to organise a good defence.

The recording of confession was not in conformity with

legal requirements. Candruff had himself likened it to

the confession made by a sinner before a priest in the

church, when questions are put to bring out minute

details. As many as 55 questions were asked while

according to law the recording magistrate should ask

minimum questions to ascertain if the confession was

being voluntarily made and not on the main incident.

But the magistrate acted as an interrogator. So

Carnduff opined that the confession as a piece of

evidence should not be relied upon for conviction. But

in the judgment Candurff made an about turn and wrote,

“I see no reason whatever for doubting the genuineness

and the voluntary character of the confession made by

the prisoner before Mr Woodman, or the plea of guilty

returned by the prisoner when charged in the court.” In

165 Home Department Notes, Chief Secretary, Bengal to Home Secretary, GOI, P.45

152

the High Court too the confession was sustained and the

death sentence upheld.

But the explosion and the trial had shaken the nation

to the core. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, in trying to explain

as to why the youngmen were taking to bombs, was

alleged to have violated the law of sedition and in

consequence was sent to six years transportation much

to the resentment166 of his countrymen. Despite the

administration’s devious effort to create racial

animosity there was great impact of the incident on the

public mind. When Kshudiram was brought from Saini to

Muzaffarpur railway station in the evening there was a

big silent crowd which perhaps thrilled the boy who

shouted Bande mataram. On 3rd May afternoon when

Kshudiram was taken to the jail after identifying the

deadbody of his companion at the railway station,

“thousands of people followed the police van.”167 What

stuck the people and the press was the innocence and

cheerfulness of the boy who almost always had a faint

smile on his lips and his supreme indifference to the

impending death. In the first week of May he might

have been accused by some people as murderer of

innocent women, but in August the same town would greet

him as a hero who had conquered death. As a matter of

fact there were many anonymous letters from various

166 Resentment found expression in strikes and riots in Bombay.167 The Statesman,dated 8th May, 1908 P.8

153

places to the court, some of them pleading for his

life and a few threatening the officials. He died with

a smile on hois lips. On 11th August Kshudiram’s

execution took place at 6 AM. “He walked to the gallows

firmly and cheerfully and even smiled when the cap was

drawn over his head.”168 Kalidas Basu obtained DM’s

permission to cremate the dead body ‘quietly’ and so

the cortege was accompanied by a few mourners only. But

the road to cremation ground was lined up by the police

and spectators.

No martyrdom in the early phase of the revolutionary

terrorist movement had created such a wave of emotion

and patriotism as the martyrdom of Kshudiram and

Prafulla Chaki. In the 1930s the death of Bhagat Singh

and his comrades on the gallows created a much deeper

and more widespread patriotic ferver in the country.

11. SEARCH AND ARREST

Armstrong sent the first information to Commissioner of

Police, Calcutta, at late night by telegram, but

Halliday169 read them at 6 in the morning.He immediately

consulted the Intelligence officers such as Plowden and

P.C.Biswas about the course of action. “Plowden advised

168 Amrits Bazar Patrika, dated 12 August, 1908, P.5169 Halliday was in charge of Bengal Police as L. Morshead ICS the IGP designate had not joined the post till then. As a matter of fact two telegrams were sent one at 22.45 and the other at 23.50.File no. 615 of 1908, WB State Archives.

154

to postpone the search for three days, as some of the

centers were in Midnapur or elsewhere, I was personally

averse to this. It was finally decided that searches in

Calcutta and the suburbs of Calcutta must be made at

once.”170 No time was lost after that. In a meeting of

exclusively European Police officers in Commissioner’s

office it was decided to search eight places171

including the Garden that night and each party would be

led by European officers while native sub-ordinates

would help in the search or act as guides. In the

afternoon warrants were taken out from Chief Presidency

Magistrate’s court. The plan was kept secret even from

the local police stations.

Yet there was enough time and opportunity for the

society members to avoid being caught red handed.

After the departure of Prafulla and Kshudiram for

Muzaffarpur it was planned that in case of any incident

the Garden and other houses under watch would be

vacated, and incriminating materials would be shifted

to safe places. Ullaskar affected by the general

indifference to safety stored the materials packed in

three trunks and two bags in his relatives’ shops under

CID’s watchful eye, in stead of taking them to his170 Home Department Proceedings, May,1908, Halliday’s report to theChief Secretary, P.56171 Ibid, P. 56-57. The places searched were: 1. Garden,2.15 Gopi Dutt Lane, 3. 134 Harrison Road, 4.30/2 Harrison Road, 5. 48 Grey Street, 6. 38/4 Raja Naba Krishna Street, 7. 4. Harrison Road and 8. 23 Scott’s Lane.

155

father’s laboratory at Shibpur, and throwing two bags

containing bombs into the Ganga as planned172. Barin,

relying on his own perception of police inefficiency,

ignored the warning of all, including Aurobindo, who

”asked Barin to be careful”173.”No sooner had our leader

received the news (of explosion at Muzaffarpur) he sent

for Barin and asked him to inform all and to send out

everyone from the Garden”. But Barin went back to the

Garden and with the help of the inmates tried to

conceal the weapons in a pit, but did not leave the

Garden. He did not inform anyone outside the Garden

about the news from Muzaffarpur.

Barin’s own explanation is that, “Everyday I used to

see the Empire newspaper to find out if the task had

been accomplished. Everyday someone from the Garden

would bring the newspaper by about 3 PM. The day at 8

o’clock in the evening Abinash came to the Garden with

the 1st May issue of ‘Empire’ newspaper. I saw the news

of explosion at Muzaffarpur and also the Commissioner’s

statement, that Police had information about those who

were committing such acts and the places where they

lived. Soon actions would be taken.”

Besides Police Commissioner’s warning published in the

press, a policeman physically came to the garden in the

evening of 1st May and warned them of an impending

172 Account ;P63173 Hen Chandra: op.cit, Pp 166-167

156

raid. Barindra writes, “At that time I also thought

that the police was on the trail, delay would not be

advisable, let us disperse tonight only.174” Upendra

Nath Banerjee also corroborates that a police man in

plain cloth visited the Garden to warn the inmates of a

raid, but it went unheeded.175 Like all arrogant

leaders he puts across several untenable explanations.

“We should have dispersed forthwith; but where would we

remove so many materials after day’s bone-breaking

labour? It was decided that early in the morning we

will leave for safe places.”176 In the meantime, he with

the help of the inmates tried to conceal the weapons as

much as they could. At midnight they went to sleep and

in the early morning they were arrested.

Aurobindo in his Tales from the Prison has recalled the

events before his arrest. “On Friday, May 1, 1908, I

was sitting in the Bande Mataram office, when Shrijut

Shyamsundar Chakraborty handed over a telegram from

Muzaffarpur. On reading it I learned of a bomb outrage

in which two European ladies had been killed. In that

day’s issue of the “Empire” I read another news item

that the Police Commissioner had said that he knew

people involved in the murder and that they would soon

174 Ibid. P 63175 Upendra Banerji: Nirbasiter Atmakatha. P 30176 Barindra Kumar Ghosh:Barindrer Atmakahini, p.46

157

be put under arrest.”177 Aurobindo was arrested from 48

Gray Street simultaneously with the inmates of the

Garden.

In the night of 1-2 May, 1908 altogether eight premises

were searched and 25 persons arrested including 14 from

the Garden. The search and arrest in the districts and

a few other houses in the city continued till 14 July

and eventually 36 persons were put up for trial in the

Sessions court in November, 1908.

As Hem Chandra has mentioned, Barin often used to live

in the world of fantasy and that is why in spite of

clear signs of danger did not really believe that the

search and arrest were imminent. When it did occur he

lost his composure for some time. Seeing, however, the

arrested boys being pushed and dragged by the sergeants

(all white-skinned) he protested to the officer and

told him that he was responsible for everything and the

boys should not be treated badly. But when the search

was in progress, and certain materials started coming

out, a distressed Barindra bitterly sulked and invoked

Mother Kali, (a picture of Kali was hanging on the

wall) by saying, “Mother, thou hast destroyed whatever

thou hast helped me build, I will now give away

whatever is left”. He then took the police officers to

177 Sri Aurobindo: Tales from Prison Life, P. 1 Aurobindo warned Barin and asked him to move out of the Garden. In 1909-1910 Aurobindo could not have written more than this.

158

show the places where he had hidden weapons in a pit178.

Dramatics apart, the legal implication of his action

was tantamount to admission of possession of illegal

firearms and explosives and a piece of crucial evidence

in the court. Barindra ,in fact, exhibited his

mercurial character in course of the search. When the

arrested boys were being harassed he protested and said

he was responsible for everything and the boys should

not be disturbed. After the Garden was ransacked and

arms and ammunitions were seized by the police,

Barindra showed his utter irresponsibility as a leader

by declaring, “My mission is over.179”

The police seized huge quantity of printed and

manuscript materials like books, journals, booklets

pamphlets along with notebooks letters, manuscript

articles maps etc. Besides from the Garden one rifle,

three guns, nine revolvers and huge quantity of

ammunitions, empty bomb shells and some bomb making

materials, and from 134 Harrison Road a live spike bomb

and several half finished bombs, dynamites, detonator

fuses etc. in three boxes and one bag were seized.

Altogether 1575 items of as exhibits were produced

before the court and 212 prosecution witnesses were

examined to bring home the charge against the accused.

178 Barindra Kumar Ghosh : Op.Cit, P 48179 BBP:P 82

159

This was the first and arguably the biggest trial for

waging war against the King Emperor in colonial India.

12. CONFESSIONS

But the more damaging act of Barin was the judicial

confession that he made and persuaded ten members of

the society--four arrested from the garden and six from

outside, including Narendra Gossain-- to make

confessions. Confession before the prosecutix is very

much against the principles of the revolutionaries and

any one doing so is considered as a man of weak

character incapable of becoming a revolutionary, if not

a traitor. As a matter of fact, when it was known to

the revolutionaries outside that Barin had confessed,

Srish Chandra Ghose, a revolutionary of Chandernagore

thought of even murdering Barin! Hem Chandra thought

that Barin had a strong desire to get reprieve (obyahotir

ichcha) and so he took Ramsadai of CID on the face value

that he could get away with light punishment if he

made a clean breast of everything. Soon however, Barin

had realised that he had been duped.

Whatever might be his motivation, Barin had realised

that by making confession he had lost his credibility

as a revolutionary leader. On his release he promptly

published a series of memoirs including Barindrer

atmakahini which, in fact, is an alibai for his actions as

160

a leader of the Manicktala secret society. He has

stated

that by confessing their guilt he and his comrades had

taken the blame on them and thus others would not be

suspected by the police. In his naivety he failed to

realise that once they started disclosing, the CID and

the magistrate would not be satisfied unless they

disclose more. Barin himself named Narendra Nath

Gossain on his own and this had grave consequences.

His plea that he wanted to let the people of the

country know as to what great preparation they had been

making to fight the British180 is still more

incongruous. Being an incorrigible exhibitionist, his

tendency to show off to earn public acclaim, turned the

secret society into an ‘open secret society.’- a phrase

he himself had used about the Manicktala Garden. He was

so fond of public recognition that the day after the

arrest when he was being taken in a tram car by a lone

police sergeant, he lamented that none of the

passengers in the car could recognise Barindra Kumar

Ghose! 181 “In narrating such a big and attractive

military preparation, the urge to say more becomes

irresistible. The narrative also becomes suffused with

a subdued sense of self-glorification.”182

180 Atmakahini: P54181 Ibid, P 50-51182 Ibid, P 54

161

The CID officers felt that since Barin was the leader

of the group, and he had made a ‘clean breast’ of their

activities in the Garden, he would divulge everything

about the society, and as such he was specially treated

by deputy superintendent, Ram Sadai Mukherji of CID.

His vanity was well satisfied when the clever Ram Sadai

gave him assurance that he would get away with very

little punishment if he would make a clean breast of

everything183.. Barin already in deep anxiety and stress

relied on this man’s promise. Upen needed little

persuation to fall in line with Barin. and Indu Bhusan

and Bibhuti Sarkar and Ullaskar and then they jointly

persuaded Indubhusan Ray and Bibhuti Sarkar to

confess. Ullaskar however, was at first reluctant but

eventually succumbed to Barin’s pressure. No one else

was agreeable to make confession.

Aurobindo and HemChandra did not make any statement

either before the police or the magistrate. Barin,

having realised that Hem Chandra would appear morally

superior to him, tried his best with the help of

Ramsadai to make him confess. But inspite of the

comined effort of Barin and Ramsadai, who took Hem

Chandra on remand for a day (6th May) and put them

together in a room, he did not confess. For his refusal

Hem Chandra had to suffer solitary confinement for a

month.183 Barindra K.Ghose: op.cit, P p 51-52

162

Although they retracted their confessions, their value

as evidence in the trial did not diminish much. As a

matther of fact the confessions, especially the one of

Barin was the corner-stone of the prosecution case

against the accused.

13. A Traitor Meets His End Narendra Nath Gossain was named by Barin as an

accomplice in a couple of cases184 and so he was

arrested and produced in in Birley’s court where he

made a short and perfunctory confession. Later on,

however, he, accusing Barin of breach of faith because

he was alleged to have implicated Naren in a few

incidents, made a long self-inculpatory statement

which gave a detailed account of the underground

organization and its activities as far as they were

known to him. Naren also implicated Aurobindo as the

leader of the group and two others namely Subodh Maulik

and Charu Datta.185. He became an approver and the

magistrate granted him pardon. A section of the Alipur

prisoners were determined to take revenge on the

traitor.

184 Barin jmplicated hin in an attempted train wrecking case near Mankundu and in the case of attempt on Tardivel’s life. 185 Mullik was detained under Regulation II of 1818 for about a year and Datta was interned in his home at Coochbehar for two years and then had to serve on half pay for sometime. Eventually his pay was restored.

163

Barin made a grandiose plan of jail break by smuggling

revolvers into the jail. A section of the jail staff

would be suborned and with their help the prisoners

would go out of the jail and eventually escape to

some West Asian countries beyond the zone of British

control. Aurobindo was not in favour of jail break; he

would prefer to face the trial. Undaunted, they

smuggled afew revolvers inside the jail. But it had to

be abandoned after the murder of Gossain when the jail

security was tightened making escape difficult.

Barin strongly disapproved of the plan of Naren[s

assassination, because such an action inside the jail

would involve all including Aurobindo as conspirator.

Barin remained adamant and would not permit killing of

Naren. He found consolation in the thought that

‘somebody or some group from outside would do this job

one day: we need not worry about it’186.Thereafter Barin

was by-passed and kept in the dark when the plan to

assassinate Naren Gossain was finalised. Satyendra Nath

Bose , Hem Chandra and Kanai Lal Datta were three

principal conspirators, though it was known to a few

trusted ones. Many were in favour of assassination

because Naren’s deposition in the Sessions court would

lead to more arrests and prosecutions.

Of the revolvers brought inside the jail over several

days, two were removed by Hem Chandra and given to186 Barindra Kumar Ghose; op.cit. P 87

164

Satyendra187 already in jail hospital. A few days later

in the evening of 30th August (1908) Kanai Lal Datta

pretended to be sick and got admitted to the hospital

where ha also got another revolver. Kanai and Satyendra

chalked out the plan for liquidation of Naren. Kanai

being strongrt of the two would take the heavier gun,188

Next morning at about 7 AM Narendra accompanied by

Higgins, one of the two European convict body guards,

came to the hospital to finalize the confessional

statements that Satyendra and Kanai had promised to

make before the magistrate. When Naren had arrived

accompanied by his bodyguard, they with revolvers in

hand attacked Naren who ran out of the dispensary.

Higgins intervened to save Naren, but he was shot

through his wrist by Kanai and was immobilized. In the

meantime, Naren rushed out, crossed the hospital

compound and ran towards the jail office through a

narrow lane. Kanai ran after Naren through the lane

firing at him. Satyendra also came behind Kanai and

when he saw Naren, he also started firing at him and in

187 Satyen Bose of the Midnapur society, was undergoing two years’ imprisonment for unauthorisedly using his brother’s firearm.. He was implicated in Alipur case and brought to Alipur jail.188 Terrorism in Bengal; Vol. I, P. 294, Tegart’s report on Chandernagore . Tegart has quoted the information given by one of the undertrials in Alipur case to the CID. The information was partly correct. The requisition of a rope ladder to scale the walls of the jail,, strong acid to be thrown on the guards etc. were exaggerations. The story about the preparation for murder of Naren Gossain was however, correct. This information was given to the CID after Naren was killed.

165

consequence one of his bullets grazed past the body of

Kanai. Another bodyguard of Naren named Linton, in a

bid to stop Satyendra, knocked him down but Satyendra

hit him on the head with the revolver butt. In the

meantime the jailor and other warders, staff and

prisoners came, but they were threatened by Kanai with

the revolver. When a bullet from Kanai’s revolver

shattered the backbone of Naren, he fell in the drain

by the side of the lane and within minutes, before the

arrival of Dr. Chaterton of the jail hospital he died.

Kanai and Satyen then surrendered their revolvers.

While Kanai said that he had done the deed as “he

(Naren) proved to be a traitor to the country”.

Satyendra refused to make any statement.189.

Captain Daly of the Indian Medical Service, who held

the postmortem examination, found two bullets inside

Naren’s body; but he found three more wounds which were

also suspected to have been caused by bullets. One

bullet entered the body on the left side, perforated

the lungs and almost came up to the skin of the right

chest. Another shattered the base of the spine and got

stuck in the waist bone. Incidentally, Kanai had also a

189 W.A. Marr, magistrate Alipur held judicial enquiry into the murder of Naren Gossain and committed the accused to the court of sessions. He started his enquiry at 7.55 AM on the same day and examined the witnesses. His report is to be seen in the Special Branch File No. 662/1908.Marr’s report was fully published in contemporary news papers as the incident created sensation in the country.

166

wound on his body, which Captain Daly had examined on

31 August, and opined that it was a bullet wound. As a

matter of fact when Satyen was chasing and firing

towards Naren, Kanai was ahead of him, and when Satyen

fired from behind Kanai, a bullet grazed past Kanai’s

body.

As noted above there were two revolvers—one big and

another small. According to the eyewitnesses, and also

according to his own admission, Kanai was carrying the

big one and Satyendra the small one190. Five bullets

from the big one and four from the small one were

fired, and according to Captain Daly all the wounds on

Naren’s body were caused by bullets fired from the big

revolver.

In the committal enquiry Kanai stated before W.A.Marr,

additional district magistrate, Alipur, “I wish to

state I did kill him. I do not wish to give any

statement as to why I killed him. No, I do not want to

give any reason. It was because he proved a traitor to

the country.” Satyen declined to make any statement.

The case was promptly committed to the court of

Sessions. The Alipur Jail Murder Trial, which was a

jury trial, commenced on 9 September, ten days after

the occurrence and went on for two days only. Kanai had

190 Hem Chandra has narrated how the issue as to who would use which revolver was sorted out. See P 199 of Banglaya Biplab Prachesta.

167

never retracted the statement. The five -member jury

found Kanai Lal guilty of murder, and the judge F.R.Row

forthwith sentenced Kanai to death. Satyen had declined

to make any statement. Evidence indicated that the

bullets fired from his revolver did not seem to have

caused any wound on the deceased’s body. So, about

Satyendra Nath the verdict of the jury was divided. Of

the five, three held him not guilty while other two had

objection to not guilty verdict. The judge, disagreeing

with the jury, pronounced Satyendra Nath guilty; but in

stead of awarding punishment sent the case to High

Court. Mr. Justice Sarafuddin and Mr. Justice Cox of

the High Court convicted Satyendra for conspiracy to

murder and sentenced him to death. Kanai Lal was hanged

on 10 November and Satyendra on 23 November, 1908. The

day before the hanging the fellow prisoners were

allowed to see Kanai in his condemned cell. Upendranath

Banerji found his face as peaceful as that of a saint,

‘without any trace of care or a shadow of despondency’.

The assassination made Gossain’s statement legally

unacceptable and to that extent it was a relief to the

accused persons. It also scuttled the prospect of

prosecution of some important persons implicated by

Gossain. F.C.Daly the then DIG of the Special Branch

wrote,” the assassination put an end to a supplementary

case which was under contemplation in which such

168

prominent persons as Abinash Chakrabarty, the Munsiff,

Charu Chandra Dutt of Bombay Civil Service and Subodh

Chandra Mallik of Calcutta would have been placed under

trial under section 121A IPC.” Even the on-going Bomb

case was also weakened from the point of view of the

prosecution as much of the evidence against Aurobindo

Ghose and others became invalid and infructuous.

All news papers especially the Anglo-Indian pro-

government papers widely covered the proceedings of the

Alipur Bomb Case as also of the Muzaffarpur case. The

long statement made by the approver in the court was

also reported. There was very little discussion and

still less criticism or condemnation of approver

Gossain in public or even in the nationalist circle.

Generally there was an indifference to the legal

proceedings as colonial justice system and its

periphery had been smeared with so much deceit,

prevarication and falsehood that things uttered in the

courts could hardly ever impress the public mind for

its truthfulness or integrity. A general apathy and

indifference which was common in respect of the

intricate process of law and law courts marked the

public attitude of indifference towards Naren’s

betrayal. Hem Chandra wrote with some truth that had

169

Naren Gossain been alive he would have certainly

retained his erstwhile social respectability.191

But the assassination made all the difference. It

brought to the fore the fact that something much worse

than mere breach of trust, which was a common

phenomenon in and around the colonial courts, was

committed by Naren. Kanai’s description of Naren as a

traitor to the country enlivened the public mind to

evaluate the deeds of Naren. Therefore the punishment

that was meted out to the traitor by the brave sons of

the country despite the protection provided by the

mighty British government was just and due to him.

Naren Gossain was forever condemned as a traitor to the

cause of freedom. The heroism and self-sacrifice of

Kanai and Satyendra, who gallantly rose to meet the

challenge of a difficult task, had shone brighter in

the backdrop of the dark deeds of treachery.

The government viewed with concern the spontaneous and

unprecedented expression of grief and patriotic

sentiment when his dead body after his execution on 10

November 1908, was being taken by his relatives for

cremation. F.C.Daly, the chief of the provincial

Special Branch described the procession in his ‘Notes’.

“An extraordinary scene was witnessed at Kalighat at

the time of the cremation of Kanai, whose body after191 Hem Chandra, Op.Cit P. 191

170

execution was made over to his relatives for disposal.

Crowds thronged the road, people pushed past one

another to touch the bier. The body was strewn with

flowers and anointed with oil. Many women, to all

appearances, of a highly respectable class, followed

the funeral procession wailing, while men and boys

thronged round shouting ‘Jai Kanai’. This Kanai Lal

Datta was a person of humble origin, a weaver by caste.

He was a native of Tantipara, Serampur in Hooghly

district and was perhaps one of the most daring and

cold-blooded of the whole gang. He gloried in the deed

and went to his execution without flinching. After the

cremation his ashes were being sold in Calcutta, and as

much as Rs 5/ an ounce are paid by some enthusiasts.”

The Times , London, reported on November, 1908 as

follows: “The thousands who pressed round the cortege,

gazed upon the features of the murdered Kanai, while

Purdah women followed in closeed carriages, hundreds of

rupees were collected round the burning ghat in order

to enrich the burning pyre, and there was a general

rush to gather portions of ashes, which were carried

away in vases of silver and gold while fragments of

bones were preserved as relics to be sent to other

towns.”192

192 Manoj Das: op.cit, p84

171

‘The Statesman’ and ‘The Empire’ gave a graphic picture of

the popular mood and editorially193 commented: ‘the

crowed paid homage to Kanai Lal on his last journey in

a frenzied manner and from their behaviour it might

appear to many that he was a great patriot. But they

were in fact very deliberately paying homage to one who

had committed a crime. It would be clear from the

behavior of the crowd that they were totally in support

of the terrorist activities of the extremists’194.

There was a craze for the photograph of Kanai Lal taken

before cremation. and the authorities banned the sale

of it and confiscated the copies of photograph left

with the shop. Satyendra was executed on 23 November,

and according to the police officer who took him to the

gallows, “He walked steadily to the gallows. He mounted

it bravely and bore it cheerfully. A brave lad.” But

the government, apprehensive of the frenzied public

expression of grief, did not allow the dead body to be

taken out of the jail campus for cremation. As a matter

of fact henceforth no dead body of the martyr all over

the country was handed over to the relatives for last

rites. The Times wrote, “Satyendra was hanged in the

morning (21st). A strong force of armed police is

guarding the precincts of the goal, and the cremation

193 The Statesman, dated 14 and 15 November, 1908194 Editorial comment in the Statesman dated 14 November, 1908.

172

of the body is now proceeding.”195 The Basumati gave the

news of a new form of protest against Satyendra’s

cremation inside the jail. “Late in the evening the

extremists made an extraordinary attempt to outflank

the Government’s order with regard to the cremation of

Satyendra, by constructing an effigy of the condemned

man which it had intended to carry to the river side in

procession to-morrow.The Joint Magistrate however,

immediately issued orders prohibiting the public to

participate in the procession.”196

The colonial government, extended its authority even on

a lifeless body which symbolized suffering in bondage

and supreme sacrifice for freedom. It became such a

strong and irresistible rallying point of all lovers of

country’s freedom, whether they subscribed to

terroristic methods or not, that the colonial

government could not but stop the popular demonstration

of love, anger and hatrd. After the experience of Kanai

Lal’s funeral procession, no where in India the

government relinquished its authority on the body of an

executed revolutionary and condescended to hand it over

to the relatives for funeral. The execution of

Kshudiram and Kanai Lal evoked hitherto unprecedented

public sympathy for the revolutionaries and in a way

195 Manoj Das. Op.cit. P 86196 Ibid.P. 86

173

such open demonstration of public support legitimized

their mode of struggle for freedom.

It was never disclosed as to how many revolvers were

smuggled in taking advantage of a slack and corrupt

jail administration. The report of the departmental

enquiry held by the Prison Authority was kept secret.

Intelligence reports indicate that apart from two

revolvers surrendered by Kanai and Satyen, three more

revolvers were found in course of the search.197.

F.C.Daly tried to make a virtue of the slack

administration by alleging that the prisoners misused

‘the great freedom’ given to them in jail. “The under

trial prisoners in this case were at first allowed all

the liberties to which undertrials could ever be

entitled. They mixed freely with one another in the

jail. A large number of visitors were permitted to

visit them, and from all accounts great freedom and

laxity allowed at the time of their visit.”198 Following

the assassination not so much the jail administration

was toned up, but a harsher jail discipline was

imposed. The inmates were not allowed to meet with each

other, The shackled prisoners were kept in solitary

cells and communication with each other was prohibited.

The visitors would be screened by the Commissioner of

197 Annotation by the Intelligence Branch,CID, Bengal to Account ofthe Revolutionary Movement in Bengal, P 65 Also see “The Statesman”, dated15 September, 1908198 F.C.Daly, Op. Cit. P 13

174

Police, Calcutta and DM, 24 Paraganas to whom they

should apply beforehand to obtain permission for

interview. The visitors would be thoroughly searched

and not more than four visitors would be allowed in a

day. No interview would last for more than five

minutes.

Barindra was incensed because the assassination was

planned and executed without his knowledge and consent

and it was an open defiance of his leadership; but he

was more worried because such actions inside the jail

would diminish his credibility with the CID

authorities. It rankled in his mind that his bete noir

Hem Chandra planned the operation and supplied the

revolvers without his knowledge On 1st September, the

day Naren Gossain was killed, he convened a formal

meeting in Ward No. 23 where he condemned Satyen for

planning the assassination and forced Hem Chandra to

appologise for the defiance and extracted a promise

that he would not do such things in future199. Barin,

however, changed his views about Satyen when he was

writing his Atmakahini, primarily because by that time

Satyen had been hailed by his countrymen as a brave

martyr. Among the prisoners, Naren’s death helped

Aurobindo most, as the approver’s statement contained

some crucial evidence against him.

199 Hem Chandra: op.cjt. P200-201

175

14. TRIAL AND CONVICTION

The isuue of defence in the trial created some

bitterness among the prisoners. The expenditure for

defence in the court of a few leaders Aurobindo,

Barindra, Upendra and Ullaskar was borne from the funds

made by public contribution while others had to bear

the cost of their own defence. The fund was subscribed

by members of the public in response to appeal made by

Smt Sarojini Ghose, sister of Aurobindo. Two innocent

brothers, namely Dhiren and Nagen Sengupta, had already

been sentenced to seven years imprisonment in Arms Act

case and were again facing trial in the Alipur case.

The leaders did not arrange for their defence though

they were responsible for their sad plight. A young

lawyer named Parameswar Lal, reading about them in

newspaper came from Allahabad to defend them.

Meek surrender to search and arrest, prompt judicial

confessions by the leaders, and above all,

discrimination in defence in the court of law sapped

the unity of the revolutionaries and their morale. They

started drifting apart from each other psychologically,

and thus they became easy targets of the Special Branch

people200. It came to such a pass that the number of

members giving information to the SB officerswent on

200 Hem Chandra has given a description how almost every day the intelligence officers used to visit the prisoners and even some leaders used to say that under the circumstances there was nothingwrong to give information to the intelligence people.

176

increasing. Protest by members like Hem Chandra led to

bitter quarrel. Both Upendra and Barindra have

corroborated that many members were giving information

to the SB. The question arose whether such behaviour

was tantamount to betrayal and breach of faith. Since a

good number of the prisoners had catered information of

various types, they were trying to find some moral

justification for their conduct201.

According to Hemchandra, “to resolve the conflict over

the issue the opinion of sage-like, impartial Aurobindo

Babu was sought”. Aurobindo opined that the sin of

giving information to the police would be atoned

adequately if after release the informer would do more

work for the country202! Hem Chandra can not be called a

cynic if he had thought that few after release would

burn their fingers once again by trying to serve the

country.203.

Barin carried the religious practices inside the jail,

dividing the prisoners into two groups – one devoted to

religious study and practice, and the other, the much

larger group, used to criticise them and make fun out

of them. Hem Chandra was of the view that the ”Fog of

Devotion’ (Bhaktitattwa Kujjhatika), had so confused their

201 At this time Special Branch could get the informationabout the presence of biblio-bomb in Kingsford’s library from Ullaskar Datta202 Ibid P 210203 Ibid, P. 211. Hem Chandra writes, “ A man with a tonsured head would not go under a bell tree once again.

177

thoughts and blurred their vision that they were unfit

for any useful work. He even composed songs and

limericks ridiculing religion204.

After a protracted trial in the Sessions court

Beachcroft delivered judgment on 6th May, 1909. When

the evidence part of the judgment was read out,

Beachcroft took the punishment part reading it rather

slowly, pronouncing each word clearly. Everyone was

holding the breath. Barin writes that after pronouncing

the punishment on Barin and Ullaskar, both of whom were

sentenced to death, “Beachcroft inquisitively stared at

us for a moment, expecting ,perhaps, that we would

faint on hearing the order. On the contrary, Ullaskar,

said to the judge, “Thank you very much.” I did not

say anything. So the judge proceeded to read out the

remaining part.205” From other accounts it is known that

Barin took the verdict calmly. After the judge finished

reading the judgment, Barin muttered, “Sejda has said I

will not be hanged.”

Upendra Nath was much upset when he heard the sentence.

“I realised that my mind was not made of the stuff, a

hero’s mind is made. Like a bewildered, helpless young

boy my mind lost all directions.”

204 Upendra Nath Bandopadhaya Op.Cit, P 61205 Barindra: Atmakahini, P106

178

Hem Chandra has not mentioned anything about his own

state of mind nor has he noted reactions of other

comrades. Barin has written, “The judge was very angry

with Hem-da as he did not confess.” Barin, in fact,

had expressed his own mind as he was disenchanted with

Hem Chandra having failed to make him confess. Upendra

recorded Hem’s optimism: “Hem Chandra commented (in

Hindi), “E bhi guzar jayega.”(Even this will pass.)206”

The judge convicted 19 out of 36 persons. Barindra and

Ullaskar were sentenced to death, Hem Chandra and

Upendra Nath along with eight others were sentenced to

transportation for life and seven to various terms of

imprisonment. Aurobindo along with 16 others was

acquitted. Aurobindo took his acquittal with stoic

indifference.

The hearing of appeal took more than six months, when

Barin and Ullaskar Datta were shut up in the condemned

cells day and night, with halters reound their necks.

The High Court commuted the death sentence on Barin and

Ullaskar to transportation for life. In appeal the

sentences of all were reduced except the sentence of

transportation for life of Upendra and Hem Chandra.

Chief Justice Lawrence Jenkings and Justice HWC

Carnduff207 differed on five appellants whom Jenkings

206 Upendra Nath: op.cit, P64207 He was not the judge who tried Kshudiram in Muzaffarpur. Recruited as an ICS officer,he served mostly in the judiciary.

179

wanted to acquit and Carnduff wanted to punish. So

those five cases were referred to Justice Harrington

who acquitted three, and upheld the conviction of two.

In the end out of a total of 36 persons put up for

trial, eventually 14 were convicted.

TRIAL COURT AND HIGH COURT

ORDERS

Sl.N

o.

Name

Sessions Court

order

High Court order

1. Barendra Kumar

Ghosh

Sentenced to

death

Transportation

for life2 Ullaskar Datta Sentenced to

death

Transportation

for life3 Hem Chandra

Kanungo

Transportation

for life

Transportation

for

life4 Upendra Nath

Banerji

Transportation

for life

Transportation

for life5 Bibhuti Bhusan

Sarkar

Transportation

for life

Transportation

for 10

years 6 Hrishikesh

Kanjilal

Transportation

for life

Transportation

for10 years7 Birendra

Chandra Sen

Transportation

for life

Transportation

for 7 years8 Sudhir Kumar Transportation Transportation

180

Sarkar for life for 10 years9 Indra Nath

Nandi

Transportation

for life

Acquitted

10 Abinash

Bhattacharya

Transportation

for life

Transportation

for 7 years11 Sailendra Nath

Bose

Transportation

for life

R.I for 5 years

12 Indu Bhusan Ray Transportation

for life

Transportation

for 10 years13 Paresh Chandra

Moulik

Transportation

for 10 years

RI for 7 years

14 Sishir kumar

Ghosh

Transportation

for 10 years

R.I.for 5 years

15 Nirapada Ray Transportation

for 10 years

R.I for 5

years16 Sushil Kumar

Sen

R.I. for 7

years

Acquitted

17 Hari Vishnu

Kane

RI for 7 years Acquitted

18 Ashoke Kumar

Nandi

R.I for 7

years

Acquitted

19 Krishna Jiban

Sanyal

R.I for 1 year Acquitted

181

In the cold early morning of 11th December 1909 seven

shivering prisoners208 dressed in “cloth which barely

reached their knees, and a half-sleeve kurta” on the

upper part of the body and “fetters on the leg and a

wooden ticket dangling from an iron ring round the

neck” marched out of the Alipur Jail like phantoms to

board a carriage to be driven to the harbour on way to

the Andamans. They were the first political prisoners

after the Wahabis to be transported to the island

prison, from where, it was a common belief not only

among the prisoners but even among the common people,

few would return alive. Such thoughts, however, did not

dampen their spirit in the excitement of being allowed

to stay together and talk freely during their voyage on

board the S.S.Maharaja. Hem Chandra and Ullaskar were

great singers and both were excellent story tellers

enlivening their narratives with humour and wit.”Grief

and sorrow” wrote Barin “could not in any way approach

the place where these two happened to be present. One

song followed another in a continuous stream”209 On 15th

December, 1909 the first batch of seven Alipur

prisoners reached the Cellular jail in the Andamans

followed by three more a few days later.

208 They were: Barindra Kumar Ghose,2. Ullaskar Datta,3.Hem ChandraKanungo, 4. Hrishi Kesh Kanjilal, 5. Indu Bhusan ray,6.Bibhuti Bhusan Sarkar, and 7. Abinash Chandra Bhattacharya. 209 Barindra Kumar Ghose: The Tale of My Exile. P11

182

The result of the Alipur Bomb Trial was disappointing

to the police and the administration as only 14 accused

out of 36 were convicted. It was felt by those in

charge of criminal justice administration that the

criminal law in force was much too liberal and on the

whole it was accused-friendly. Therefore the

administration persistently demanded that some strict

laws should be enacted to deal effectively with the

terrorists. In fact the Alipur Trial was the last big

trial of the revolutionary terrorists conducted in

accordance with the existing criminal law and Code of

Criminal Procedure. After that special laws and special

procedures have been applied in dealing with the cases

of terrorist violence.

The prosecution’s anxiety to get Aurobindo convicted

was so pronounced that Beachcroft was obliged to

comment that he was the main target. Eventually

Aurobindo was acquitted as the charges could not be

proved against him.The Government officials,

particularly those of the Police and the CID considered

the acquittal as miscarriage of justice, as “it is hard

to see how on the evidence laid before the Court the

Judge could have believed that Aurobindo had no guilty

knowledge of what was going on and it did not have his

tacit approval.”210

210 Daly: op.cit, Terrorism in Bengal, Vol.I P25

183

The government, therefore, was not reconciled to the

acquittal of Aurobindo. “The statement of the case was

prepared by the solicitor for an appeal against

acquittal” and was submitted to the Bombay Advocate

General for opinion, Only if the opinion was clearly

favourable will the Bengal Government propose an

appeal.”211 The activities of Aurobindo after acquittal

created some anxiety in the highest level of the

administration. While the Chief of the Intelligence

wrote “the article on Karmajoga shows, Aurobindo would

seek to convert Hinduism generally into a militant

creed,” the Home Secretary of the Government of India

felt “Aurobindo’s influence was even greater than it

was before he was arrested and it will probably

grow”212. The Viceroy concurred with these views. So

Aurobindo was not likely to remain free for long.

15. AUROBINDO’S ROLE IN VIOLENCEAmalesh Tripathi has criticised Aurobindo’s silence and

his equivocal attitude to the question of violence and

also suggests that the rhetoric of the defence counsel

was full of untruths and therefore on the issue of

innocence of Aurobindo such exhortations should not be

relied on by the historians. 211 Home Department NotesNos 230-248,Oct.1909, P.2212 Ibid. Note by Stevenson-Moore Director,of Criminal Intelligenceon23rd June,1909 and by H.A.Stuart, H.S. on 29th June. Viceroy agreed with H.S’s views.

184

Tripathi writes that Aurobindo was, ‘unconditionally

released’213, but actually, he was acquitted by the

Sessions Court after a prolonged trial in which the

charges against him could not be proved. It was not

‘the majority’ of the accused but ten out of thirty-

six, made confessions, not voluntarily214 but being

persuaded by Barin, their leader, to do so. Confessions

were the most damaging piece of evidence in the

trial,as evident from the judgments in the case, and

not “playing to the gallery”, as Tripathi suggests. In

any event members of a secret society have taken oath

to keep secret and not to disclose the internal matters

of the society to any one, including the police and

the magistrate. Barin also claimed 15 years later in

his memoirs, that confession was a ploy “to inform the

people of our military preparations.” But in truth

confessions had disastrous effects Hem Chandra,

however, thought, not incorrectly as evident from

Barin’s subsequent conduct, that Barin’s confession was

motivated by the ‘hope of reprieve’ (obyahotir asha)215.

Among the important leaders Aurobindo and Hem Chandra

did not make any confession and ‘remained

charactertically silent’. Their silence during

213 Amalesh Tripathi: The Extremist Challenge, P134214 Out of ten, four retracted the confession by saying that they were induced by the police to make confession, while Barindra, Upendra and four others did not retract. See trial records.215 Hem Chandra: op.cit.P 180, also see Chapter II

185

investigation and trial was resented by the prosecution

and and has now been adversely commented upon by

Tripathi whose views have later on been endorsed by

Peter Heehs216. In this connection it may be noted that

the right to remain silent, when charged with an

offence, is a right given to the accused in British

jurisprudence and so Aurobindo, Hem Chandra and others

were within their rights to remain silent. From

Pondicherry in later years, however, Aurobindo made

discloser of his connection with the secret society.

Amales Tripathi has accused Aurobindo of “equivocal

attitude, his silences more than his speeches which are

intriguing.217” Then he asks a barrage of questions such

as “Did he or did he not know what was brewing on in

the Maniktala Garden? Did he or did he not order

Kshudiram Bose and Prafulla Chaki to assassinate

Kingsford? What was his role vis-a-vis Barin and the

Yugantar group he led?” Tripathi further writes, “Barin

had valiantly tried to exculpate Aurobindo and take all

the blame on himself but others in his group, Hem

Chandra Kanungo and Upendra Nath Banerjee, for example,

regarded Aurobindo as their real leader though he acted

from behind the scene and signed all orders as Kali.”

Tripathi has still more arguments like publication of

216 P.Heehs: Nationalism, Terrorism, Communalism, P43. “So far as Ican tellonly one writer has been as struck as I have by the complexities of Aurobindo’s revolutionary connections.”217 Ibid, PP.134-135

186

incendiary articles in the Jugantar and Bande Mataram to

underscore Aurobindo’s support for and encouragement to

violence. He quotes from “On Himself” to say that “long

afterwards Aurobindo admits that he had been intimately

connected with organising revolutionary activities as a

preparation for open revolt in case passive resistance

proved insufficient for the purpose.” Such an admission

“long afterwards” is considered as insufficient answer

to the questions raised above.

Aurobindo “never wrote any comprehensive or systematic

account of his life”, though he was “quite emphatic in

stating that only he could write truly about himself”218

On several occasions he corrected some misconceptions

about his political ideas and misleading statement

about events of his life. “All this material has been

compiled and presented in a systematic manner in a

book entitled “On Himself” (1972). Another compilations

entitled “Autobiographical Notes and Other Writings of

Historical Interest” (2006), consists of corrected

statements made by biographers and writers and personal

letters written before 1927 and letters on personal and

world events219. Such refutations are often in third

person. In refuting a statement that “Sri Aurobindo

did not believe in, nor did he like, violent

218 “Note” On Himself,Pondicherry, 1972219 See Publisher’s Note in” Sri Aurobindo: Autobiographical Notes”.

187

revolution,” it has been stated that, “If he

(Aurobindo) had not believed in the efficacy of violent

revolution or had disliked it, he would not have joined

the secret society whose purpose was to prepare for a

national insurrection”. It is also stated that he had

“studied with interest rebellions and revolutions and

national liberation struggles” from which he developed

a faith in violent movements in India’s liberation from

bondage. In logically developing the “Doctrine of

Passive Resistance” he gave unambiguous reference to

violence in freedom struggle. “The new politics is a

serious doctrine and not like the old a thing of shows

and political theatricals; it demands real suffering

from its adherents ---imprisonment,worldly ruin, death

itself, before it can allow him to assume the rank of a

martyr for his country.220” The method of struggle that

a subject nation would opt for “is best determined by

the circumstances of its servitude. We would not for a

moment be understood to base this conclusion upon any

condemnation of other methods as in all circumstances

criminal and unjustifiable.” Even the manuscript

article entitled “The Morality of Boycott,” seized from

Aurobindo’s residence and produced as evidence,

Aurobindo wrote, “Amother question is the use of

violence in the furtherance of boycott. This is, in our

view, was purely a matter of policy and expediency. An220 Bande Mataram, The Doctrine of Passive Resistance, P.116

188

act of violence brings us into conflict and may be

inexpedient for a race circumstanced like ours. But the

moral question does not arise.”221

In refuting the claim that Aurobindo did not believe

in, nor did he like violent revolution, it has been

stated that in Bengal he “maintained a secret

revolutionary activity as a preparation for an open

revolt, in case passive resistance proved

insufficient.”222 In 1940 in an article it was suggested

that “he was the forerunner of the gospel of Ahinsha”

It was contradicted by saying that “This is quite

incorrect. Sri Aurobindo is neither an impotent

moralist nor a weak pacifist.”It was further asserted

that, “he had always believed that a nation is entitled

to attain its freedom by violence. Use of violence

would depend on what is the best policy and not on

ethical consideration”.223

Aurobindo’s “association secret society started at

Baroda when he had taken the oath of the society and

met the members of the Council in Bombay” From Western

India he “he took up on his own responsibility the task

of generalising support for it in Bengal. “ Aurobindo’s

role in the growth of the secret society has been

discussed above. “He took advantage of the Swadeshi

221 Sri Aurobindo: Bande Mataram, Pp 126-127222 Sri Aurobindo : On Himself, P.17223 Ibid; P22

189

movement to popularise the idea of violent revolt in

the future.”

Aurobindo rightly says that”the Secret Society did not

include terrorism in its programm, but this element

grew up in Bengal as a result of the strong repression

and the reaction to it in the province.”224 This is in

fact borne out by other sources too. The repression and

highhandedness in Barisal in April 1906 provoke the

society to assassinate l Bamfylde Fuller, although it

had been decided earlier in February that the society

would undertake ‘actions’ in revenge. Similarly

Kingsford was targeted for repressive prosecution of

newspapers like Sandha, Yugantar, Bande Mataram and

flogging of Sushil Sen. Aurobindo had not absolved

himself of the responsibility of ordering revengeful

actions by members of the secret society although on

many occasions he did not personally know the

participants. In a conversation in 1934 he said, “I

have done politics and the most violent kind of

politics, ghoram karma, and I have supported war and

sent men to it, even though politics is not always or

often a very clean occupation nor can war be called a

spiritual line of action.”225

224 Sri Aurobindo: On Himself, P. 24.225 Ibid, P129.

190

Regarding Aurobindo’s connection with the Manicktala

Society of which he was generally known as Badakarta, it

is stated that after “the partition of Bengal and a

general outburst of revolt which favoured the rise of

the extremist party or the great Nationalist

movement,”Aurobindo’s activities “turned more and more

in this direction” and “secret section became a

secondary and subordinate element.226” In fact he was so

indifferent to the secret society that during one year

of its existence in the Garden Aurobindo did not find

time to visit the society even for once, and in

September,1907 when the Societ was staunchly

ensconsened in the Garden , Aurobindo was trying to

sell it to pay off his father’s debt227. In a talk with

his disciples in 1940 Aurobindo stated about his

connection with the members of the Manicktala society.

“I had nothing to do with them. It was all Barin’s

work. It is true that Barin used to consult me or

Mullik for any advice. But the whole movement was in

his hand. I had no time for it. I was more busy with

Congress politics and Bande Mataram. My part has been

most undramatic”228. These unambiguous statements should

not sound equivocal. In Aurobindo’s anti-colonial

226 Ibid, P.24227 Statement of B.B.Bose, PW 88 in Alipur Bomb Trial.228 Nirod Baran (ed) Talks with Sri Aurobindo, Vol.II&III, P256-8; quoted by Peter Heehs in his Nationalism, Terrorism, Communalism, P46

191

revolutionary struggle, violence is not to be judged by

the conventional standard of morality and ethics, but

by the “condition of servitude of the subject nation”.

Violence in the anti-colonial struggle is, therefore,

not criminal and immoral. According to Aurobindo the

dehumanising effect of colonialism, and severly

oppressive nature of the “bureaucratic administration”

of the British have made the old standard of judging

violence and violent actions by the subject people

irrelevant. Aurobindo has, in fact, created a new

ethical and moral standard for violence which is

derived from the secular perception of objective

reality in a colonial country and in no way fron the

Bhagvat Gita or the Vedants as Tripathi would make us

believe.

Regarding leadership of the society in the Garden

Tripathi has stated that Barindra had taken all the

blame upon him and “valiantly exculpated” his brother

in his confession. True he did not nake Aurobindo in

the confession, but he provided so many clues and

iimplicated many others including Naren Gossain who

exposed the secret society and Aurobindo too.

Confession was not an act of valour but an act of

treachery. Barindra and Upendra were silent about

Aurobindo’s role in their confessional statements made

in 1908; but in 1913, they told Charles Tegart in

192

confidence in the Andamans that they had acted under

the orders of Aurobindo. With regard to the bomb attack

on Viceroy Hardinge, (23rd Dec.1912) Barin said, “This

appears to be the work of some old hands, with some of

the old leaders behind it, possibly Aurobindo, who is

not likely to forget his old ideas.229” Upendranath also

said “So far as Bengal is concerned Mr Aurobindo Ghose

is the leader.” On their release from the Andaman Jail

when both of them published their memoirs almost

simultaneously in 1922230, once again they remained

silent on Aurobondo’s role.They, in fact, spoke in two

voices: one to the public and other in confidence to

the police and the CID. Hem Chandra, however,

categorically mentioned in his memoirs231 published in

1928 that Aurobindo was the Karta. This revealation at

that time was of historical importance. In the trial,

however, the prosecution failed to establish any

connection of Aurobindo with the secret society in the

Garden.

Yet Aurobindo knew broadly as to what was going on in

the Garden. He was party to the decision of

assassinating oppressive officials including Kingsford.229 Notes on Andamans Enquiry, by Charles Tegart (August,1913, WestBengal State Archives, No.8230 Baribdra Kumar Ghose: Barindrer Atmakahini (1923) is more an alibi for his impulsive activities and wrong deeds and Upendra Nath’s Nirbashiter Atmakatha (19234) is a belle letter than a dependable account of his period. For a critical assessment of the memoirs see Chapter II.231 Hem Chandra : Banglaya Biplab Prachesta, P.167.

193

But the prosecution failed prove that in the court of

law. Aurobindo, like all underground revolutionary

leaders, did act behind the scene, but, as alleged by

Tripathi, he never issued any written order, signed or

unsigned, to the members of the Samiti. Much later from

1912 onwards he, however, signed his letters on mostly

spiritual matters from Pondichery to Motilal Ray of

Chandernagore as Kali. Evidently, Tripathy has mixed up

facts with fiction.

He also sounds a word of caution to the historians and

asks them not to accept “the plea of defence counsel

who was trying to save a hero from the gallows.” The

exhortations of the lawyers, both of prosecution and of

defence, are not very dependable materials for writing

history. But the fact of the matter is the lawyers wax

their eloquence on the evidence produced before the

court. Aurobindo’s acquittal was due to the non-

convincing nature of the evidence adduced by the

prosecution and C.R. Das, became somewhat rhetorical

pitching his main arguments on the infirmity of the

prosecution case. He said, “Do not impute me the crimes

that I am not guilty of; deeds against which my whole

nature revolts, and which, having regard to my mental

capacity are something which could never have been

perpetrated by me.”232 Das concluded making an appeal to232 Bijay Krishna Bose: Alipur Bomb Trial, 1908-1910,

194

the much advertised ideals of impartiality and fairness

of British justice and British judges. “I appeal to you

all that is noble of all the thousand principles of law

which have emanated from the English Bench and I appeal

to you in the name of the British judges who have

administered the law in such a manner as to compel not

only obedience but the respect of all those in whose

cases they have administered the law.” Rhetoric apart,

Das had very studiously pointed out the procedural

lapses at every stage of the trial and raised serious

doubts in the mind of the judge about the methods of

investigation and the reliability of the evidence on

record.

Peter Heehs, too, has been “struck by the complexity

of Aurobindo’s revolutionary connections” though from

Aurobindo’s subsequent statements, 233 have been quoted

by him to prove that Aurobindo had endorsed violence

and terrorism as a mode of anti-colonial struggle.

Heehs has, however, tried to join forces with

Aurobindo’s Prosecutors. He

believes that the trial court had wrongly rejected two

documents written by

Aurobindo as doubtful. The so called “sweetletter,”234

seized from the residence

233 Peter Heehs, op.cit Pp 44-49234 The letter was Ex. No. 295 in the Alipur Bomb Trial.

195

of Aurobindo atGrey Street on 2ndMay,1908. was not

accepted as it wa

suspected as forgery.

The prosecution interpreted the letter as preparation

for making bombs for an

uprising in all the provinces of India. But the judge

did not believe in the interpretation of the content

because of some evident inconsistencies235and suspected

the letter as an act of forgery because a former

forger236 helped the police in the investigation of the

case. Barin, according to Eardly Norton, “had asked his

lawyer, R.C.Banerjee not to deny his writing or

signature of the ‘sweet’ letter”237 thereby making it

clear that the letter was a genuine one. Heehs quotes

Barin’s verbal communication in 1940238 to prove the

same point. But even the acceptance of the letter by

the court as genuine would have left considerable gap

in the evidence to prove Aurobindo’s culpability in

revolutionary conspiracy.

With regard to the scribbling, ‘a small charge of the

staff”,Heehs affirms that ‘as editor of Aurobindo’s235 Barin used to address Aurobindo as sejda. Writing a letter while living at the same place was redundant. It is intriguing as to whyBarin should signed his full name. Bombs are often referred to as rasagollas and not as sweets.236 Sarat Chandra Das was the forger and was recruited by the police for watch and surveillance duties. He denies being a forger, but judge said he would have no difficulty in getting hold of one.237 Bijoy K.Bose: Op.cit, p.iv238 Barin’s statement to G.Raychoudhury in 1940.

196

writings for more than twenty years, he could state

with confidence that the scribbling were in Aurobindo’s

hand.239 But Beachcroft had good reason to disbelieve

the prosecution. Satish Chandra Mukherjee, who was

Superintendent of Bengal National College of which

Aurobindo was the Principal, had said on oath that the

scribblings were not Aurobindo’s handwriting240, and

Satish Mukherjee had opportunity of seeing many more

samples of contemporary hand writing of Aurobindo than

Heehs probably have had241. In the face of his evidence,

Heehs’ claim is not acceptable. It is, however,

enigmatic as to why the Prosecution did not seek expert

opinion on Aurobindo’s hand writing as the office of

the Examiner of Questioned Documents has been

functioning in Calcutta since 1903. The benefit of

doubt for not taking expert opinion in this case goes,

as such benefits always go, in favour of the defence.

But the important question is why should Aurobindo or

for that matter anyone who had ‘waged a war against

239 Heehs, Peter; op.cit, P52240 Deposition of PW 122. See court records of Alipur Bomb Trial.The scribbling were Ex. 302/3: Ex. 302/4: The PW about

handwritings on both the documents stated , I don’t think it is

his”.

241 Peter Heehs joined Arabindo Ashram at Pondichery in 1970

197

the Kimg-Emperor,’ admit his activities to the agencies

of the state or in public, till their objectives were

achieved? As a member of a secret revolutionary

society he was bound by the oath of secrecy and as a

founder-leader of the secret society, he had

administered oath to many of his followers. Not to

divulge secrets of the society and its activities under

grave threats and inducement is the hallmark of

integrity and courage of a revolutionary. Aurobindo

remained true to the oath by not making a confession

before the magistrate unlike his brother Barin and a

few others. Nevertheless, Aurobindo made careful

disclosure of his role in the revolutionary movement in

course of correcting observations of others about him,

at a time when such disclosure was not expected to

bring harm either to the organisation or to the former

members.

198