INA trials

The INA trials or the Red Fort Trials refer to the courts martial of a number of officers of the Indian National Army between November 1945 and May 1946 variously for treason, torture, murder and abetment to murder.The first, and most famous, of the approximately ten trials was held in the Red Fort in Delhi, hence deriving the name.In total, approximately ten courts-martial were held. The first of these, and the most celebrated one, was the joint court-martial of Colonel Prem Sahgal, Colonel Gurubaksh Singh Dhillon and Major General Shah Nawaz Khan. The three had been officers in the British Indian Army and taken PoW in Malaya or Singapore. They had, like a large number of other troops and officers of the British Indian Army, joined the Indian National Army and later fought in Imphal and Burma alongside the Japanese forces in allegiance to Azad Hind. These three came to be the only defendants in the INA trials who were charged of "Waging War against the King Emperor" (The Indian Army act of 1911 did not have a separate charge for treason) as well as Murder and abetment of Murder. Those charged later only faced trial for torture and murder or abetment of murder.The trials covered arguments based on Military Law, Constitutional Law, International Law, and Politics. These trials attracted much publicity, and public sympathy for the defendants who were perceived as patriots in India, and outcry over the grounds of the trial, as well as general emerging unease and unrest within the troops of the Raj ultimately forced the then Army Chief Claude Auchinleck to commute the sentences of the three defendants in the first trial.

Indian National Army

Japan, as well as South East Asia was a major refuge for Indian nationalists living in exile before the start of World War II who formed strong proponents of militant nationalism and also influenced Japanese policy significantly. Although Japanese intentions and policies with regards to India were far from concrete at the start of the war, Japan had sent intelligence missions, notably under Major I Fujiwara, into South Asia even before the start of the World War II to garner support from the Malayan Sultans, the Burmese resistance and the Indian movement. These missions were successful establishing contacts with Indian nationalists in exile in Thailand and Malaya, supporting the establishment and organisation of the Indian Independence League.

At the outbreak of World War II in South East Asia, 70,000 Indian troops were stationed in Malaya. After the start of the war, Japan's spectacular Malayan Campaign had brought under her control considerable of Indian Prisoners of War, notably nearly 55,000 after the Fall of Singapore. The conditions of service within the British Indian Army as well as the conditions in Malaya had fed dissension among these troops. From these troops, the First Indian National Army was formed under Mohan Singh Deb and received considerable Japanese aid and support. It was formally proclaimed in September 1942 and declared the subordinate military wing of the Indian Independence League in June that year. The unit was dissolved in December 1942 after apprehensions of Japanese motives with regards to the INA led to disagreements and distrust between Mohan Singh and INA leadership on one hand, and the leagues leadership, most notable Rash Behari Bose. The arrival of Subhas Bose in June 1943 saw the revival and reorganisation of the unit as the army of The Azad Hind govt that was formed in October 1943 Within days of its proclamation in October 1943, the Government had been accorded recognition by Germany, Fascist Italy, Croatia, Thailand, Ba Maw's Burmese government, and some other Axis-allied nations, as well as receiving felicitations and gifts from the government of neutral Ireland and Irish republicans. The Azad Hind government declared war on Britain and America in October 1943. In the early part of 1944, INA forces were in action along with the Japanese forces in Imphal and Kohima area against commonwealth forces, and later fell back with the retreating Japanese forces after the failed campaign. In early 1945, the INA's troops were committed against the successful Allied Burma Campaign. A vast number of INA troops were captured, defected or fell otherwise into British hands during the Burma campaign by end of March that year and by the time Rangoon fell in May 1945, the INA had more or less ceased to exist although some activities continued till Singapore was recaptured.

At the conclusion of the Second World War, the government of British India brought some of the captured INA soldiers to trial on treason charges. The prisoners would potentially face the death penalty, life imprisonment or a fine as punishment if found guilty.

Early Trials

By 1943 and 1944, Court martial were taking place in India of former personnels of the British Indian Army who were captured fighting in INA ranks or working in support of the INA's subversive activities. These did not receive any publicity or political sympathies and support till much later. These charges in these earlier trials were of "Committing a civil offence contrary to the Section 41 of the Indian Army Act,1911 or the Section 41 of the Burma Army Act" with the offence specified as "Waging War against the King" contrary to the Section 121 of the Indian Penal Code and the Burma Penal Code as relevant. [Stephen P. Cohen "Subhas Chandra Bose and the Indian National Army" "Pacific Affairs" Vol. 36, No. 4 (Winter, 1963) pp 411-429 ]

Red Fort trial

However, the number of INA troops captured by Commonwealth forces by the end of the Burma Campaign made it necessary to take a selective policy to charge those accused of the worst allegations. The first of these was the joint trial of Shah Nawaz Khan, Prem Sahgal and Gurubaksh Singh Dhillon, followed by the trials of Abdul Rashid, Shinghara Singh, and Fateh Khan. The decision was made to hold a public trial, as opposed to the earlier trials, and given the political importance and significance of the trials, the decision was made to hold these at the Red Fort. Also, due to the complexity of the case, the provision was made under the Indian Army Act rule 82(a) for counsels to appear for defence and prosecution. The then Advocate General of India, Sir Naushirwan P Engineer was appointed the counsel for Prosecution. The accused were offered the help of both the INA Defence Committee formed by the Indian National Congress and, for the Muslims amongst the accuse, the Defence committee formed by the Muslim League.

INA Defence committee

The Indian National Congress and the Muslim League both made the release of the three defendants an important political issue during the agitation for independence of 1945-6.

The first trial

The first trial was held between November and December 1945. The charges against the three accused were:

Against Gurubaksh Singh Dhillon
* Waging War against the King contrary to the section 121 of the Indian Penal Code.
* Four charges of murder contrary to the Section 302 of the Indian Penal code.

Against Prem Sahgal
* Waging War against the King contrary to the section 121 of the Indian Penal Code.
* Four charges of Abetment of murder in the charges brought against Gurubaksh Singh Dhillon contrary to Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code.

Against Shah Nawaz
* Waging War against the King contrary to the section 121 of the Indian Penal Code.
* One charge of Abetment of murder in the charges brought against Gurubaksh Singh Dhillon contrary to Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code.

The charge of Waging War consisted of planning, organisation and participation in military operations between September 1942 and April 1945.

The murder and abetment charges concerned the shooting of INA members for desertion and attempting to communicate with the enemy in the Popa Hill area of Burma contrary to Section 35 of the INA act.Evidence presented in support of the Prosecution included:

econd trial

These were the trials of Abdul Rashid, Shinghara Singh, and Fateh Khan. In light of unrest over the charges of treason and glorification in the first trial, the charges of treason was dropped. The site of trial was also moved from the Red forst to an adjoining building

Trial of Burhan ud Din

Later trials

Consequences of the trials

Beyond the concurrent campaigns of noncooperation and nonviolent protest, this spread to include mutinies and wavering support within the British Indian Army. This movement marked the last major campaign in which the forces of the Congress and the Muslim League aligned together; the Congress tricolor and the green flag of the League were flown together at protests. In spite of this aggressive and widespread opposition, the court martial was carried out, and all three defendants were sentenced to deportation for life. This sentence, however, was never carried out, as the immense public pressure of the demonstrations forced Claude Auchinleck, Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Army, to release all three defendants.

During the trial, mutiny broke out in the Royal Indian Navy, incorporating ships and shore establishments of the RIN throughout India, from Karachi to Bombay and from Vizag to Calcutta. The most significant, if disconcerting factor for the Raj, was the significant militant public support that it received. At some places, NCOs in the British Indian Army started ignoring orders from British superiors. In Madras and Pune, the British garrisons had to face revolts within the ranks of the British Indian Army.

Another Army mutiny took place at Jabalpur during the last week of February 1946, soon after the Navy mutiny at Bombay. This was suppressed by force, including the use of the bayonet by British troops. It lasted about two weeks. After the mutiny, about 45 persons were tried by court martial. 41 were sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment or dismissal. In addition, a large number were discharged on administrative grounds. While the participants of the Naval Mutiny were given the freedom fighters' pension, the Jabalpur mutineers got nothing. They even lost their service pension.

Reflecting on the factors that guided the British decision to relinquish the Raj in India, Clement Attlee, the then British prime minister, cited several reasons, the most important of which were the INA activities of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, which weakened the Indian Army - the foundation of the British Empire in India- and the RIN Mutiny that made the British realise that the Indian armed forces could no longer be trusted to prop up the "Raj". [Dhanjaya Bhat, [http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060212/spectrum/main2.htm. "Which phase of our freedom struggle won for us Independence?"] "The Tribune", Sunday February 12, 2006. Spectrum Suppl. URL accessed on 17 July 2006 ] .Although Britain had made, at the time of the Cripps' mission in 1942, a commitment [ Judith Brown "Modern India. The making of an Asian Democracy" (Oxford University Press) 1999 (2nd Edition) pp328-330 ] to grant dominion status [James L. "Raj; Making and unmaking of British India. Abacus. 1997. p. 557"] to India after the war this suggests that, contrary to the usual narrative of India's independence struggle, (which generally focuses on Congress and Mahatma Gandhi), the INA and the revolts, mutinies, and public resentment it germinated were an important factor in the complete withdrawal of the Raj from India.

Most of the INA. soldiers were set free after cashiering and forfeiture of pay and allowance. [Nirad C. Chaudhuri "Subhas Chandra Bose-His Legacy and Legend" "Pacific Affairs" Vol. 26, No. 4 (December 1953), pp. 349-350 ] On the recommendation of Lord Mountbatten, and agreed by Nehru, as a precondition for Independence the INA soldiers were not reinducted into the Indian Army.

Whether as a measure of the pain that the allies suffered in Imphal and Burma or as an act of vengeance, Lord Mountbatten, Head of Southeast Asia Command, ordered the INA Memorial to its fallen soldiers destroyed when the Singapore was recaptured in 1945. [ [http://www.s1942.org.sg/indian_national_army/memorial.htm Historical Journey of the Indian National Army. INA war Memorial in Singapore. National Archive of Singapopre] URL accessed on 20 August 2006] It has been suggested later that Mountbatten's actions may have been to erase completely the records of INA's existence, to prevent the seeds of the idea of a revolutionary socialist liberation force from spreading into the vestiges of its colonies amidst the spectre of cold-war politics already taking shape at the time, and had haunted the Colonial powers before the war. [ Lebra, Joyce C., "Jungle Alliance: Japan and the Indian National Army", Singapore, Asia Pacific Library] [Borra R. Subhash Chandra Bose. "Journal of Historical Review", 3, no. 4 (Winter 1982), pp. 407-439] In 1995, the National Heritage Board of Singapore marked the place as a historical site. A Cenotaph has since been erected at the site where the memorial stood.

After the war ended, the story of the INA and the Free India Legion was seen as so inflammatory that, fearing mass revolts and uprisings—not just in India, but across its empire—the British Government forbid the BBC from broadcasting their story. [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3684288.stm Hitler's Secret Indian Army Last Section: Mutinies] URL accessed on 8 August 2006] . However, the stories of the trials at the Red Fort filtered through. Newspapers reported at the time of the trials that some of the INA soldiers held at Red Fort had been executed, [ [http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/Netaji/images/nov_2_45.gifMany I.N.A. men already executed, Lucknow ] . "The Hindustan Times", November 2, 1945. URL accessed 11 August 2006] which only succeeded in causing further protests.

ee also

* Indian National Army
* INA Defence Committee, the legal defence team for the INA formed by the Indian National Congress in 1945.
* Maj Shah Nawaz Khan, Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon and Col. Prem Kumar Sahgal, defendants in the first INA trial.
* Captain Lakshmi Sahgal, who commanded the Rani of Jhansi Regiment, and was also the minister in Charge of Women's affairs in the Azad Hind Govt.
* Indian National Congress

References

* [http://www.bl.uk/collections/independenceww7.html Letter from members of the Indian National Army Defence Committee to the Viceroy, 15 Oct 1945.]