Savarkar remark: Did hon'able Apex Court justices seek to rewrite history of Indian freedom struggle?
According to press reports, a Supreme Court bench consisting of Justice Dipankar Datta (set to retire in February 2030) and Justice Manmohan (to retire in 2027) temporarily paused legal proceedings against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi initiated by a Lucknow court concerning his defamatory remarks about Vinayak Damodar Savarkar (1883–1966) on April 25, 2025. Rahul was charged with offences under Section 153A (promoting enmity) and Section 505 (public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). While granting the stay, the bench noted that Rahul had a “good point in law” which entitled him to an order staying the summons.
However, the bench issued a strong oral warning to Rahul against making such statements again. The Justices cautioned Gandhi that the court might initiate action suo motu—meaning on its own initiative—if similar remarks were repeated. Justice Datta was reported to have stated: “This is not the way to treat our freedom fighters. They have given us freedom.” The Lucknow defamation case was filed after Gandhi’s remarks during the Bharat Jodo Yatra on November 17, 2022, in which he alleged that Savarkar collaborated with the British and received a pension. Rahul approached the Supreme Court after the Allahabad High Court refused to cancel the summons. During the hearings, the Supreme Court bench asked Rahul’s lawyers, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Prasanna S., “Does he [Rahul] know his grandmother also sent a letter to the freedom fighter praising him?” adding, “You cannot make such statements without knowing history…”
‘Supreme Court Stays Summons Against Rahul Gandhi Over Savarkar Remarks’, The Wire, April 25, 2025.
According to another press report, Justice Dipankar Datta, admonishing Rahul, stated that “His statements would prompt others to make similar remarks against other freedom fighters,” while reminding the court that in Maharashtra, Savarkar was “worshipped as God.” Justice Datta asked Rahul’s lawyers whether their client knew that “even Mahatma Gandhi used ‘your faithful servant’ while addressing the Viceroy… Tomorrow, somebody can say Mahatma Gandhi was a servant of the British… You are encouraging these sorts of statements.”
The apex court issued a notice to the State of Uttar Pradesh and the complainant, Nripendra Pandey, a resident of Lucknow. It listed the case for hearing after eight weeks.
Krishnadas Rajagopal, ‘Remarks on Savarkar: Supreme Court stays summons to Rahul Gandhi in defamation case’, The Hindu, April 25, 2025.
Let us compare the claims of these Honourable Justices—that Savarkar (the only ‘Veer’ or “brave” in the Hindutva pantheon of great freedom fighters) was a great freedom fighter who gave us independence—with contemporary documents available in the Hindu Mahasabha and RSS archives.
Savarkar’s Hatred for the Tricolour
Savarkar abhorred every symbol of the Indian people’s united struggle against British rule. He refused to accept the Tricolour (which then featured a charkha or spinning wheel) as the national flag or as a symbol of the freedom struggle. In a statement issued on September 22, 1941, for the benefit of Hindu Mahasabha cadres, he declared:
> “So far as the flag question is concerned, the Hindus know no flag representing Hindudom as a whole other than the ‘Kundalini Kripanankit’ Mahasabha flag with the ‘Om and the Swastik’—the most ancient symbols of the Hindu race and polity coming down from age to age and honoured throughout Hindusthan… It flies aloft on every Hindusabha branch office at thousands of centres. Therefore, any place or function where this Pan-Hindu flag is not honoured should be boycotted by Hindu sanghatanists… The Charkha-Flag in particular may very well represent a Khadi-Bhandar, but the Charkha can never symbolize and represent the spirit of the proud and ancient nation like the Hindus.”
[Bhide, A.S. (ed.), Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s Whirlwind Propaganda, Bombay, 1940, pp. 470–73]
Savarkar Preceded Jinnah in Propounding the Two-Nation Theory
While the Muslim League under M.A. Jinnah demanded Pakistan in March 1940, Savarkar had already laid down the two-nation theory. Assuming leadership of the Hindu Mahasabha in 1937, he declared at its 19th session in Ahmedabad:
> “As it is, there are two antagonistic nations living side by side in India. Several infantile politicians commit the serious mistake of supposing that India is already welded into a harmonious nation… India cannot be assumed today to be a unitarian and homogenous nation. On the contrary, there are two nations in the main: the Hindus and the Moslems.”
[Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya: Hindu Rashtra Darshan, vol. 6, Hindu Mahasabha, Pune, 1963, p. 296]
Savarkar Supported the British During the Quit India Movement
The Quit India Movement began on August 9, 1942, with Gandhi's call to ‘Do or Die’ to expel the British. The British swiftly responded with mass arrests—including the entire Congress leadership—and violent suppression. It is less known that Savarkar’s Hindu Mahasabha offered full support to the British rulers. At its 24th session in Kanpur in 1942, Savarkar outlined HM’s strategy:
> “The Hindu Mahasabha holds that the leading principle of all practical politics is the policy of Responsive Cooperation [with the British]… This covers the whole gamut of patriotic activities from unconditional co-operation right up to active and even armed resistance…”
[Hindu Rashtra Darshan, vol. 6, Poona, 1963, p. 112]
Savarkar’s Hindu Mahasabha Formed Coalition Governments with the Muslim League
The Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League collaborated in Bengal and Sind during the Quit India Movement. Defending this alliance, Savarkar said:
> “…in Sind, the Sind-Hindu-Sabha had taken the responsibility of joining hands with the League… The case of Bengal is well known… under the premiership of Mr. Fazlul Huq and the leadership of Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerji, the Coalition Government functioned successfully…”
[Hindu Rashtra Darshan, pp. 479–80]
Note: Mookerji was deputy premier and oversaw the suppression of the QIM in Bengal.
Savarkar Opposed Subhas Bose’s Armed Struggle
While Netaji Bose prepared for military liberation, Savarkar advocated helping the British war effort. At the 23rd HM session in Bhagalpur (1941), he stated:
> “Hindudom must ally unhesitatingly with the war effort… by joining the Army, Navy, and Aerial forces in large numbers…”
[Hindu Rashtra Darshan, vol. 6]
According to HM records, Savarkar inspired 100,000 Hindus to enlist in British forces, some of whom fought against INA soldiers.
Savarkar’s Mercy Petitions—Acts of Surrender, Not Strategy
Savarkar submitted at least five mercy petitions (1911–1920). Contrary to claims that they were strategic, their language reveals surrender. His 1913 petition ends:
> “…if the Government in their manifold beneficence and mercy release me… I am ready to serve the Government in any capacity…”
[R.C. Majumdar, Penal Settlement in Andamans, Govt. of India, 1975, pp. 211–213]
The 1920 petition concludes:
“…a release would be a new birth… so deeply as to render me personally attached and politically useful in future…”
[National Archives, Delhi]
Savarkar’s Early Release and British Pension
Sentenced to 50 years, Savarkar was released after 12 years and 6 months (with 37.5 years’ remission). Dhananjay Keer records that the Ratnagiri District Magistrate fixed his maintenance at Rs. 50/month, later raised to Rs. 60.
[Veer Savarkar, Dhananjay Keer, 1950, p. 219]
Savarkar’s Support for Loyalist Hindu Princes
Savarkar glorified Hindu princes loyal to the British. In a 1941 message to the Mysore Hindu Sabha, he urged:
> “…stand by the Maharaja and the Hindu State… defending against subversive activities by any non-Hindu forces or Hindu dupes of pseudo-nationalist organisations.”
[Bhide, Whirlwind Propaganda, Bombay, p. 343]
Savarkar Wanted the King of Nepal to Rule Post-British India
Savarkar floated the idea that if the British exited, India’s crown should go to the King of Nepal:
> “His Majesty the King of Nepal… alone has the best chance of winning the Imperial crown of India… Even Britain will feel it more graceful…”
[Bhide, Whirlwind Propaganda, pp. 256–57]
Sardar Patel Blamed HM & RSS for Gandhi’s Assassination
In a letter dated July 18, 1948, to Syama Prasad Mookerji, Sardar Patel wrote:
> “Our reports confirm that the activities of [HM and RSS] created an atmosphere in which such a ghastly tragedy [Gandhi’s assassination] became possible… The activities of the RSS constituted a clear threat to the existence of the Government…”
[Sardar Patel: Select Correspondence, 1945–1950, vol. 2, pp. 276–77]
It is perplexing that the bench, despite orally branding Rahul a slanderer, granted him relief. Were they unsure of their oral interventions? Thankfully, for now, their oral observations are not in the April 25th order. But if included in future orders, we may witness the judicial canonisation of Savarkar—elevating him to a sacred, unquestionable figure. India would then have to discard countless writings, including those of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, and prosecute researchers seeking to explore the real Savarkar.
Justice Datta imparted an unheard wisdom to Rahul: that Savarkar and Gandhi were both freedom fighters because “even Mahatma Gandhi used ‘your faithful servant’ while addressing the Viceroy.” His Lordship reads the form of colonial address but ignores the content.
Savarkar renounced his revolutionary past, had 75% of his sentence remitted, and received a pension...
---
Comments