Category Archives: Freedom Fighters (under research project)

Pir of Pagaro of Sindh sacrificed for India’s Freedom

SIND, BRITISH INDIA :

Pir Pagaro of Sindh
Pir Pagaro of Sindh

Indians and other historians have either tried to whitewash the revolutionary movements for freedom or presented these as disjointed localised efforts.

Even the largest movement of Azad Hind Fauj led by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose has been narrated in a staggered manner and an episodial manner like the battle of Burma (Mayanmar) and the battle of Imphal. The picture thus presented is of an army fighting at a frontier with no support elsewhere. This history needs to be revisited.

In 1930, Sayyid Sibghatullah Shah Al-Rashidi called Pir of Pagaro, a Muslim Saint from Sindh with a huge following, was arrested by the British Government for ‘creating disturbances’. He was accused of instigating anti-colonial feelings among his followers known as ‘Hurs’ (literally meaning free). The decision to send him to a prison away from Sindh rather shaped this anti-colonial Muslim saint into a nationalist revolutionary. 

In the Bengal hail, he met several revolutionaries and realised that what he had experienced in his area was the same being experienced by others. He understood that British colonialism was destroying the nation and Hindu-Muslim unity was the only weapon to fight them.

From the prison, he started preaching nationalist messages. Sarah F. D. Ansari of the University of London in her book Sufi Saints and State Power: The Pirs of Sind, 1843 – 1947, writes, “messages strongly coloured with a radical nationalist tinge were smuggled out in the form of notes written in the margins and between the lines of books and magazines. They condemned the British for treating ‘Indians like donkeys’, loading them down with ‘England’s burdens’, and pointed out that the only reason why the British were able to rule over 300,000,000 people was that Indians were ‘cowards’.”

In 1936, when he returned to his seat at Khairpur in Sindh, Pir of Pagaro had turned a revolutionary.

He started establishing links with revolutionary leaders of Bengal as well as those living in Europe, especially Germany. He started inviting Congress leadership to his area and organise Hindu-Muslim unity meetings. We must keep in mind that it was 1938 and Subhas Chandra Bose was the President of Congress. Unsurprisingly when Subhas formed Forward Bloc after his famous differences with Mahatma Gandhi, Pir of Pagaro asked his followers to back Forward Bloc and denounced the stand of Congress. 

In 1939, the centuries-old Hindu-Muslim unity of Sindh was severely shattered over the Manzilgah mosque dispute and the riots that followed. Pir of Pagaro ordered his large following of armed followers known as ‘ghazis’ to save Hindus from the Muslim fanatics. Sarah F. D. Ansari writes, “In his newspaper, the Pir-jo-Goth Gazette, he (Pir of Pagaro) called for Hindu-Muslim unity: ‘My forefathers’, he wrote, ‘treated Hindus and Muslims alike as a sacred trust. The same is my principle . .. Allah is the same as Parmatma, though with different names. I will be happy when I see temples and mosques together with only a wall dividing them and everyone [worshipping] according to their rights so that no one may have a grievance against the other’. In a similar vein, he denounced the Hindu Sabha and the Muslim League as divisive communal movements. Only when Hindus and Muslims combined would ‘peace . . . be achieved and satanic deeds . . . stopped’: Indians had to be ‘national minded’ and regard India as a country which belonged to all its inhabitants.”

An intelligence report dated October 1940 says, “Pir of Bharchundi is not liked by the Pir Pagaro, who disrespected the Pir of Bharchundi and sent him away from his ‘Kot’ when the Pir of Bharchundi last visited the Pir Pagaro… the reason for such treatment of the Pir to the Pir of Bharchundi was that the Pir of Bharchundi would not assist in getting the murderers of Hindus arrested.” 

It further says, “Pir Pagaro has won great sympathy of the Hindus.” Sarah also points out how the Pir came out in support of a Muslim man’s right, who had earlier converted into Islam from Hinduism, to reconvert into Hinduism. “

Another intelligence report noted that Pir of Pagaro has enlisted at least 6,000 militants to fight with an oath to die for the cause. These militants were called ghazis. Ghazis had paraded and displayed their military skills in front of him during his visits to Jaisalmer and Jodhpur as well. The nationwide presence was a threat for the British. The report further noted, “the Pir was renewing his contacts with terrorists (terrorists was a term used by the English for revolutionaries) who had been in prison along with him in Bengal. His visits to Calcutta (Kolkata) were, it is said, performed for no other reason.”

The British apprehension was not wrong. Pir Pagaro had contacts with Bengali revolutionaries and Subhas. If Subhas raised an army on Eastern Front, Pir of Pagaro raised another on the Western Front. An intelligence report from 1941 noted, “He (Pir of Pagaro) has got his electric plant and radio set at which he and his followers hear Hindustani programs from Germany and then spread the German news in the villages which has a disquieting effect on the local people.” The report also pointed out that “the villainous activities of the Pir and his growing contempt of authority are becoming a byword throughout India”.

Pir of Pagaro was running an independent government in that region of Sindh with the help of his militia. The British Government arrested him in Karachi on the pretext of holding talks with him. His ghazis would not stop and kept attacking the British infrastructure. They were so much feared that the Legislative Assembly members did not want their names to become public for voting in favour of an act against Hurs (followers of Pir of Pagaro).

Sarah notes, “The level of fear which existed in Sind at the time even inside the Legislature was reflected in the session being held in camera. Members of the Assembly were not prepared to vote openly in favour of the act ‘lest they were marked down for the Pir’s future vengeance’.” The fear was not unfounded as soon after Ghazis killed the son of Hidayatullah, one of the tallest Sindh leaders in that Legislative Assembly, by derailing a train. 

It did not take much time and within weeks Martial Law was declared. The British had to open a war front at the time of World War II. Sarah writes, “The area north of Sanghar and the Thar desert (Rajasthan) were thoroughly reconnoitered from the air; paratroopers and bombs were used against bands of armed men. Hur villages were raided, wells stopped up and their cattle herded into other districts.” On the other hand, the Pir was being tortured to ask his followers to put down their weapons. 

Did the nationalists concede defeat? No. The Pir of Pagaro, Sibghatullah, embraced martyrdom at the gallows on 20 March 1943, after a sham of a court trial. Hurs kept fighting the British till 1946 even after their Pir was gone. 

source: http://www.awazthevoice.in / Awaz, The Voice / Home> Culture / by Saquib Alim / July 23rd, 2022

Tears of the Begums: Stories of Survivors of the Uprising of 1857 (Originally in Urdu as Begumat ke Aansoo)

INDIA :

New Book , First ever English translation of Nizami’s invaluable Urdu book Begumat ke Aansoo 

pix: amazon.in

Apart from the fifteen years that Sher Shah Suri snatched upon defeating Humayun, the flag of the grand Mughal Empire flew over Delhi undefeated for over 300 years.

But then, 1857 arrived and the mighty sword fell helpless in the face of a mightier British force.

After the fall of Delhi and Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar’s tragic departure from the Red Fort in 1857, members of the royal Mughal court had to flee to safer places. Driven out from their palaces and palanquins onto the streets in search of food and shelter, the dethroned royals scrambled to survive. Some bore their fate with a bitter pride, others succumbed to the adversity.

Through twenty-nine accounts of the survivors of the Uprising of 1857, Khwaja Hasan Nizami documents the devastating tale of the erstwhile glorious royalty’s struggle with the hardships thrust upon them by a ruthless new enemy.

In vivid and tragic stories drawn from the recollection of true events, Nizami paints a picture of a crumbling historical era and another charging forward to take its place.

With the reminiscence of past glory contrasted against the drudgery of everyday survival, Tears of the Begums – the first ever English translation of Nizami’s invaluable Urdu book Begumat ke Aansoo – chronicles the turning of the wheel of fortune in the aftermath of India’s first war of independence.

source: http://www.amazon.in / Amazon / Home> Books> History> World / as on August 06th, 2022

List of Important Leaders Associated with the Revolt of 1857

INDIA :

The Revolt of 1857 was not merely a product of Sepoy mutiny but was accumulated grievances of the people against the Company’s administration and of their dislike for the foreign regime. Here is the List of important leaders Associated with the Revolt of 1857.

_______________________
Shakeel Anwar / Updated Nov 10, 2020, 11:10 IST

Important leaders Associated with the Revolt of 1857
Important leaders Associated with the Revolt of 1857

_____________________________

The Revolt of 1857 is also called the Sepoy Mutiny or India’s First War of Independence. It was started on 10 May 1857 at Meerut, as a mutiny of sepoys of the British East India Company’s army.

It was a prolonged period of armed uprising as well as rebellions in Northern and Central India against the British occupation of that part of the subcontinent. It began as a revolt of the sepoys of the British East India Company’s army but eventually secured the participation of the masses. The revolt is known by several names: the Sepoy Mutiny (by the British Historians), the Indian Mutiny, the Great Rebellion (by the Indian Historians), the Revolt of 1857, the Indian Insurrection, and the First War of Independence (by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar).

The revolt spread over the entire area from the neighborhood of Patna to the borders of Rajasthan. The main centers of revolt in these regions namely Kanpur, Lucknow, Bareilly, Jhansi, Gwalior, and Arrah in Bihar. Following is a list of important leaders who took part in the revolt from different parts of the country: 

Important leader Associated with the Revolt of 1857

PlaceLeader
BarrackporeMangal Pandey
DelhiBahadur Shah II, General Bakht Khan
DelhiHakim Ahsanullah (Chief advisor to Bahadur Shah II)
LucknowBegum Hazrat Mahal, Birjis Qadir, Ahmadullah (advisor of the ex-Nawab of Awadh)
KanpurNana Sahib, Rao Sahib (nephew of Nana), Tantia Tope, Azimullah Khan (advisor of Nana Sahib)
JhansiRani Laxmibai
Bihar (Jagdishpur)Kunwar Singh, Amar Singh
Allahabad and BanarasMaulvi Liyakat Ali
FaizabadMaulvi Ahmadullah (He declared the Revolt as Jihad against English)
FarrukhabadTufzal Hasan Khan
BijnaurMohammad Khan
MuradabadAbdul Ali Khan
BareillyKhan Bahadur Khan
MandsorFiroz Shah
Gwalior/KanpurTantia Tope
AssamKandapareshwar Singh, Manirama Datta
OrissaSurendra Shahi, Ujjwal Shahi
KulluRaja Pratap Singh
RajasthanJaidayal Singh and Hardayal Singh
GorakhpurGajadhar Singh
MathuraSevi Singh, Kadam Singh

The revolt of 1857 was an unprecedented event in the history of British rule in India. It united, though in a limited way, many sections of Indian society for a common cause. Though the revolt failed to achieve the desired goal, it sowed the seeds of Indian nationalism.

source: http://www.jagranjosh.com / Jagrn Josh / Home> General Knowledge> History / by Shakeel Anwar, Jagran Josh / November 10th, 2022

Qasim Nanautawi : The Scholar who awakened Muslims through education

UTTAR PRADESH :

Darul Uloom Deoband

He is truly a forgotten warrior of the freedom movement. Few know about him and fewer are familiar with his name but delve into the pages of history and you realise that he deserves a better place.

He participated in the Indian Rebellion of 1857 in the Battle of Shamli between the British and the anti-colonialist ulema. The scholars were ultimately defeated at that battle.

He was Mohammad Qasim Nanautawi.

Nanautawi was born in 1832 into the Siddiqui family of Nanauta, a town near Saharanpur in Uttar Pradesh.

He was schooled at Nanauta, where he memorised the Quran and learned calligraphy.

At the age of nine, Nanautawi moved to Deoband where he studied at the madrasa of Karamat Hussain. The teacher at this madrasa was Mehtab Ali, the uncle of Mahmud Hasan Deobandi.

On the instruction of Mehtab Ali, Nanautawi completed the primary books of Arabic grammar and syntax.

Thereafter, his mother sent him to Saharanpur, where his maternal grandfather Wajihuddin Wakil, who was a poet of Urdu and Persian, lived.

Wakil enrolled his grandson in the Persian class of Muhammad Nawaz Saharanpuri, under whom, Nanautawi, then aged twelve, completed Persian studies.

In 1844, Nanautawi joined the Delhi College. Although was enrolled in the college, he would take private classes at his teachers’ home, instead of the college.

Nanautawi stayed in Delhi for around five or six years and graduated, at the age of 17.

After the completion of his education, Nanautawi became the editor of the press at Matbah-e-Ahmadi.

During this period, he wrote a scholium on the last few portions of Sahihul Bukhari.

Before the establishment of Darul Uloom Deoband, he taught for some time at the Chhatta Masjid. His lectures were delivered at the printing press. His teaching produced a group of accomplished Ulama, the example of which had not been seen since Shah Abdul Ghani’s time.

In 1860, he performed Haj and, on his return, he accepted a profession of collating books at Matbah-e-Mujtaba in Meerut. Nanautavi remained attached to this press until 1868.

In May 1876, a Fair for God-Consciousness was held at Chandapur village, near Shahjahanpur.

Christians, Hindus, and Muslims were invited through posters to attend and prove the truthfulness of their respective religions.

All prominent Ulama delivered speeches at the fair. Nanautawi repudiated the Doctrine of the Trinity, speaking in support of the Islamic conception of God.

Christians did not reply to the objections raised by the followers of Islam, while the Muslims replied to the Christians word by word and won.

Mohammad Qasim Nanautawi established the Darul Uloom Deoband in 1866 with the financial help and funding of the Muslim states within India and the rich individuals of the Muslim Indian community.

He conformed to the Sharia and worked to motivate other people to do so. It was through his work that a prominent madrasa was established in Deoband and a mosque was built in 1868. Through his efforts, Islamic schools were established at various other locations as well.

His greatest achievement was the revival of an educational movement for the renaissance of religious sciences in India and the creation of guiding principles for the madaris (schools).

Under his attention and supervision, madaris were established in several areas.

Under Muhammad Qasim Nanautvi’s guidance, these religious schools, at least in the beginning, remained distant from politics and devoted their services to providing only religious education to Muslim children.

Nanautawi died on 15 April 1880 at the age of 47. His grave is to the north of the Darul-Uloom.

Since Qasim Nanautawi is buried there, the place is known as Qabrastan-e-Qasimi, where countless Deobandi scholars, students, and others are buried.

Significantly, the elders of Deoband took more and more part in the struggle for the independence of the country.

After the establishment of Darul-Uloom, the period of participation in national politics began.

Darul-Uloom, Deoband, was a centre of revolution and political, training. It nurtured such a body of such a body of self-sacrificing soldiers of Islam and sympathisers of the community who themselves wept in the grief of the community and also made others weep; who themselves tossed about restlessly for the restitution of the Muslims’ dignity and caused others also to toss about.

They shattered the Muslims’ intellectual stagnation, they broke up the spell of the British imperialism, and, grappling with the contemporary tyrannical powers, dispelled fear and anxiety from the minds of the country.

They also kindled the candle of freedom in the political wilderness.

It is a historical fact that the political awakening in the beginning of the twentieth century was indebted to Deoband and some other revolutionary movements in the country, and the revolutionary freedom-lovers who rose up there were the products of the grace from the spring of thought of Deoband.

Then, after the establishment of Pakistan, the Indian leaders of Deoband guided the Indian Muslims in utterly adverse circumstances and helped keep up their spirits high. — IANS

source: http://www.muslimmirror.com / Muslim Mirror / Home / by Amita Verma / July 31st, 2022

Remembering 4 Muslim women who fought for Indian independence

UTTAR PRADESH / PUNJAB :

Hyderabad: 

On the occasion of 74th Independence Day, let us remember these Muslim women who proved their strength, enthusiasm and determinism in the fight for freedom.

These women broke the stereotype of Muslim women in the society, who are merely perceived to be clad in Burqha and were never let out of the house. They participated in the India’s struggle for independence and emerged victorious.

Begum Hazrat Mahal (1830–1879)

Begum Hazrat Mahal, a prominent woman of 1857 rebellion, was born in 1830 Faizabad of Uttar Pradesh. Her actual name was Muhammadi Khanum. Her father is Gulam Hussain of Faizabad. At her tender age itself, she showed good talent in literature.

She was married to Wajid Ali Shah, the Nawab of Awadh. They were blessed with a son Mirza Birjis Khadir Bahadur. On 13 February, 1856, the British troops imprisoned Wajid Ali Shah. They sent him to Calcutta on 13 March and occupied Awadh illegitimately. This irked the people and native rulers.

They revolted against the British under the leadership of Begum Hazrat Mahal. The native rulers and people met at Chavani area of Lucknow, the capital of Awadh on 31May, 1857 and declared independence. They taught a lesson to the British troops and wiped out their power in Lucknow. Later, Begum Hazrat Mahal declared her son Birjis Khadir as the Nawab of Awadh on 7 July, 1857.

As the King’s mother, she gathered 1,80,000 troops and renovated the Lucknow fort spending huge amount of money. She established a high level committee for the good governance of the state. Hazarat Mahal ruled the state on behalf of her son for about ten months and challenged the British force by inspiring patriotism among the people and the fellow native rulers. She issued a historic statement on 31 December, 1858 challenging the proclamation issued by the Queen Victoria on November 1, 1858.

But, when Delhi, the prime center for the First War of Independence was captured, the British troops surrounded and attacked Lucknow in March 1859. There was a fierce battle between the Company troops and the Begum troops. When defeat became inevitable, Begum Hazrat Mahal retreated to the Nepal forests along with the co-revolutionary leaders like Nana Sahib Peshwa and others.

The British rulers offered her huge amount of money and luxurious facilities in order to bring her back to Lucknow. But, the Begum denied them and made it clear that nothing else was acceptable to her except Independent Awadh state. Begum Hazarath Mahal was struggling for the independence of her state till her last breath. She passed away at Khathmound of Nepal on 7 April, 1879. In 1984 Government of India released a postal stamp in her honour.

Abadi Bano Begum (1852-1924)

Abadi Bano Begum, who took active part at par with men in the Indian National Movement, was born in 1852 in Amroha village, Moradabad district of Uttar Pradesh. She was married to Abdul Ali Khan of the Princely State Rampur.

Though she lost her husband at a young age, she did not remarry. She had two sons Moulana Mohammed Ali and Moulana Showkath Ali, who were famous as ‘Ali Brothers’. She nurtured her children, into becoming memorable leaders of the Indian Independence Movement. Her involvement in the freedom movement began with the Home Rule Movement, to which she rendered moral and most importantly, financial support.

When the British government detained the Ali Brothers in Chindanwad village, under the Indian Defence Regulations, she went along with them. When a police official proposed for the surrender of her sons, she bluntly refused saying, ‘If my sons agree to the proposal of the government, I will kill them by strangulation. I hope God will bestow enough energy into this old woman’s hands’. Abadi Bano met Mahatma Gandhi in 1917 for the first time.

There after Mahatma Gandhi always addressed her ‘Ammijan’, and all other freedom fighters followed Gandhi’s address. She helped Mahatma Gandhi and other Khilafath leaders financially for undertaking all India tours.

She attended the Indian National Congress and the All India Muslim League sessions in 1917, held at Calcutta. She spoke in those meetings emphasising that complete freedom could be achieved through unity between Hindus and Muslims.

She also played a constructive role in the Khilafat and Non[1]Cooperation Movement in 1919. She declared in several meetings that ‘it was her ambition that even the dogs and cats of her country should not be under the slavery of the British’.

The fact that the British government official records treated her as a ‘dangerous person’, which established the kind of challenge she hurled at the colonial rule.

 Apart from participating in politics she also guided several women’s organisations all over India. So intensely patriotic and nationalist that Abadi Bano Begum who played an active role in national movement without caring old age, ill health and cruel atrocities of police, breathed her last on 13 November, 1924.‹

BIBI AMATUS SALAM (1907-1985)

Bibi Amatus Salam, who strongly believed that freedom from the slavery of British could be achieved, through the Gandhian methods only, was born in 1907 in Patiala of Punjab in Rajputhana family.

Her father was Colonel Abdul Hamid and her mother Amatur Rehaman. Amatus Salam was the younger sister of six elder brothers. Her health was very delicate since her childhood. She was inspired by her eldest brother, freedom fighter Mohammad Abdur Rashid Khan.

Following the footsteps of her brother, she decided to serve the people of the country.

Amatus Salam participated in the Khadi Movement and attended the meetings of the Indian National Movement along with her brother. She was attracted towards the Non[1]Violence theory of Mahathma Gandhi and Sevagram Ashram.

She decided to join Sevagram Ashram, and went there in 1931. She joined Ashram and followed the strict principles of the Ashram. With her selfless service she became very close to Gandhi couple.

They considered Amatus Salam as their beloved daughter. During the Indian National Movement, she went to jail along with other women in 1932 despite her illness with the permission of Gandhi.

After being released from Jail, she reached Sevagram and took over the responsibilities as Personal Assistant of Gandhi. She said that besides achieving independence, harmony between the Hindus and Muslims, Welfare of the Harijans and Women were her life ambitions. When communal riots erupted, she toured North-West Frontier, Sindh and Noukhali areas as an ambassador of Gandhi.

She held Satyagraha for 20 days to normalize the situation in those areas. After Independence, she rededicated herself to the Public Service. She published an Urdu Magazine called ‘Hindustan’ to promote national integration and communal harmony. When Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan toured in India in 1961, she travelled with him as his personal assistant. When India was at war with

China in 1962 and with Pakistan in 1965, she took all the pains in reaching the mountains or war area along with her adopted son Sunil Kumar to encourage our soldiers and to serve them. Bibi Amatus Salam, who spent all her life following the Gandhian ideology, breathed her last on 29 October, 1985.‹

HAJARA BEGUM (1910-2003)

Hajara Begum, who fought against the British to liberate the Nation and worked for the welfare of the toiling masses of the country, was born on 22 December, 1910 at Saharanpur in Uttar Pradesh. She came to know about the sacrifices of the freedom fighters who were fighting against the British from her father, who was a police officer.

After the failure of her marriage, she went to London to pursue her higher education, where she got acquainted with the anti-British forces. This led her to decide to fight against the British Imperialist forces to liberate the nation. She had to face the anger of the British Government as she was criticizing their acts in several International fora.

She returned to India and joined as a lecturer in the Karamat Hussain women’s College at Lucknow in 1935.

She also worked along with famous poet Sajjad Zahir in the formation of All India Progressive Writers’ Association.

She got married to a nationalist leader Dr. Zainul Abedeen Ahmed in 1935 and in the same year both of them took membership in the Indian National Congress. Since the police were after them for their anti-British activities, they resigned their jobs and dedicated themselves totally to the Indian National Movement.

While participating in the activities of the Indian National Congress, Hajara Begum also campaigned for the Communist Party without the knowledge of the Police. She actively took part in the election campaign in those days, and as a result of this a number of Congress leaders could get elected. She attended a secret political workshop at Kotthapatnam in Andhra Pradesh in 1937.

 She spoke on different subjects in the workshop as a lecturer. Hajara Begum was against the gender bias since her younger age. She fought against all types of inequalities successfully. She left the Indian National Congress in 1940 along with her husband. Since then, she played a vital role in organizing the unorganized labour sector.

She became very popular as ‘Hajara Aapa’ in the circles of toiling people and women. The Soviet Union honoured her with ‘Supreme Soviet Jubilee Award’ in 1960 in recognition of her work for the downtrodden people on the eve of the birth centenary of Lenin. Hajara Begum, who spent her entire life in the service of the country, breathed her last on 20 January, 2003.


Syed Naseer Ahamed can be contacted at Phone: +91 94402 41727

source: http://www.siasat.com / The Siasat Daily / Home> Featured News / by Nihad Ahmed / Input by Syed Naseer Ahmed / August 15th, 2020

The Muslim Martyrs of Royal Indian Naval Mutiny of 1946

BRITISH INDIA :

After the Second World War, soldiers of the Azad Hind Fauj (Indian National Army) were captured by the British forces. They were charged with treason and tried by tribunals as war criminals. Indians protested against this treatment given to the freedom fighters of Azad Hind Fauj.

In February, 1945, soldiers and officers of the Royal Indian Navy mutinied in Mumbai and Karachi. English officials including the Viceroy took this mutiny as a sign of leaving India. The British forces killed many to quell the mutiny, many of which were Muslims.

Here, we are sharing names of the few Muslims we know, who attained martyrdom for taking part in the mutiny or supporting it.

Abdul, Ali, Din Mohammad: born 1929, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Nagpada, Bombay, on 23 February 1946, died the same day.

Abdul Aziz: born 1921, domestic servant, hit by bullet in the premises of his employers as a result of firing by the police at Bombay on people demonstrating in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Abdul Razak: born 1916, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound on 22 February 1946 in firing by the police near Crawford market, Bombay, died on 24.2.46.

Abdul Rehman: born 1911, employee of private firm, hit by a bullet as a result of firing by the police at Doctor’s Street, Bombay, on people demonstrating in support of the revolt by rating of the Royal Indian Navy on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Abdul Gani: born 1901, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by police at Bombay on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Abdul Karim: born 1926, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police near Crawford Market, Bombay, on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Abdul Sattar, Mohmmad Umar: born 1924, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police on 22 February 1946 at Bombay, died the same day.

Abdulla, Abdul Kadar: born 1921, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Bern- bay on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Abdulla, Safi: born 1933, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound on 22 February 1946 in firing by the police at Fort, Bombay, died in hospital the same day.

Adamji, Mohamed Hussain: born 1924, son of Allauddin Adamji, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound on 22 February 1946, in firing by the police at Bombay, died in hospital.

Ali Mohammad: born 1906, hit by bullet in firing by the police at Dadar, Bombay, on people demonstrating in favour of the revolt by ratings of the RIN on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Anwar Hossain: a student of Lahore College, hoisted the flags of revolt in the rating vessel Bahadur in Karachi, died with flags in hand on 23 February 1946.

Asgar Ismail: born 1934, received a bullet wound in firing by the police on people demonstrating in support of the revolt by ratings of the Hoyal Indian Navy on 23 February 1946, near the Paxsi Statue, at Byculla, Bombay, died on the spot.

Asghar Miya, Nawsati: born 1916, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police near the J. J. Hospital, Bombay, on 23 February 1946, died in hospital.

Aziz, Chhotu: born 1921, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Bombay on 23 February 1946, died in hospital the same day.

Dilawar, Abdul Malik: born 1931, son of Dilawar Muzawar, student, hit by bullet in firing by the police at Dongri, Bombay, on people demonstrating in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Fida Ali, Kayam Ali: born 1933, received a bullet wound in firing by the police near J. J. Hospital, Bombay, on people demonstrating in favour of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy on 23 February 1946, died the same day.

Gulam Hussain, Ali Mohammad: born 1906, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police’ at Bombay on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Haroon, Hamid: born 1931, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Bombay, on 23 February 1946, died the same day.

Ibrahimji, Yusufali: born 1910, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Bombay on people’s demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy on 22 February 1946, died the same day. 

Ismail Hussain: born 1932, hit by bullet as a result of firing by the police at Bombay on people demonstrating in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy on 22 February 1946.

Ismail, Rahimtulla: bom 1911, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police near the Imperial Bank, Abdul Rehman Street, Bombay, on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Jamal Mohammed: born 1926, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Bombay on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Khuda Bakhsh, Pyare: born 1876, hit by bullet as a result of firing by the police at Bombay on people demonstrating in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy on 23 February 1946, died the same day.

Manzoor Ahmed: born 1906, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound; in firing by the police at Bombay on 22 February 1946, died in hospital the same day.

Mohammed, Aboobakar: born 1928, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the RIN, received a bullet wound in firing by the police near Crawford Market, Bombay on 22 February 1946, died in hospital the same day.

Mohammed Aziz: born 1911, took part in the popular demonstra- lions in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Bombay on 22 February 1946, died in hospital the same day.

Mohammed Hussain: born 1931, son of Mulla Gulam Ali Abdul Hussain, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police near J. J. Hospital, Bombay, on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Mohammed Sheik, Sayed Hassan: born 1921, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police near Null Bazar police station, Bombay, on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Mohiddin, Sheik Ghulam: born 1928, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Parel, Bombay, on 22 February 1916, died the same day.

Mohmed Samikh, Taja-Urkh: born 1920, hit by bullet as a result of firing by the police at Kamathipura, Bombay, on people’s demonstration in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy on 23 February 1946, died the same day.

Moula Bakhsh, Abdul Aziz: born 1906, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Kamathipura, Bombay, on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Siddik Mohamed: born 1921, son of Isak Mohamed, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Kamathipura, Bombay, on 23 February 1946, died the same day.

Sulemanji, Zakiuddin: took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police at Bombay on 22 February 1946, died in the hospital the same day.

Taj Mohamed, Fazal Mohamed: born 1930, took part in the popular demonstrations in support of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police near the Salvation Army office at Bombay, on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

Vazir, Mohamed: born 1891, took part in the popular demonstrations in favour of the revolt by ratings of the Royal Indian Navy, received a bullet wound in firing by the police near Hindmata Cinema, Bombay, on 22 February 1946, died the same day.

source: http://www.heritagetimes.in / Heritage Times / Home> Featured Posts> Freedom Movements / by Mahino Fatima / August 14th, 2021

The forgotten mutiny for India’s independence

BRITISH INDIA :

A sailor being arrested after the Naval mutiny.

One of the most important but undervalued events of India’s independence movement was the naval revolt of 1946, about which Indian historian Sumit Sarker wrote, “Had this insurrection succeeded, India’s struggle for freedom might have taken a different turn.” From February 18 to 23 that year, more than 20,000 ordinary sailors, known as ratings, and low-ranking officers of 74 warships and 20 installations took part in a strike, which was termed as a mutiny or rebellion.

After Bengal lost its independence at Palashi’s Mango grove in 1757, the British Raj in India faced two major armed revolts: the first one was exactly after one hundred years, the military revolt of 1857, and the second one was 189 years later, the naval mutiny. Both in 1757 and 1857, the freedom fighters were defeated by the arms and tactics of the British rulers, but the naval mutiny failed because of the politicians in India then. It was not only the ratings’ mutiny that the political leadership had decided not to support – the civilian uprising triggered by the naval mutiny, too, was condemned by them. The scale of the civilian uprising, if it happened in a post-colonial era, would have created a revolution or at least caused the fall of the government of the day.

Three days after the mutiny ended and the civilian uprising was crushed with brutal force, the then British Prime Minister Clement Atlee told the House of Commons on February 26, 1946, “I regret to inform the House that grievous loss of life, injury and destruction of property have resulted from all these disturbances. In Bombay, there have been 223 deaths and 1,037 persons have been injured. The total damage includes the looting or destruction of nine banks, 32 government grain and cloth shops which the public can ill-afford to lose, 30 other shops, 10 post offices, 10 police stations and 1,200 street lamps. The number of vehicles destroyed is not yet estimated. In Karachi, there have been seven deaths and 21 cases of injury. In Madras, up to last night, one person has been killed and another seriously injured” (Source: Hansard). 

Mr Atlee in his statement said, “Both Congress and Muslim League leaders cooperated in condemning and attempting to stop the disturbances, but the Communist Party issued a manifesto at midnight on Thursday thanking the public for its support.” It perhaps explains why, to this day, the political classes of the three countries born from the partition of India are not willing to admit their failure and give those mutineers and civilian martyrs their due credit. Therefore, in 2021, there was no big event in the subcontinent to mark the 75th anniversary of the naval revolt.

Mohammad Dewan Ali Nazir, Royal Indian Navy, Index no: 34499.

On a personal level, it’s ironic that, despite studying history at the country’s two top universities, I, too, did not take much interest in it during my student life. When I first heard of the rebellion from a mutineer, I had already taken a job and started my professional journey devoid of in-depth history. The mutineer I am talking about was my father, who spoke about his role and feelings about the lost cause during one of my short home visits. My father, Mohammad Dewan Ali Nazir (Royal Indian Navy, RIN, Index no: 34499) was one of the last 3,500 sailors and 300 sepoys who refused to surrender until the last on board of HMIS Akbar.

They were detained after surrendering and were released in August of that year. The mediation and the assurances given by the leaders of both Congress and Muslim League turned out to be nothing but betrayal. Though the uprising was a challenge to the Empire, shaking up the British imperial order, the leaders of the nationalist movement waiting to form an interim government through negotiations were not ready to derail that prospect.

Newspaper clipping of the Evening News.

The leaders of the Congress and the Muslim League did not want a revolution – they wanted a peaceful transfer of power. Among the leading politicians, only Congress leader Aruna Asaf Ali extended her support to the ratings’ strike and tried to persuade her party leaders to take a stand in favour of the strikers, but failed in the face of opposition from Vallabhbhai Patel. On February 22, Vallabhbhai Patel sent a message to the rebels to surrender. Only the Communist Party of India came forward in support of the naval revolt and called a general strike. Reading the memoir of one of the key figures of the revolt, Balai Chand Dutt (BC Dutt), and a few other publications, one can easily imagine how much frustration and pain those mutineers felt because of the national leaders’ silence, which they saw as a betrayal. Perhaps it explains why my father, too, lost interest in politics and didn’t speak much about the heroic uprising that ended in a tragedy. 

Those nationalist leaders, including Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru and Muhammad Ali Jinnah, advised them “not to mix up ‘political demands along with service demands’; to ‘remain calm’ and to formulate to the naval authorities their service demands.”

But from the very beginning, those naval ratings were raising political demands – particularly, the Quit India slogan.

Their Charter of Demands asked for: 1. Release of all Indian political prisoners; 2. Release of all Indian National Army personnel unconditionally; 3. Withdrawal of all Indian troops from Indonesia and Egypt; 4. British nationals to leave India; 5. Actions against the commanding officer and signal bosonshead for rough treatment of the crew; 6. Release of all detainees (naval ratings); 7. Speedy demobilisation of the RIN ratings and officers; 8. Equal status with the British navy regarding pay, family allowances and other facilities; 9. Best class of Indian food; 10. No return of clothing kit after discharge from service; 11. Better treatment from officers to subordinates; and 12. Installation of Indian officers and supervisors. (Source: Meanings of Failed Action: A reassessment of the 1946 Royal Indian Navy uprising by Dr Valentina Vitali, University of East London, UK.)

Autobiographies of two rebels  – BC Dutt and Biswanath Bose – suggest that the then (undivided) India could have been a different place if the revolt of that day had succeeded. The rise of communal politics, the division and instability that is spreading in the states and society, would not have happened.

BC Dutt was one of the organisers of the HMIS Talwar, the ship where the mutiny started. He was arrested and tried for writing a new slogan on a ship on February 1, three weeks before the start of the February 18 mutiny. His book, The Mutiny of the Innocents, contains details of how political literature and pro-independence activities were organised much before their strike.

Biswanath Bose’s RIN Mutiny, 1946 also gives detailed descriptions of how the revolt unfolded. But politicians argued that the revolt was mostly due to the resentment among Indian ratings over low wages, poor quality of food and housing, which was lower than that of the Whites, and racial discrimination.

After the mutiny of 1857, the British rulers banned the entry and discussion of political leaflets in all forces, but BC Dutt used to secretly discuss political documents in the ship HMIS Talwar. Two months before the mutiny, on the Naval Day on December 1, when it was open for public visit, they wrote various slogans, including “Quit India” and “Jai Hind” on the ship. Explaining the reason why the mutiny failed, BC Dutt wrote that while all Europeans and Indians were stunned by the course of events and wondering if it was a revolt, unfortunately the political parties had nothing to say. When it was time to lower the British Union Jack and fly the Indian flag, they felt unprepared.

Newspaper clipping of the Hindusthan Standard

On February 22, 1946, when the nationalist leaders were busy arranging the ratings’ surrender, Prime Minister Clement Attlee told the parliament that the sailors had given political slogans and demanded that a political leader be given a chance to speak. He also said in the statement that Congress had nothing to do with the insurgency, but the communists and leftists could try to exploit sympathy.

William Richardson, a British researcher, writes in The Society for Nautical Research that the political movement for India’s independence was at the root of the revolt (The Mutiny of the Royal Indian Navy at Bombay in February 1946, May 1993).

Author of the book 1946: The Unknown Mutiny, Promod Kapoor wrote that the navies fell between the two aspirations of the two rulers. One side wanted their impending departure not to be tarnished by the stigma of rebellion. On the other hand, when power was imminent, the other rulers were anxious to see if there were any signs of chaos in the armed forces. Because in the future, they would have to manage these forces. 

Politicians assured that no one would be punished, no compensation would be paid, and steps would be taken to meet the demands. In reality, the opposite had happened. Rebel leaders were arrested, tried and punished. Other rebels were told to grab third-class train tickets to return home and to never return to Bombay again. Showing various excuses, deductions were made from salary arrears even for minor damages in their uniforms.

Biswanath Bose’s book gives a glimpse of how frustrated and angry these rebels became with the behaviour of the government and the breach of promises by the political leaders. He wrote, “If patriotism is a crime, then we must be criminals.” Expressing his frustration for not being reemployed in the Indian Navy, he wrote a letter to Prime Minister Nehru asking if there was any law banning his return to the force due to dismissal for taking part in the freedom movement, and how, as a leader of the Congress, Nehru could be the prime minister.

Nationalist leaders were so reluctant to give the mutineers their due credit, that the Indian government banned the Bangla play Kallol (Sound of the Wave), based on the mutiny, by playwright Utpal Dutt, and he was imprisoned. The play was first performed in 1965 in Calcutta at the Minerva Theatre and it drew large crowds.

At the beginning of the naval strike, a Central Strike Committee (NCSC) was formed by the representatives of the ships stationed in Bombay. The committee renamed the Royal Indian Navy as The Indian National Navy. The committee was chaired by Signalman MS Khan, and Madan Singh was the vice-president. One remarkable element of the naval rebellion was the unity of various faiths among both the naval force and the civilians who took to the street. They raised slogans “Hindu-Muslim unite” and “Inquilab Zindabad” on the streets of Bombay.

BC Dutt’s book also speaks of this communal harmony. He wrote, “We are from different regions, and from families of Hindu, Muslim, Christian and Buddhist, but after spending years in the Navy, we sailors have become Indians. The irony is that the politics of communal division and hatred is now intensifying across the subcontinent.

(After leaving the job of a naval instructor, my father joined the office of Indian Civil Supply, and after a short stay in Kolkata, he was transferred to East Bengal. He retired as a magistrate and died on August 29, 2001.)

Kamal Ahmed is an independent journalist and writes from London, UK. His Twitter handle is @ahmedka1

source: http://www.thedailystar.net / The Daily Star / Home> In Focus / by Kamal Ahmed / July 25th, 2022

Worth A Re-Read – A History of the Ulama in British India

UNITED INDIA :

DESIGN: Sarah Anjum Bari

Over the past few years, and particularly after their recent tussle with the government over the statue of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the Ulama’s involvement in politics has come back under scrutiny in Bangladesh. Since the 10th century, the Ulama have been exercising strong authority over religious issues; yet they have been accused of failing to respond to modernity and to the changes in society.

Against this backdrop, the actions, discourses, and history of the Ulama are well worth looking into. Muhammad Qasim Zaman’s The Ulama in Contemporary Islam: Custodian of Change (2002) and Barbara D Metcalf’s Islamic Revival in British India: Deoband, 1860-1900 (2016), both published by the Princeton University Press, are two outstanding studies in this regard. While Metcalf looks into the emergence, proliferation, and responses of the Deobandi Ulama to “modernity” when Muslim power in India was declining, Zaman looks at their strategy to establish authority in British India and Pakistan. 

Shifting sands of influence

In pre-British India, religious education was a private enterprise and individual tutelage was the usual mode of the dissemination of religious knowledge. This tradition was to change with the emergence of the Farangi Mahall Ulama as custodians of Muslim intellectual traditions.

The Lucknow-based Farangi Mahall Ulama were known by the family of Mulla Hafiz, who received a land grant from Mughal Emperor Akbar sometime in the sixteenth century. He was the ascendant of Qutbu’d – Din (d. 1691), a Mughal courtier who participated in the collection of Fatawa-yi ‘Alamgiri’. The latter is a collection of Fatwa to be used in the Mughal courts. The family and students who took lessons from this family were known by the name of Farangi Mahall. The activities of the Ulama of Farangi Mahall, however, were confined to producing graduates for princely services. Their most significant contribution was their systemisation of the curriculum—dars-i-Nizami—for religious education. As Metcalf informs us, this curriculum came to Bengal when a Farangi Mahall graduate was appointed as the first principal of the madrasa yi ‘Aliyah’, Calcutta in 1780. 

Farangi Mahall’s dominance declined and the centre for religious studies shifted from Lucknow to Delhi by the late 18th century. The person who played a key role in this shift was Shah Waliyu’llah, who advocated for more social and political responsibilities for the Ulama as opposed to those of the Farangi Mahall. Waliyu’llah’s successors had studied legal codes and written fatwa for the Muslim community, which had once become the main tool to disseminate religious instructions when the British were about to establish political authority over India. Besides claiming centrality of the hadith in the interpretation of the sharia, Shah Waliyu’llah discouraged blindly following the rulings of the earlier generations (taqlid). He suggested going back to the Quran or Sunnah for legal solutions. 

The 1857 revolution landed heavily upon the revivalist movement initiated by Shah Waliyu’llah. Suspecting the Ulama’s involvement, British colonisers took all religious institutions in Delhi under their control. Fourteen hundred people were shot by British soldiers in Kuchah Chelan, where Shah Abdul Aziz (son of late Shah Waliyu’llah) used to preach, according to Metcalf. The Delhi-based Ulama were forced to move to the countryside and establish a madrasa at Deoband in 1867. 

After the revolution, Deoband became the centre for Muslim intellectuals. They introduced formal religious education for Muslims in British India. Students had separate classrooms and a library, and the curricula were organised according to departments, such as Arabic, Persian, and others. A formal examination system was introduced and successful students were issued certificates of award. Graduates came from different corners of India. Most significantly, these graduates went back home and set up madrasas in their respective localities. By the end of the 18th century, nearly every town held the presence of the Deobandi Ulama.

One well known Deobandi Ulama was Muhammad Ashraf Ali Thanawi (1863-1943), who authored Bahishti Zewar (1981)—among the most popular books for Muslims of India, and masterminded the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act 1939—the first reformist legislation for Muslims of British India.

In the late 19th century, the Ulama played a crucial role in upholding the pride of their religion and their community through publications and public debate on religious issues. Their intellectual exercise peaked with the invention of print technology, multiplying the scale of the transmission of knowledge all over India. Publishing in local languages such as Urdu, instead of Arabic, was one of their effective strategies to establish authority. This also served as a medium of communication between common Muslims and the Ulama, and helped renew Muslim traditions against local customs. Following the birth of Pakistan on August 14, 1947, the Ulama consolidated their authority and forced the then government not to pass a law against sharia. Over the next few years, their continuous efforts would force the Pakistani government to establish a Supreme Sharia Board to oversee any inconsistencies between sharia and laws passed by the parliament. 

The historiography of these two books may be compared with Geoffrey G Field’s Blood, Sweat and Toil: Remaking the British Working Class, 1939-1945 (Oxford University Press, 2011), in which Field understands “class” from multi-dimensional approaches including its relationship with the state, society, and family. Similarly, Barbara Metcalf and Qasim Zaman define the Ulama as a class by providing a social and intellectual history of their presence in South Asia. Metcalf highlights their hardships in the post-1857 revolution and the silent “intellectual” revolution of the Deobandi Ulama. Hers is an excellent cultural history. Despite being published earlier, Zaman fills in what Metcalf’s study left to be addressed: it focuses on how the Ulama have played an active role in different social and political contexts, particularly in post-colonial Pakistan. He disapproves of the allegation that the Ulama are against changes. The common mistake that most studies make, says Zaman, is not to consider the social and political context within which the Ulama work. To him, the flexibility of sharia depends on a socio-political context. Zaman suggested that the Ulama do not respond to changes as not because they do not like it but because of their fear of losing authority over religious issues in a modern state. 

None of the above-mentioned studies, however, concerns the Ulama of Bangladesh. The growing presence of the Bangladeshi Ulama in the public sphere, particularly their increasing involvement in the political issues, merits investigation into—in Zaman’s words—their “transformation, their discourses, and their religio-political activism.” Could the Ulama in Bangladesh inherit the wind of the Islamic intellectual traditions? The question deserves to be addressed amongst others.

Dr Md Anisur Rahman is a legal historian at Asian University for Women. His research interests include Islam in Asia and South Asian Islamic Law and Society.

source: http://www.thedailystar.net / The Daily Star / Home> Reviews / by Md. Anisur Rahman / January 28th, 2021

Manzoor Nomani was ‘intrinsically Indian’ in the first place

Lucknow, UTTAR PRADESH :

Maulana Manzoor Nomani. Courtesy: Quranwahadith.

Maulana Muhammed Manzoor Nomani (1905-1997), most arguably was one of the five prime most Muslims of the Indian sub-continent in the last century. He was the founding member of Jamaat-e-Islami and later got associated with Tablighi Jamaat and was also the member of founding committee of Muslim World League.

Maulana Khalil-ur-Rehman Sajjad Nomani is his son who gives every credence to his father, as that is what has made him, potentially what he is today; the most potent Muslim voice in the nation.

Sajjad Nomani’s command on Arabic, Quran, Hadith, Urdu, Hindi and English, in the same verve, depth and gravitas, apart from being an eloquent speaker, an indefatigable champion of Muslim cause, a voracious reader and a writer with an unquestionable command on the intricacies of linguistic theory and cultural praxis, are all the qualities he has embodied and imbibed from his late father.

Yours truly also did once saw Manzoor Nomani Sahab, at his Nazeerabad residence, Lucknow, as he sat on his wheel chair engrossed in an Urdu newspaper and also attended to his funeral at Aishbagh, Lucknow in 1997.

It would be worthy to recollect some of the anecdotes Sajjad Sahab shared about his late father, which all are a treasure trove to understand the ‘times’ about seventy-five years back.

He reminisced that Pakistan first Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan was very insistent that Manzoor Sahab visit Pakistan and become a part of Pakistan Constituent Assembly to ‘pave for the ingredients’ for Islamic Jurisprudence for the state of Pakistan, and ultimately even officially sought for it, as Manzoor Sahab was one of the most outstanding figures of Islamic Law and Jurisprudence at those times.

When India’s PM Jawahar Lal Nehru came to know of it, he communicated that though he does not want Maulana to volunteer it, yet if Maulana wanted then government of India was to facilitate it. But, there was no question of Manzoor Sahab even entertaining the idea as he was an unwavering Indian by his heart, not out of any chance but primarily for his choice, as Muslims after 1947 were to choose between India or Pakistan and Manzoor Sahab stood for India.

Maulana Khalilur Rahman Sajjad Nomani

Sajjad Sahab would also reflect that it was in 1976, when he was studying in Medina University, and had come to India on his vacations, that Manzoor Sahab kidneys collapsed all of a sudden and he went into coma. That was the time when emergency was in place. He informed that ‘intelligence inputs’ were given to PM Indira Gandhi that unless Maulana Ali Mian Nadwi, Maulana Manzoor Nomani and Qari Siddeeq Baandvi were to be arrested, Muslims were not relent to ‘vasectomy-sterilization’ and Indira Gandhi went to India’s President Fakhrudin Ali Ahmed, for his counsel on it, to which she was answered that all hell will break loose in the country in case of such an eventuality.

In the meantime, Indira Gandhi was also informed about the medical situation of Manzoor Sahab, and a chartered place to carry Maulana to Delhi was sent to Lucknow. The family members could not fathom for it, for they knew, that Maulana was be very angry once after the coma was to subside, the gesture of Indira Gandhi was hence refused, and fortunately by the midnight Maulana regained his senses, but then the next morning Indira Gandhi herself came down to Maulana’s residence. She would insist that Maulana may be flown to Delhi for his medical treatment, but all what Maulana sought from her was that she should implement justice as there was ‘tyranny’ all across the nation. He would address Indira Gandhi as his daughter and that when she played in her father’s courtyard, Maulana was to advice her father JL Nehru on critical issues.

Such has been the sense of belonging of Muslims for Manzoor Sahab , inherited too well by his son, is that while Jamshedpur raged under riots of 1979, Maulana went on to sit in a mosque for 21 days, draw into people and disbursed charity amongst the hapless Muslims, which continued for months. Maulana had an impeccable memory as Sajjad Sahab, relates, that shortly before his death, while he was searching for a Hadith, his ailing father, who was almost comatose, made him look for it on the exact page of Tirmezi- a great compendium of Hadith. Maulana Manzoor Sahab was a living authority and a luminary of Hadith-the sayings of Prophet of Islam.

Manzoor Nomani Sahab surely has left an indelible mark on Muslim civilization not across only in India but throughout the whole Muslim world. The best part however is that, it has all been very well innately translated into a relentless campaign for Muslim rights in India, by his son Sajjad Nomani, an activist always on his heels and one of the most credible voice of Muslims in the nation today. He is right now articulating the cause of Peace and Justice, a desperate call of the nation today. Sajjad Sahab is also the spokesperson of All India Muslim Personal Law Board, the Apex of Muslims in the country.

***

The writer is a former UP State Information Commissioner and writes on political issues.

source: http://www.mulimmirror.com / Muslim Mirror / Home> Muslim Scholars / by Haider Abbas / June 20th, 2022

Date with history: A family’s journey from Medina to Mysore kingdom

KARNATAKA :

Synopsis

When bullock carts were the prime mode of transport, an Arab businessman was pained to see the beasts carry loads up the steep, rough climb.

In the 1930s, when bullock carts were the prime mode of transport, an Arab businessman was pained to see the beasts carry loads up the steep, rough climb from Hebbal Tank. Their hoofs wore thin very soon. So, he levelled the path, spending Rs 10,000 out of his pocket. When this came to the notice of Sir Mirza Ismail, the then diwan of Mysore, he promptly informed Krishnaraja Wadiyar. A private citizen spending for public good, the king thought, reflected badly on his administration. He made good the businessman’s expenses and named the area at the junction of Bellary Road, Jayamahal Road and CV Raman Avenue in his honour. Today , we call it Mekhri Circle.

The selfless businessman was M Enayathulla Mehkri (not ‘Mekhri’ as it is spelt today). The Enayathulla Mehkri Square was inaugurated by Sir John Hope, governor of the Madras Presidency , in April 1935.The space had a lamp post with five lights. A garden around it was maintained by ward officers. Later, in 1965, RM Patil, minister of home and municipal administration, notified it as Enayathulla Mekhri Circle through a notification in the state gazette.

Mehkri’s story , however, goes beyond the one philanthropic initiative he is most known by.

Mehkris were originally based near Medina in Arabia and migrated to India after the Turkish invasion. The family’s legacy dates back to more than 600 years. “While people believe that our name is derived from a place called ‘Mehkr’ in Syria, documents suggest that we were named after Mekhar in Maharashtra,” said Fazal Mehkri, nephew of Enayathulla Mehkri.

In India, the family held key posts under the Mughals and the Mysore maharajas.

Enayathulla Mehkri, born in 1898, went on to become a freedom fighter. At 17, he joined the Indian National Congress.

A contractor by profession, he participated in the freedom struggle, and was jailed for six months at Madras Central Jail along with C Rajagopalachari and EV Ramaswamy Naicker.

Mehkri was the municipal commissioner (between 1947 and 1948) and a councilor of the City Corporation for 16 years before that. He was not only the only member from Karnataka to be on the Advisory Council of the Freedom Fighters Cell of the AICC, he also headed the Karnataka Freedom Fighters’ Association till his death on November 28, 1990.

source: http://www.economictimes.indiatimes.com / The Economic Times / Home> Panache> ET Magazine> Travel> Business News> Magazine / by Divya Shekhar, ET Bureau / April 28th, 2016