‘Socialists, RSS had common ground then… Sangh families sustained underground movement': Dattatreya Hosabale
RSS sarkaryawah (general secretary) Dattatreya Hosabale was a 21-year-old student when the Emergency was imposed, and among those jailed under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA). In an interview with The Indian Express, Hosable, now 70, talks about the RSS's involvement with Jayaprakash Narayan's Movement, its collaboration with the socialists, and the organisation of underground networks after the ban on it. Excerpts:
First, there was a student protest against hostel fees at an engineering college in Gujarat. It became a widespread agitation in the entire state against corruption. This was the time of the Chimanbhai Patel government (of the Congress) in Gujarat. A Navanirman Yuvak Samiti was started by the student leaders. The ABVP participated in this agitation as one of the leading organisations.
The Gujarat CM had to resign under pressure of the student agitation. There were many such corrupt practices in different parts of the country… Student agitations were brewing on many campuses.
In Bihar, a student agitation started against price rise and corruption of the (state's) Abdul Ghafoor government. The agitation was led by the ABVP and other student organisations. There was police lathicharge and firing on the students… There were widespread protests by the people and some prominent leaders in the society in response.
After this, the ABVP leaders and others approached Lok Nayak Jayaprakash Narayan to guide them.
JP had two conditions. One, the agitation should be totally non-violent and peaceful. Second, it should not be led by political leaders. The student leaders consented, and JP agreed to lead the movement. The ABVP was an active participant… The Sangh leadership also stood behind this as it was an agitation for the betterment of society… a fight against corruption, price rise… and the demand was for better employment and education systems.
This is how the RSS joined the JP Movement… Not directly as an organisation – but indirectly – through swayamsevaks who were active among students, labour unions… JP's agitation too was organised by these organisations (linked to the Sangh). And Sangh workers extended support for these tours, local meetings and rallies. Seeing all this, the Indira Gandhi government banned the RSS.
We had better relations with the socialists during the movement. Communists were not very active in most of the states… But the socialists, Samajwadi Jan Sabha, Jana Sangh and ABVP… We all had common meetings to organise rallies for JP…
There were some common points, common grounds (between socialists and the RSS). George Fernandes, Ravindra Verma, Ravi Ray, Mohan Dharia and many socialists…. all had direct interactions with (Jana Sangh leaders) Nanaji Deshmukh, Bhaurao Deoras and many others.
Student and youth organisations of the Sangh vichar parivar (the larger Sangh family) also played an active role. I was one of them in Karnataka.
Some people tried to oppose the participation of the ABVP, but JP directly told them that those who agree with the agenda of the movement can join in. He said others had no right to prevent the entry of any organisation that is ready to support those common points. Even those who were critical (of the RSS) had to shut their mouth.
On November 14 1975, the satyagraha against the Emergency was launched. A large number of the RSS cadre and other organisations inspired by the RSS were detained. In the beginning, the underground movement was led by Nanaji Deshmukh, Ravindra Verma, George Fernandes, Duttopant Thengadi and many others. When Nanaji Deshmukh and Ravindra Verma were arrested, the Lok Sangharsh Samithi (the common platform leading protests against the Emergency) appointed (RSS leader) Dattopant Thengadi as its general secretary.
So, the underground movement was sustained greatly because of the Sangh's personal contacts and through the help of their families. To run an underground movement, it is necessary to escape from the eyes of the police… The RSS had this informal contact and communication.
For months together, workers who were part of the underground movement could not go to their families and homes. Many had to shut their business, resign from their jobs or discontinue their education.
Many people could not meet their family members, particularly elders, who were suffering because of certain diseases. Income was almost zero… Sangh workers made arrangements for various such resources through an organisational network.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
34 minutes ago
- Economic Times
‘Apologise in your ancestors' name': RSS to Congress on Emergency
At an event in Delhi marking 50 years since the Emergency, RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale demanded that the Congress apologise for the 1975 crackdown under Indira Gandhi's rule. He also called for the removal of the words "socialist" and "secular" from the Constitution's Preamble, stating they were inserted during the Emergency. Show more 03:03 04:10 05:27 05:13 02:08 02:08 04:02 04:03 05:09 02:06 05:42 06:14 04:13 02:28 03:11 05:17 12:57 06:22 02:12 01:30 01:25 03:15 08:27 01:24 11:15 09:42 03:55 08:42 01:59 02:26 03:58 03:06 01:42 02:43 04:56
Deccan Herald
an hour ago
- Deccan Herald
Oppn attacks RSS over call to remove terms 'Socialist', 'Secular' in Constitution's Preamble
The RSS-BJP's very ideology stands in direct opposition to the Indian Constitution. RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale has openly called for the removal of the words 'socialist' and 'secular' from the Preamble. This is not just a suggestion—it is a deliberate assault on… — Congress (@INCIndia) June 26, 2025 The RSS has NEVER accepted the Constitution of India. It attacked Dr. Ambedkar, Nehru, and others involved in its framing from Nov 30, 1949 onwards. In the RSS's own words, the Constitution was not inspired by Manusmriti. The RSS and the BJP have repeatedly given the call for a… — Jairam Ramesh (@Jairam_Ramesh) June 27, 2025 The RSS's renewed push to strip socialism and secularism from India's Constitution lays bare their long-standing disdain for it. They never accepted the Constitution, attacking Dr. Ambedkar, Nehru, and its framers since November 30, 1949, for its rejection of Manusmriti's… — John Brittas (@JohnBrittas) June 27, 2025
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
RSS leader Dattatreya Hosabale questions ‘socialist', ‘secular' in Preamble: Why the words were inserted in 1976
Commemorating 50 years of the imposition of the Emergency at an event, RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale on Thursday (June 26) said a discussion was merited on the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble of the Constitution. Hosabale said, 'The words socialist and secular were added to the Preamble [during the Emergency]. No attempt was made to remove them later. So, there should be a discussion on whether they should remain. I say this in a building (Ambedkar International Centre) named after Babasaheb Ambedkar, whose Constitution did not have these words in the Preamble.' Multiple legal challenges have been filed over the years against the inclusion of the words. Just last year, the Supreme Court upheld them in a verdict. Here is why. Essentially, the preamble includes the core philosophy of the Constitution and serves as an introduction to it. The Preamble of the Constitution that commenced in 1950 read: 'WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens: JUSTICE, social, economic and political; LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity of the Nation; IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.' The description of India as a 'secular' country in particular, has been debated intensely over the past four decades; with critics, mostly on the Right, claiming that these 'imposed' terms sanction 'pseudo-secularism', 'vote-bank politics' and 'minority appeasement'. The words were added by The Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, during the Emergency imposed by then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Imposing the Emergency under Article 352 allowed her government to curb civil liberties and centralise power. Let's look at the word 'socialist' first. Over her years in government, Gandhi had attempted to cement her approval among the masses on the basis of a socialist and pro-poor image with slogans such as 'garibi hatao' (Eradicate poverty). Her Emergency government inserted the word in the Preamble to underline that socialism was a goal and philosophy of the Indian state. It needs to be stressed, however, that the socialism envisaged by the Indian state was not the socialism of the USSR or China of the time — it did not envisage the nationalisation of all of India's means of production. Gandhi herself clarified that 'we have our own brand of socialism', under which 'we will nationalise [only] the sectors where we feel the necessity'. She underlined that 'just nationalisation is not our type of socialism'. The people of India profess numerous faiths, and their unity and fraternity, notwithstanding the differences in religious beliefs, were sought to be achieved by enshrining the ideal of 'secularism' in the Preamble. In essence, this means that the state protects all religions equally, maintains neutrality and impartiality towards all religions, and does not uphold any one religion as a 'state religion'. A secular Indian state was founded on the idea that it is concerned with the relationship between humans, and not between human beings and God, which is a matter of individual choice and individual conscience. Secularism in the Indian Constitution, therefore, is not a question of religious sentiment, but a question of law. The secular nature of the Indian state is secured by Articles 25-28, part of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Yes, in essence, it was always a part of the philosophy of the Constitution. The founders of the Indian Republic adopted Articles 25, 26, and 27 with the explicit intention of furthering and promoting the philosophy of secularism in the Constitution. The 42nd Amendment only formally inserted the word into the Constitution and made explicit what was already implicit. In fact, the Constituent Assembly specifically discussed the inclusion of these words in the Preamble, and decided not to do so. After members such as K T Shah and Brajeshwar Prasad raised the demand to add these words to the preamble, Dr B R Ambedkar put forward the following argument: 'What should be the policy of the State, how the Society should be organised in its social and economic side are matters which must be decided by the people themselves according to time and circumstances. It cannot be laid down in the Constitution itself because that is destroying democracy altogether.' What was the Supreme Court case? In July 2020, a Supreme Court advocate by the name of Dr. Balram Singh filed a petition challenging the inclusion of the words 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble of the Constitution. Later, former Law Minister Subramaniam Swamy and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay also filed petitions with similar challenges. The court rejected these arguments in a short, seven-page order in November 2024, with Justices Sanjiv Khanna and P V Sanjay Kumar noting that 'the flaws and weaknesses in the arguments are obvious and manifest.' When the Constitution was being drafted, the court noted that the meaning of the word secular was 'considered imprecise' as some scholars (particularly in the West) had interpreted secularism as being opposed to religion. With time though, the court held that 'India has developed its own interpretation of secularism, wherein the State neither supports any religion nor penalises the profession and practice of any faith'. The ideals espoused in the Preamble — fraternity, equality, individual dignity and liberty among others — 'reflect this secular ethos', the court held. Similarly, the court held that the word socialism has also evolved to have a unique meaning in India. It held that socialism refers to '(the) principle of economic and social justice, wherein the State ensures that no citizen is disadvantaged due to economic or social circumstances' and does not necessitate restrictions on the private sector which has 'flourished, expanded, and grown over the years, contributing significantly to the upliftment of marginalized and underprivileged sections in different ways'. Finally, it held that there was no justification for challenging the 42nd amendment nearly 44 years after its enactment. This explainer draws upon previous explainers published in 2024 and 2022.
