Latest news with #NMML
Indian Express
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
As Govt decides to legally contest Sonia Gandhi's claim to Nehru's papers, a key question: what are Private Papers of public figures, and who can see them?
The annual general meeting (AGM) of the Prime Ministers' Museum and Library (PMML) Society has decided to take legal action to ensure that Congress leader Sonia Gandhi returns the Private Papers of Jawaharlal Nehru that she took away from the museum in 2008. Last year's PMML AGM had discussed in detail the reclaiming by Sonia of 51 cartons of donated Nehru Papers when the UPA was in power and she was chairperson of what was at the time known as the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (NMML) Society. These papers, part of the Private Collection of India's first Prime Minister, had been donated to the museum by his family earlier. In 2008, Sonia had also barred access to several sets of these papers. Sources told The Indian Express that a broad consensus had emerged in Monday's (June 23) AGM chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi that Nehru's papers were a 'national treasure and should be handed back to the museum as its rightful place to preserve his legacy'. Last year, the PMML had decided that it would not permit future donors of Private Papers of eminent personalities to impose indefinite conditions on the declassification of such material. How private are the 'Private Collections' of eminent public personalities? What rules govern the declassification of correspondence involving occupants of high government office? Who is responsible for declassifying access to such papers? The Jawaharlal Nehru Papers were the first set of Private Papers obtained by NMML, which was set up in memory of the first Prime Minister. These papers, relating to both the pre-Independence and post-Independence periods, were transferred to NMML in several batches from 1971 onward. The transfer was facilitated by the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund (JNMF) on behalf of Nehru's legal heir, Indira Gandhi, who apparently remained the owner of these documents until her death in October 1984. Subsequently, a substantial collection of Nehru's Papers from the post-1946 period were handed over to NMML by Sonia Gandhi. Yes. The PMML has the largest collection of Private Papers in the country, which originally belonged to some 1,000 personalities of modern India, encompassing the entire spectrum of its leadership. In this priceless collection are the papers of Mahatma Gandhi, B R Ambedkar, Rajkumari Amrit Kaur, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Bhikaji Cama, Chaudhary Charan Singh, and many others. Among its recent acquisitions are papers of former Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Shanta Kumar, which include letters written by him to Prime Minister Narendra Modi on One Nation, One Election, the abrogation of Article 370, and Indo-Pak relations, according to the PMML. There are also the papers of the legendary environmental activist Sundarlal Bahuguna, which were donated to PMML by his wife, Vimla Bahuguna, and papers pertaining to Hindi writer and author Yashpal, comprising correspondence pertaining to his revolutionary activities during the freedom struggle. The individual collections have come to PMML from families, institutions, universities, and other private donors. The papers are invaluable for an accurate appraisal of the lives and times of these personalities, and essential for an understanding of India's modern history and its landmark moments. This is what lies at the heart of repeated efforts to make them available to scholars and researchers. The custodians of the archives say there are essential differences between papers and correspondence that can be deemed personal, as opposed to Private Collections, even if they pertain to the same person. For instance, the correspondence of a President or a Prime Minister with other eminent personalities of the time, or with institutions, can be part of that person's Private Collection by virtue of these papers being owned by the person's family or other private individuals. However, correspondence and documents held in personal capacity are excluded from this set. Another set of papers can be classified as Official Records — these are held by various government departments and ministries, and could comprise letters, records, or file notings, etc. pertaining to the working of various central and state governments. When donors hand over Private Collections in their ownership to archives and museums, they do sometimes reach an understanding with the recipient institution, imposing conditions for their declassification and public access. Many of those who donated Private Collections to PMML set unspecified embargo conditions on public access to these papers — consequently, the institution holds these papers and conserves them, but it cannot make them public, and researchers cannot access them. It is in this context that the museum — which functions under the Ministry of Culture — decided that it will, under normal circumstances, permit only a five-year embargo from the date of receipt of any new papers. In rare cases, this window can remain shut for up to 10 years at most. PMML has also decided to open up several sets of Private Papers that have been lying in its custody for decades, pertaining to the first Speaker of Lok Sabha G D Mavalankar, Nehru's niece Nayantara Sahgal, and as many as 2.80 lakh pages pertaining to Nehru that were not claimed by Sonia Gandhi in 2008. The other organisation that acquires Private Collections in the country, the National Archives of India — which too, operates under the Culture Ministry — says it acquires only those papers which the donors agree to declassify. It is the norm to put all records in the public domain, unless in very rare cases, where the concerns may be pressing and pertain to security or sensitivity. The National Archives' Private Archives Section has in its custody a rich collection of private papers of eminent persons who have contributed in various fields of public life. These papers have been acquired mainly through donations and gifts from individuals and institutions around the world. The National Archives has papers pertaining to Mahatma Gandhi, Dr Rajendra Prasad, Dadabhai Naoroji, Purushottam Das Tandon, Maulana Azad, Minoo Masani, Sardar Patel and Keshav Dev Malviya among others. In the United States, the Library of Congress Manuscript Division holds Personal Papers and organizational records that are significant in American history. The National Archives and Records Administration is the official depository for US government records, like the National Archives of India here. In India, The Public Records Rules, 1997, cover the declassification of all kinds of records and correspondence. For official records, the Rules say that the responsibility for declassification rests with the respective organisations, and that records should ordinarily be declassified after 25 years. The definition of Public Records encompasses any records in relation to the central government, and any Ministry, department or office of the government — including the PMO and the President's Office. However, the 1997 Rules don't lay down sweeping powers for papers owned by private individuals and families, access to which is voluntary in nature — either by means of donation or sale of these documents in some cases. Several of these issues could be contested legally if the government does take the matter of the Nehru papers to court. This is an updated and edited version of an explainer that was first published on June 27, 2024. Divya A reports on travel, tourism, culture and social issues - not necessarily in that order - for The Indian Express. She's been a journalist for over a decade now, working with Khaleej Times and The Times of India, before settling down at Express. Besides writing/ editing news reports, she indulges her pen to write short stories. As Sanskriti Prabha Dutt Fellow for Excellence in Journalism, she is researching on the lives of the children of sex workers in India. ... Read More
Scroll.in
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Scroll.in
From the biography: How freedom fighter MC Davar tried to prevent the partition of India
MC Davar's first meeting with Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose in Calcutta is not recorded, but in his interview to the NMML Davar recalls meeting the great leader a few years later in Dalhousie: It was 1938 and I went to Dalhousie and there Subhas Chandra Bose was staying as a guest of Dr Dharam Vir…I went to see Sardar Joginder Singh Mann, who became afterwards a Minister and Speaker of the Punjab Assembly. I had gone to treat his wife. Subhas Bose was there and he said: 'Dr Davar, I had wished long ago that you should stop your practice and take up the work which you were doing in Calcutta, that is revolutionary work. But today's revolutionary work, political activities and sufferings of all of us are going waste due to the simple reason that Muslim League comes in the way, and so why should we not devote all our time for unity of Hindus and Muslims?' Dr Davar replied: 'The task is very difficult, moreover this requires a great deal of patience.' But [Bose] said: 'I know your capacity and the way you are tackling the problems…I wish you could leave the practice or depend only on your practice for a few hours to earn your bread, and devote all your time to Hindu-Muslim unity, and especially Congress-Muslim League understanding.' This conversation with Subhas Bose made a deep impact on young Davar's mind. As the new year began, he met Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, the Liberal leader who exactly ten years ago at the Calcutta session of the Congress, presided over by Motilal Nehru, had made a brave attempt to reconcile the differences between the Congress and Muslim League over the provisions of the 'Nehru Report'. The All India Parties Conference of 1927 had authorised Motilal Nehru to prepare a report on the Constitution of free India that would address the concerns of the Muslims in a country with a dominant Hindu population. But the report was rejected by the Muslim League, and an early opportunity, two decades before independence, for keeping India united was lost. The Muslim League's demand for the partition of India and the carving out of a separate Muslim country grew stronger and louder. When the now 26-year-old Davar met Tej Bahadur Sapru in Delhi, where he now lived after spending almost eight years in Calcutta during and after his Homoeopathy studies, he suggested to the veteran leader that he should call another All Parties Conference, like the one in 1927 which had resulted in the Nehru Report. Things might turn out differently this time. Initially hesitant, on health grounds, Sapru finally gave in to Davar's persuasion, and agreed to call an All Parties Conference. Meanwhile, the Aga Khan came to Delhi and met Sir Mohammed Yakub, the Deputy Chairman of the Central Assembly, and later Commerce Member of the Viceroy's Executive Council. Dr Davar received a message from Yakub that he was unwell and wanted homoeopathic treatment as by now, through word of mouth, many eminent people had come to know that Dr Davar was 'the best' homoeopath in Delhi. When the Doctor was examining his patient, the latter said: 'Dr Davar, why should you not do anything for the country? His Highness the Aga Khan came to me yesterday. He was feeling miserable that people are not united here. I'm suffering from fever but just talking to you I'm getting much relief. Why don't you take up this work?' To Davar's answer that he had decided 'to do his humble bit', Yakub replied, 'You can do much more, you have better capacity to do it.' Davar told Mohammed Yakub: 'Then with your blessings and His Highness Aga Khan's blessings, and also as advised by my leader, Netaji Subhas Bose, I will take up this work.' Yakub then advised Davar to go to Lahore and meet Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan, the then Prime Minister of Punjab who was totally against the partition of the country. Yakub also gave him a letter of introduction to the Punjab premier. This was the beginning of the year 1940. After his meeting with Mohd. Yakub Khan, Davar left for Lahore the very next day by Frontier Mail. So passionate was he to the cause of Hindu-Muslim unity – the only way, he felt, the partition of the country could be prevented – that he didn't care that he was leaving his newly married wife, Lila Vati (not Dr Lilavati, whom he had met earlier in Calcutta), alone in their rented flat in Connaught Place. But fortunately for Lila Vati, she had parents residing in Karol Bagh, which was not far from the couple's flat. It was a biting cold morning, in the first week of February 1940, when Davar reached Lahore railway station. After a bath at the residence of his cousin Chaman Lal, he went straight to the bungalow of Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan. Before he could hand him the letter of introduction given by Mohd. Yakub, Hayat Khan said, 'Don't bother about the letter, I know the purpose of your coming here.' Obviously Mohd. Yakub had telephoned Hayat Khan about Davar's mission at his instance. As Davar was about to begin talking, the brother-in-law of the Punjab premier, Mir Maqbool Mahmud, the brain behind the Unionist Party, arrived and joined the talks. In a lighter vein, Hayat Khan told his brother-in-law, 'Look, Maqbool, Davar has left Punjab, and with it, Punjabi too.' Davar told him this had happened because of the influence of the cosmopolitan culture of Delhi, where one gets used to speaking more in Hindustani or English. But for the remaining conversation, he spoke in Punjabi. Davar presented 26 points against Partition, one of which read: If Pakistan comes into being, it is not the Hindus only who will suffer, but the Muslims will suffer much more, and along with Muslims, naturally, India will suffer and, along with India, the whole of Asia will suffer, and one day Pakistan will become a danger to world peace. When Davar was on the 13th point, Maqbool interrupted and said, 'Dr Sahib, there is no need to go further. We have fully understood your views and appreciate the points you have enumerated here.' Sikandar Hayat told Davar to convey to Sir Mohd. Yakub and the Aga Khan that 'Punjab will remain for all Punjabis – Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims. As long as Sikandar lives, there will be no Pakistan; no partition of Punjab. And if no partition of Punjab takes place, there will be no Pakistan…Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, and all others will enjoy equal opportunities, all are my own kith and kin, we Punjabis cannot be divided.' After a week, Sikandar Hayat came to Delhi, where Sir Mohd Yakub and Davar met him and the three of them had a long discussion at the end of which Sir Sikandar repeated his pledge: 'Jab tak Sikandar ke dum me dum hai, koi partition nahi hoga. (As long as Sikander breathes, there will be no partition.)' But soon after he returned to Lahore, an extremely violent incident took place in which many Muslims were killed in a clash with the police who were trying to prevent them from forcibly taking over a Gurudwara. The situation thus became tense just before the Muslim League session was to take place. This was the session in which Muhammad Ali Jinnah had planned to pass the famous 'Lahore Resolution' demanding Pakistan. But he knew that the Punjab premier was strongly opposed to the demand. However, the Gurudwara incident had adversely affected Sikandar Hayat's image, and Jinnah grabbed this opportunity. Through his emissaries, he managed to have the Punjab leader attend the session. Once there, Sikandar Hayat was asked to second the resolution for Pakistan moved by Fazlul Haq, Vice President of the Muslim League of Bengal. In the charged atmosphere of the session, it became impossible for Sikandar Hayat to decline, and he stood up only to say, 'I second the resolution.' He did not say a word after that and immediately left the meeting. Davar met Sikandar at Shimla a month later and asked him point blank: 'Sir Sikandar, what have you done?' The Punjab premier replied: 'What could I have done when the situation was such? The whole Muslim community would have risen in revolt if I had not spoken. But I assure you again that I will honour my pledge made earlier.' When Hayat Khan returned to Lahore, he was invited to speak at the Islamia College. There, true to his word to Davar, he spoke passionately against Partition, and warned that if Pakistan came into existence, Muslims would suffer much more than any other community. His speech came as a great relief to all his followers and admirers, Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs alike. But the Lahore Resolution of the Muslim League created an atmosphere that led to the widening of the already growing Hindu-Muslim differences. Excerpted with permission from He Almost Prevented Partition: The Life and Times of Dr MC Davar, Praveen Davar, Speaking Tiger Books.
