Latest news with #VDSavarkar
Scroll.in
03-08-2025
- Politics
- Scroll.in
The true story behind a ‘real' photograph of Rani Lakshmibai
In 2003, a painted portrait of Hindutva ideologue VD Savarkar was installed in Parliament, sparking an uproar. Objections were raised over the fact that he had been accused in the Mohandas Gandhi assassination case, even though he escaped being charged in the conspiracy. As the controversy raged on, it was also discussed by us members of Sahmat, the trust established in memory of activist-artist Safdar Hashmi. Sahmat ideologue Rajendra Prasad had found Savarkar's book, The Indian War of Independence of 1857, in Delhi's Teen Murti library. Banned by the British, the first edition of the book in English was published in 1909. Leafing through the book I was astonished to see a reproduction of a postcard with a photograph titled 'Lakshmi Bai – The Rani of Jhansi and leader in the Indian War of Independence of 1857'. My heart raced. I thought I knew my photo history, but I had never seen this image or even a reference to it. I had visited the Jhansi fort as a child with my mother and the vivid tales told by the guide were seared in my memory. I had grown up hearing the famous poem Jhansi Ki Rani by Subhadra Kumari Chauhan. I have also seen countless paintings and other images of Lakshmibai. But a photograph, as an authentic portrait, would mean something else entirely. While working on an exhibit on the Uprising of 1857 with Sahmat a little later, I included this image of the Rani and it travelled across India as part of the display. Some years after this, in 2010, I saw a television news report about an exhibition in Bhopal with the same photograph, attributing it to an album in the collection of my artist friend Amit Ambalal in Ahmedabad. Play I contacted Ambalal who told me that he had bought the album in Jaipur in the 1960s and sent me images of the pages. There, among photos and paintings of the other freedom fighters of 1857, was the Rani of Jhansi. Devanagari and Urdu scripts on the back of the photograph identified her. This was thrilling. There was now a second historical source of the image and, importantly, it was in India. Excited by this discovery, in the following months I contacted many experts in the field to authenticate the image. Could the Rani have been photographed? Rani Lakshmibai had died in battle on June 18, 1858, but it was entirely possible that she had been photographed. Photography was fairly widespread in India by the mid-1850s. I began a long search to authenticate the image and its source. Around 2006-'07, I got in touch with photo historian Sophie Gordon, who was the curator of theatre director and collector E Alkazi's extensive early Indian photography collection in London. She had found an advertisement in a Delhi gazette shortly after the 1857 uprising, where there were photos of Jhansi offered for sale. But no images were traceable. As part of my search into sources that could help verify the authenticity of the photograph, I had reached out to Bhawa Nand Uniyal, a collector of rare books from Delhi who was in London at the time. I told Sophie Gordon that Uniyal had written back to tell me that he had found a post-Independence edition of Savarkar's book in his collection stating that the postcard was not Rani Lakshmibai, but Begum Shahjahan of Bhopal. 'Now he finds this reference in the catalogue of proscribed material in the India Office Collections,' I said in my email to Gordon. 'It obviously is not in the photography collection because it is a printed postcard. Are you still interested in this? Being there, you probably have much easier access to dig this would be a terrific coup.' I gave her the reference details Uniyal had sent me: Listed item no: 176 in publications proscribed by the GOI Reference no: EPP 1/36 IOLR A catalogue of the collections in the India Office Library and Records and the department of Oriental Manuscripts & Printed books. Edited by Graham Shaw and Mary Lloyd 1985. Then, in 2010, I got a message from archivist and researcher Pramod Kumar KG, who found the same image in a photo album in the archives of the Chowmohalla Palace in Hyderabad. 'This particular page has a carte-de-visite showing the lady in question seated on a chair. The caption in Urdu reads HH the ..... of Tanjore,' said Pramod Kumar's message. 'The main name is illegible though Her Highness and Tanjore is pretty clear. Looking at the image it is quite possible that this is the work of the Johnston & Hoffman Studio, here I am going by the props and the way the image is taken. Hope this helps clear the confusion.' Shortly thereafter, a response from Sophie Gordon, by then the curator of photography of the Royal Collections at Windsor Castle, helped clear the matter up. 'The portrait of the woman identified as the Rani of Lakshmi is, as Pramod suspected, a princess of Tanjore,' wrote Gordon. 'The Royal Collection has this portrait in the photograph collection where it is captioned as 'HH The Princess of Tanjore', from the Bourne and Shepherd studio. It is an albumen print (ie not a daguerreotype, and must therefore date to a later period). I should date to sometime in the 1870s.' There was also an interesting history to the album. 'The portrait is on a page with other portraits of her two daughters and her official consort. The album itself is a collection of portraits of the many rulers of India, presented to Queen Victoria in the mid-1880s,' said Gordon, who had sent along an image of the entire album page. 'Unfortunately, I have never seen a photographic portrait of the Rani of Jhansi. I hope this is helpful.' Here ended the seven-year long search, from the Teen Murti library to Bhopal, Hyderabad, the India Office Library and finally Windsor Castle in England. The image Sophie Gordon had sent was by far the clearest and showed other members of the Tanjore ruling family being photographed in the same setting. It was amazing that this image had been in wide circulation at some point in the late 19th century as a photograph of the Rani of Jhansi. It was a testament to the power of her myth in the Indian imagination in our struggle for freedom. Sadly, it was not the Rani. But the tale was worth telling. It took seven years to hunt down the source of this photograph and even longer tell this tale. But in this age of artificial intelligence, misinformation, and fabrications, a search through 19th century archival material to authenticate history is even more important.
Indian Express
30-07-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Bihar's electoral roll revision: Are we shifting from inclusive citizenship to identity-based exclusion?
The recent controversy regarding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of Bihar's electoral rolls is indicative of the fading institutional boundaries in contemporary India. The Election Commission of India (ECI) is mandated under Article 324 to revise electoral rolls. Section 21(3) of the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1950 authorises the ECI to conduct a special revision of the electoral roll for any constituency or part of the constituency. Similarly, Rule 25 of the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 authorises the ECI to conduct an intensive revision of electoral rolls. However, the present order of the ECI brings in the new concept of Special Intensive Revision (SIR). In the domain of citizenship rights, we are moving from jus soli (citizenship by birth) towards jus sanguinis (citizenship by bloodline). Further, this movement is insisting more on technicalities/documentations, which are affecting the vulnerable sections. The recent Bihar caste survey showed that 63 per cent of the population are backward or extremely backward, and 73 per cent of Muslims are backward. Many of these people are now afraid to be declared illegal migrants. In India, historically, due to migration, different cultural identities have gained their own cultural and political space, creating a multicultural society. In the pre-Independence period, the citizenship debate divided the cultural nationalists and political nationalists. Leaders like V D Savarkar linked citizenship to cultural roots. Based on this, he denied equal citizenship to any community whose punya bhoomi (holy land) is situated outside India. The Constituent Assembly of India, however, deliberated on the issue and gave citizenship — through Article 5 — to those who were born in India or resided in the country for at least five years before the commencement of the Constitution and had not acquired citizenship of any foreign country. Through Article 6 (which later became Article 11), it empowered Parliament to make provisions regarding all matters related to citizenship. The Citizenship Act, 1955, removed the provision of citizenship by birth for those born after January 26, 1950, on the condition that any one of the parents should be an Indian citizen. The Assam Accord in 1985 inserted Assam-specific section 6A, which allowed those who migrated between 1966 and 1971 to be registered as foreigners. Those who migrated after 1971 were considered illegal migrants. Through the 1987 amendment, the state gave citizenship based on the principle of jus soli to those who were born before 1987. However, those who were born in and after 1987 were given citizenship based on jus sanguinis. According to the 2003 amendment, the citizenship of a person born after or in 2003 depends on whether both of her parents are already Indian citizens. If not, at least one of them must be Indian, and the other shouldn't be an illegal immigrant. In the year 2024, the Citizenship Rules, 1956, were amended. It openly mentioned the religious identity of the immigrants. Section 8A of the amended rules empowered the collector of a district, in Gujarat and Rajasthan, to register minority Hindus with Pakistani citizenship, who have migrated to India more than five years ago with an intention to settle down permanently, as citizens of India. The 2024 amendment, by bringing in religious identity for acquiring citizenship, has defied the secular outlook of Article 7 of the Constitution, which deals with people who have migrated from Pakistan to India, without mentioning any religion. In 2015, two significant amendments were made to the Passport (Entry into India) Rules, 1950 and the Foreigners Order, 1948. Both are precursors to the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019. It further institutionalised this religion-based exclusion by making it easier for a certain group of people to get Indian citizenship based on their religious identity. The current SIR of ECI appears to establish hierarchy in citizenship. The Indian Constitution has served as a significant obstacle to such a shift towards cultural identity-based citizenship. We need critical engagement with the constitutional framework to promote inclusive citizenship norms rooted in political identity rather than cultural identity. The writer teaches at Christ University. Views are personal
Time of India
24-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Nashik court grants bail to Rahul Gandhi in Savarkar defamation case
A Nashik court in Maharashtra on Thursday granted bail to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in a defamation case related to his remarks about V D Savarkar . The defamation complaint was filed by Satyaki Savarkar, the grandnephew of V D Savarkar, alleging that Rahul Gandhi made defamatory and derogatory statements about the freedom fighter during an event organised by the Overseas Congress in the United Kingdom in 2023. The remarks were subsequently circulated on social media, allegedly damaging Savarkar's legacy and public image Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Public Policy CXO Technology Data Analytics Cybersecurity MCA Data Science Management Healthcare Product Management Digital Marketing Others healthcare Leadership Design Thinking Degree MBA Operations Management others Finance PGDM Data Science Skills you'll gain: Economics for Public Policy Making Quantitative Techniques Public & Project Finance Law, Health & Urban Development Policy Duration: 12 Months IIM Kozhikode Professional Certificate Programme in Public Policy Management Starts on Mar 3, 2024 Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 12 Months IIM Calcutta Executive Programme in Public Policy and Management Starts on undefined Get Details During the proceedings, Judge Shinde read out the defamation charge under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. Advocate Pawar confirmed that his client had received copies of the complaint and all relevant documents. When asked by the court whether Gandhi understood the nature of the allegations, Pawar responded affirmatively. Asked if he wished to plead guilty, Advocate Milind Pawar on behalf of Rahul Gandhi clearly stated, "No. I do not plead guilty." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Treatment That Might Help You Against Knee Pain Knee pain | search ads Find Now Undo With the plea officially recorded, the court has now set July 29 as the date to begin recording evidence in the case, marking likely the commencement of a full trial, hearing on other applications related to the case also to be conducted on the same date. Following the statement made by Rahul Gandhi, in April 2023, Satyaki Savarkar, the grandson of one of Vinayak Savarkar's brothers, filed a complaint with a Pune magistrate regarding alleged defamatory comments made by Rahul Gandhi. Live Events These remarks were reportedly made during an Overseas Congress gathering in London on March 5, 2023. According to the complaint, Gandhi intentionally made false and damaging accusations against Savarkar to tarnish his reputation, causing mental distress to him and his family.
Hindustan Times
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Rahul Gandhi pleads not guilty in Pune court in defamation case over comments on Savarkar
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Friday pleaded not guilty in a defamation case pertaining to his comments on Hindutva ideologue V D Savarkar in a Pune court. File photo of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. (HT Photo) Judicial Magistrate (First Class) and Special Judge (MP/MLA court) Amol Sriram Shinde read out the charge, levelled by Satyaki Savarkar, a grandnephew of V D Savarkar, to which Gandhi pleaded not guilty through his lawyer Milind Pawar. The Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha was not present in the court and his lawyer Pawar pleaded not guilty on his behalf before the court. Advocate Sangram Kolhatkar, who is representing Satyaki Savarkar, said since the phase of recording of plea of the accused is over, the trial in the case will proceed now. The court kept the matter for next hearing on July 24.
Indian Express
11-07-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Savarkar defamation case: Rahul Gandhi pleads not guilty before Pune court
Congress leader and Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi on Friday pleaded not guilty in the V D Savarkar defamation case before an MP/MLA court in Pune. Rahul Gandhi's counsel Milind Pawar appeared before the court on his behalf to record his plea in the defamation case filed by Satyaki Savarkar, the grandnephew of Hindutva ideologue V D Savarkar. Special judge Amol Shinde of the MP/MLA court read out the charges against Gandhi. Then, through his lawyer, Rahul submitted that he does not plead guilty in this case. Advocate Pawar filed an application before the MP/MLA court seeking that the complainant (Satyaki) clarify under which provision of law the latter submitted 'two different and mutually contradictory family trees'. Pawar requested the court to direct the complainant to clarify the reason for the omission of the name of his mother Himani in the second family tree placed on record. Satyaki's lawyer Sangram Kolhatkar argued that the two family trees are not different or contradictory. The court asked Kolhatkar to file a say on the clarification sought by Rahul Gandhi's counsel, during the next hearing on July 29. Earlier, on March 28, advocate Pawar had filed an application on behalf of Rahul, requesting the court to direct the complainant to file a family tree on his maternal side. Pawar claimed that the complainant has 'deliberately, systematically, very brilliantly avoided, and suppressed to disclose the family tree from his maternal side in the present complaint.' The complainant's mother Himani Ashok Savarkar is a daughter of Gopal Godse, younger brother of Nathuram Godse, who had killed Mahatma Gandhi. But, on May 28, the court had rejected Rahul's application and observed that 'this case is related only to alleged defamatory speech made by the accused in London against VD Savarkar.' The court order stated that Satyaki is the grandson of one of the brothers of late V D Savarkar and the said case is not related to the family tree of his mother Himani Savarkar. Satyaki Savarkar had filed the defamation complaint against Rahul for his alleged objectionable remarks against V D Savarkar during a speech the Congress leader made in London on March 5, 2023. According to Satyaki, Gandhi had said in his speech in London that Savarkar had written a book in which it is stated that Savarkar and five to six of his friends beat up a Muslim and were 'delighted' about it. Satyaki said V D Savarkar had not written any such book as Gandhi had claimed, nor has such an incident ever take place. In his petition, Satyaki stated, 'He (Gandhi) has intentionally made false, malicious and wild allegations against Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, fully knowing the said allegations to be untrue, with the specific objective of harming the reputation and to defame the surname Savarkar.' In his criminal defamation application, Satyaki demanded maximum punishment for Rahul Gandhi under section 500 (Punishment for defamation) of the Indian Penal Code. On May 27, 2024, the inquiry report submitted by Pune City police before the magistrate court in this case concluded that Rahul Gandhi defamed V D Savarkar during his speech at the London event, by making statements that were not written by Savarkar in any of his books.
