The Appalling Massacre at Jallianwala Bagh

“The incident in Jallian Wala Bagh was ‘an extraordinary event, a monstrous event, an event which stands in singular and sinister isolation” Winston Churchill

On April 13, 1919, Brigadier-General Reginald E.H. Dyer opened fire on an unarmed gathering in Jallianwala Bagh. Official sources place the casualties at 379, private sources say that the number was over 1000 and Civil Surgeon Dr Smith indicated that they were over 1800.

Background

In the spring of 1919, British India was at a crossroads of history. The First World War was over, and soldiers were returning to discover an India more impoverished and less free than it was when they left. News of the Russian Revolution had fired the imagination of thousands of young Indian. The trial and martyrdom of the Ghadar Party leadership in the Lahore Conspiracy trial, and the internment of some 1,500 of the emigrants in India, proved an abiding symbol for a younger generation of radicals.

Moreover, after the Lucknow Pact of 1916 both Hindus and Muslims initiated joint struggle for the self-rule.

Rowlatt Report

This Hindu-Muslim unity was unfavourable to the British Raj. Government formed a committee to probe into their secret activities. This was headed by Justice Sidney Rowlatt who presented his report on 30th April, 1918. In the light of this report, the Government introduced the ‘Rowlatt Bill’ in the Imperial Legislative Council, of which Quaid-e-Azam was also a member. This bill gave unlimited powers to the administration and the police. The accused had no right to appeal or employ a lawyer for his defence. The Government was authorized to put any individual under house arrest without assigning any reason.

This added fuel to the already blazing flames of hatred, among the masses, against British Raj.

Indian Reaction

Quaid-e-Azam resigned from the Imperial Legislative Council after the passage of this bill. Gandhi also launched his Non-Violence Movement against this statute. Nation-wide strikes became a routine. In the wake of growing discontent, Sir Michael O’ Dwyer – the Governor of Punjab – banned all public meetings, processions and protests in the province. The Government also put a ban on two well-known leaders of Amritsar, the Cambridge-educated allopath Dr Saifuddin Kitchlew and his homeopath colleague Dr Satyapal, from making speeches. Later on, they were arrested and sent to Dharamsala. Their arrest fuelled the protests and left India in panic.

Events

On 9th April, 1919, a large crowd gathered in a park demanding the release of their leaders but the police dispersed them by resorting to firing on them. On 10th April, General Dyer received orders to leave Jalundhar for Amritsar. He reached Amritsar with 475 English and 710 Indian soldiers and two armoured vehicles.
On the morning of April 13, Baisakhi day, Dyer’s troops marched through Amritsar, proclaiming that all assemblies would be “dispersed by force if necessary.” A public announcement was being made that a rally will be held at 4:30 p.m. at Jallianwala Bagh. By afternoon, a peaceful gathering of over 20,000 people was in place, hearing a succession of speeches condemning the Rowlatt Act and the recent arrests and firings.

When General Dyer was told that a meeting was being held at Jallianwala Bagh, he reached with 90 troops there instantly and ordered them to open fire on the unarmed gathering. The firing continued for fifteen minutes and left 379 people dead on the spot and more than 1200 critically injured.

Back in his headquarters Dyer reported to his superiors that he had been confronted by a revolutionary army, and had been obliged to teach a moral lesson to the Punjab.

In a telegram sent to Dyer, British Lieutenant-Governor of Punjab, Sir Michael O’Dwyer wrote:
“Your action is correct. Lieutenant Governor approves.”

Aftermath

O’Dwyer requested higher authorities that the martial law be imposed upon Amritsar and other areas. This was granted by the Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford, after the massacre. Following the public outcry against the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh, the government was compelled to appoint a committee of enquiry with Sir John Hunter as the chairman. The Congress appointed its own committee with Motilal Nehru as chairman and Gandhi as one of its members.

Deposing before the Hunter Commission, inquiring into the shooting, General Dyer said his action was meant to punish the people if they disobeyed his orders. However, what was more damning was his statement,

”I think it quite possible that I could have dispersed the crowd without firing but they would have come back again and laughed, and I would have made, what I consider, a fool of myself.”

The Hunter Committee split down the middle, with its three Indian members, Jagat Narayan, C.H. Setalvad and Sultan Ahmad, authoring a dissent. The majority condemned Dyer, arguing that in “continuing firing as long as he did, it appears to us that General Dyer committed a grave error,” but broadly endorsed other acts of violent repression. The dissenting members, understandably, argued that the martial law regime’s use of force was wholly unjustified.

British Reaction

The public opinion in England stood divided regarding the brutal tactics used by General Dyer. Some considered his acts a timely action to teach a lesson to the Indians whereas others felt that this tragedy played a vital role in arousing the nationalistic feelings among the Indians.

Conclusion

On the whole, the massacre at Jallianwala Bagh shattered into pieces once for all the tradition of loyalty to the British Crown. And within a period of 27 years, it was proved that the brutal acts of General Dyer and Lt. Governor O’Dwyer could not suppress the passion for independence that flared up after the above episode.

Note:

On 13th March, 1940, an Indian revolutionary from Sunam, named Udham Singh (a.k.a. Mohammad Singh Azad), who had witnessed the events in Amritsar and was himself wounded, shot dead Sir Michael O’Dwyer, believed to be the chief planner of the massacre (Dyer having died years earlier) at the Caxton Hall in London.