A day after Defence Minister Rajnath Singh claimed that former Hindu Mahasabha leader Savarkar had filed a mercy petition before the British government on Mahatama Gandhi’s request, Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel argued how Gandhi could have communicated with a jailed Savarkar.
“Where was Mahatma Gandhi and where was Savarkar at that time? Savarkar was in jail. How could they’ve communicated?” Baghel was quoted as saying by ANI.
“He (Savarkar) filed mercy petitions from jail and continued being with the Britishers,” the Congress leader added.
Baghel also claimed that Savarkar was the first one to speak of the two-nation theory after he came out of jail in 1925.
Where was Mahatma Gandhi&where was Savarkar at that time? Savarkar was in jail. How could they’ve communicated? He filed mercy petitions from jail & continued being with Britishers.He was the 1st to speak of 2 nation theory after coming out of jail in 1925: Chhattisgarh CM Baghel https://t.co/1aEsVMgZLC pic.twitter.com/9lmW1cUa3B
— ANI (@ANI) October 13, 2021
Singh had on Tuesday said: “A lot of falsehood was spread against Savarkar. It was repeatedly said that he filed multiple mercy petitions before the British government. The truth is he did not file these petitions for his release. Generally a prisoner has right to file a mercy petition. Mahatma Gandhi had asked that you file a mercy petition. It was on Gandhi’s suggestion that he filed a mercy petition. And Mahatma Gandhi had appealed that Savarkar ji should be released. He had said the way we are running movement for freedom peacefully, so would Savarkar.”
He was speaking at the launch of a book — Veer Savarkar: The Man Who Could Have Prevented Partition — by Uday Mahurkar and Chirayu Pandit at the Ambedkar International Centre in Delhi where RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat also addressed the gathering.
During the book launch, the RSS chief had stated, “People were using goondaism to make everyone accept this (two-nation) theory and so (Savarakar had to use) harsh words. The circumstances were such. In hindsight, we can say that it was important to speak loudly at that time and had all spoken like that the partition would not have happened.”