It is quite perplexing that a 12-page report prepared by Jawaharlal Nehru 100 years back on September 12, 1924, on the Hindu-Muslim trouble which occurred during the Mohurrum procession at Sambhal was recently presented on several ‘Godi’ media channels by distorting its contents.
That report was prepared on the instructions of Mahatma Gandhi and submitted to him by Nehru.
The deliberate misrepresentation of that report after 100 years was done to justify Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath’s support to some Hindu leaders moving a local court in November 2024 for a survey of the 500-year-old Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal built on a ground which had ruins of a Hindu temple allegedly demolished during the Mughal period.
It is worthwhile to recall that the said local court very inexplicably gave an ex parte order on November 19, 2024, for survey without hearing the respondents representing the mosque, and the same day the Adityanath’s administrative apparatus with unprecedented alacrity went ahead for a survey with heavy police protection.
The court order did not take into account the Places of Religious Worship Act, 1991, which prohibits any alteration of the shrines as it existed on August 15, 1947. While the survey was done without any untoward incident, the local administration very strangely came forward to do a second survey in the early morning of November 24, 2024, accompanied by people shouting the “Jai Shree Ram” slogan.
Muslims gathered to protest against the abrupt second survey without giving any notice and five of them lost their lives allegedly due to police firing.
Also read: ‘Nothing Provocative About Jai Shri Ram’: Adityanath Shifts Blame in Sambhal, Bahraich Violence
The matter was raised by Samajwadi Party members in the UP assembly. They accused the Adityanath government of pushing Sambhal into communal violence as part of a pre-planned conspiracy for political gains.
In response, the chief minister, inter alia, said, “…only the traditions of Ram, Krishna and Buddha would govern the country and not those of Babur and Aurangzeb.”
“Will you,” he asked the opposition benches, “uphold the legacy of invaders, or the traditions of Ram, Krishna, and Buddha?”
Later, in January this year, he said that any disputed structure should not be called a mosque and the Muslim community should “in the most respectful manner” hand over the Mughal-era Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal to Hindus if scriptural and archaeological evidence show that a Hari Har temple dedicated to Kalki existed at the site before the mosque was built.
He also asked the Muslims to “accept their mistakes” regarding the alleged demolition of a Hari Har temple in Sambhal more than five centuries ago.
It is against that backdrop some channels dug out the aforementioned 1924 report of Nehru and selectively quoted from it to justify the initiatives of some Hindus going to court. The contents of that report was presented in a twisted manner to defend Adityanath for pointing fingers at the Muslims.
Therefore, it is of paramount importance to put the report and its findings in proper perspective and appreciate how Nehru, 100 years back, very dispassionately studied the Hindu-Muslim trouble in Sambhal after hearing both sides.
Published in Volume 2 of the Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru, the report gave an account of the Hindu-Muslim conflict in Sambhal without any involvement of the British regime or any of its officials.
How the report is being used to serve BJP’s religious polarisation agenda
The findings of the report stand in sharp contrast to the recent violence in Sambhal which was triggered by state agencies, such as the lower court, which gave a unilateral decision for the survey of the mosque, and the state machinery, which executed it without factoring in the sensitivities of Muslims.
In the very beginning of the 1924 report, Nehru wrote that people of both the communities of Sambhal were preparing to move the court to file a criminal case and so they were afraid of saying or doing anything which might prejudice the matter.
Nehru admitted that it was extraordinarily difficult to get at the truth. However, he also observed, “Prima facie the Hindus are aggrieved party”.
“Two of their temples,” the report stated, “have been desecrated and idols have been broken; a number of them have been badly beaten and still bear the marks of injury. They accused the Muslims for their premeditated attack, exaggerated instances of their cruelty and implicated in the riot every Mohamadan of repute. The Mohamadans, on the other hand, argued that the Hindus provoked Muslims by playing music and singing on a large scale when the Tazias were taken out.”
Nehru did not hesitate to mention that “…there was considerable amount of hard lying on both the sides.” He admitted, “A quiet enquiry conducted by some little known person would perhaps be helpful in elucidating some doubtful points.”
In contrast to Adityanath’s definitive assertion that the Mughal-era Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal was built 500 years ago by demolishing a Hari Har temple, Nehru in his 1924 report, stated, “It (Sambhal) was an important place in the Hindu period and Prithvi Raj built a fine temple which it is said was subsequently converted into the principal mosque of the city.”
He added, “It is full of teerth and sacred wells. It is said that the next avatar will come from Sambhal.”
He prefixed his remarks using the words “It is said” – something that says how cautious and probabilistic he was while noting on communally sensitive matters.
Also read: ‘Making Sambhal Into Ayodhya’: Why a Police Outpost Near the Jama Masjid Is Concerning
There is also a reference in Nehru’s report to the establishment of a Hindu Sabha which started a litigation to recover temple properties of Sambhal misappropriated by both the Hindus and Muslims. It succeeded in many cases, chiefly against the latter. Those initiatives of the Sabha were a source of resentment among Muslims.
Nehru’s report had observed that due to the overwhelmingly large population of Muslims in Sambhal in 1924, almost all officials of the town including SDO, tahsildar and police inspectors were Muslims and because of complaints of the Hindus against those postings, a Hindu official was sent as SDO that year.
This caused resentment among Muslims.
In 2024, the Mohurrum procession coincided with the organisation of a Hindu Mela. The SDO, a Hindu, ordered that no music would be played at the time of the mourning procession associated with Mohurrum. However, the Muslims complained that music was played when the mourning procession was underway.
Hindus denied these allegations and took a stand that only conch shells were blown in the temple. They also alleged that to defame the Hindu SDO, Muslims made wild allegations and started attacking the Hindus in the Mela.
The conflict between Hindus and Muslims in 1924 were also centred around the differences arising out of organising the mela and Mohurrum procession. The magistrate had appealed for a compromise between the two communities and even a conciliation board of Hindus and Muslims was formed for resolution.
However, it failed to bring them together as Muslims insisted that there should be no case filed against them and Hindus rejected that stand.
Nevertheless, in 1924, it is understood that the state authorities tried for a compromise. Switch to 2024-25 – the chief minister is openly exacerbating the conflict.
The 1924 conflict in Sambhal was never about the status of the 500-year-old Shahi Jama Masjid as it is being made now. It is indeed a pity that Nehru’s report on Sambhal violence has been grossly distorted and misrepresented to aid and abate the religious polarisation by the current BJP regime in UP.
Gandhi, in fact, sat in a 21-day fast in 1924 to restore communal harmony and Hindu-Muslim unity after he got that report from Nehru. It is instructive that in his article titled Gulbarga Gone Mad, published in Young India magazine on August 28, 1924, Gandhi referred to communal violence in several places including Sambhal and appealed people of all faiths to live in amity by eschewing ill will.
He wrote, “Yours is a golden opportunity, if you desire amity between the two communities. In the light of what seems to have happened at Amethi, Shambhar (Sambhal), and Gulbarga, it is doubly your duty to solve the question…..You have therefore noble traditions behind you. You can turn your quarrels to a good account by closing the ranks and establishing a heart-friendship that will not break under any strain whatsoever.”
He concluded the article by saying, “The Hindu- Muslim question is the question on a proper solution of which hangs the destiny of India in the immediate future.”
Those words uttered by Gandhi 100 years back assume greater significance in 2025 to defend the idea of India and promote communal harmony being endangered by those controlling the state apparatus anchored in religious polarisation.
S.N. Sahu served as an officer on special duty to President of India K.R. Narayanan.
