The trial began on 7th May 1929 in the court of Additional Magistrate Mr. Pool. Lawyer Asaf Ali was representing the revolutionaries voluntarily. The defendants requested that they would give their statements in Sessions Court only. The request was granted under Sec. 3 of Indian Penal Code.
The hearing began on 4th June, 1929 in the court of Session Judge Mr. Middleton. The prosecution put forward its case and paraded its witnesses.
In defence Bhagat Singh and Dutt issued a statement which questioned the veracity of the statements of several witnesses. In reply to the Lord Irwin’s claim that the bomb throwing was an attack on the constitution they said, ‘We humbly claim to have seriously studied the history, the conditions of our country and human aspirations and we hate hypocrisy.
Our aim was to express our practical opposition to the institution that had since the very beginning proved its worthlessness and nakedly demonstrated its capacity to cause harm. More we studied the more we became convinced that this institution (Central Assembly) is meant to demonstrate to the world the helplessness and pitiable condition of India. It has become a symbol of irresponsible and arrogant government’s brute power…’.
In the lower court Bhagat Singh was asked to define the revolution. He said, ‘There is no imperative place for bloody battles in revolution nor for any personal revenge. The revolution is not bombs and guns culture. By revolution we mean to change the system which is based on injustice. The producers and labourers are basic units of economic system. The exploiters rob them of their fruits of labour and human rights…’
He ended the statement with the words—‘On this altar of sacrifice we are determined to burn our young lives for incense. For our great objective no sacrifice in big enough. We shall patiently wait for the culmination of the revolution. Inquilab Zindabad!’
This statement greatly aroused the passions of the countrymen. Bhagat Singh became the nation’s centre of attraction.
The hearing ended on 10th June, 1929.
On 12th June, the Session Judge sentenced Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt to life imprisonment in the ‘Assembly Bombing’ case.
Although the defendants didn’t really contest the case yet an appeal was made to the higher court. The idea was to avail of more opportunities to make patriotic statements to arouse anti-British feelings among the masses.
The appeal was heard in Lahore High Court before the Justice Ford and Justice Edison.
Here Bhagat Singh made another brilliant statement—
‘My Lord,
We are no barristers or scholars of English language. Nor have we any high educational degrees. Hence erudite and eloquent speeches should not be expected from us. We request to be forgiven for grammatical errors and only the real meaning of our statements be taken into consideration. I will leave all other points of this case to my lawyers and shall concentrate to express my views only on one aspect which is very vital for this case. The point is what was our real intention and to what extent we are guilty.
…My Lord, in these circumstances it would’ve been expected of the learned Session Judge to measure the extent of our crime by the result or to see it from the psychological angle with the help of our statement. He did none.
The first fact is that the bombs thrown by us in the assembly caused no physical or psychological damage to anyone. From this view point the punishment dealt to us is not only harsh but smells of vendetta. From the other angle, if the mental state of the accused is not understood then the real aim of the act is not truly known. If the aim is ignored then no one can be given justice. Because if the aim is taken as immaterial factor then all military generals would look murderers, government tax collectors would appear thieves and thugs. If objective is ignored then a government has no right to ask anyone to deal justice. If aim is ignored then religious preachers would appear liars and every messiah could be charged with defrauding millions of simple minded people. Christ would look a rebel rouser and a peace disturbing anarchist. In legal terms he would be an ‘Anti-social element’.
…In these circumstances, My Lord, we think that we have been misunderstood. We came to your court not to beg for pardon or for lighter sentence but to clear our position. We want not to be subjected to improper treatment and no wrong assumptions be made about us. The question of the punishment is secondary.”
The Judges upheld the verdict of the Session Judge on 13th January, 1930.
The appeal was heard by the High Court of Lahore because Bhagat Singh was wanted in other cases namely ‘Sanders Murder’ and ‘Bomb Factories’ at that place. During the ‘Assembly Bombing’ case trial Bhagat and Dutt were kept in Delhi jails in European class where they were treated nicely.
But the story of the Punjab jails was different. The prisoners and undertrails were very ill treated in jails there. Bhagat Singh and Dutt were kept in Mianwali jail.
In protest against the ill treatment they went on hunger strike. The other undertrials also joined them. They were demanding better treatment and better facilities. Then Bhagat Singh made a written request to be transferred to Lahore jail since he was to face the Sanders Shooting case to enable him to prepare his defence. The other co-accused were in Lahore jail. It was a legitimate demand. There was no reason to keep them in Mainwali jail once the ‘Assembly Bombing’ case was over.
In the last week of June they were transferred to the Bostral Jail of Lahore. Their hunger strike continued.
The preliminary hearing of the ‘Sanders Shooting’ case was held on 10th July, 1929. Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt were brought to the court on stretchers as they were too weak to walk due to the hunger strike. Their condition shocked the countrymen.
The other undertrials of the Bostral jail also began hunger strike in their support.
Their demands were : (1) Better food of the standard that was served to the European prisoners as they were political prisoners.
(2) Exemption from manual labour. (3) Freedom to get books and writing material. (4) At least one newspaper everyday. (5) Special ward for political prisoners. (6) Bathing facilities and clean clothes.
The authorities refused to oblige. They made it as prestige issue. Bhagat Singh lost 5 pounds every week. By 30th July his weight stabilized at 133 pounds.
His condition was a cause of worry. The people all over the country were greatly agitated. There was danger of the public anger exploding. The government appointed a Jail Enquiry Committee to consider the demands of the undertrials on 2nd September, 1929.
On 13th September, 1929 one of the close friends of Bhagat Singh, Yatindranath Das passed away impoverished by the hunger strike. The authorities had tried to force feed the hunger strikers. But the determined revolutionaries had perfected the art of throwing up the force-fed food. Entire country was grief stricken.
The death of the undertrial meant trouble for the rulers. The people were losing the patience and getting in rebellious mood.
The Jail Committee speeded up its work and submitted its report. Bhagat Singh knew that the authorities had yielded. He said, “That’s enough. Let’s see how they implement the Committee’s recommendations.”
He conveyed to the authorities that he was ready to break his hunger strike provided all the strikers do it simultaneously. The authorities agreed.
On 5th October, 1929 Bhagat Singh broke his fast with his comrades by accepting dal-roti after 114 days of the hunger strike.
During the hearing of ‘Sanders Shooting’ case Bhagat Singh and his friend created a lot of problems for the officials. They would loudly sing patriotic songs and recite challenging verses disrupting the proceedings. They would march into the court hand in hand swaying and singing.
The prosecution had army of witnesses. To one witness during cross examination undertrial Shiv Sharma put questions in such a way that the witness was forced to reveal the formula of bomb-making. Thus the formula became known to all militants outside.
The court was gradually turning into a circus. The gate of the court was by the roadside. Everyday after schools and colleges closed crowds of students would gather there. Bhagat Singh would speak loud enough for them to hear his statements. Sometime the crowd would join the undertrials in singing patriotic songs.
One day all hell broke loose when in the witness box stood Jaigopal, a revolutionary who had turned approver. His very sight made the blood of the undertrials boil with anger and hatred. He was the same fellow who had teamed up with Bhagat in Sanders killing. To make matters worse the traitor didn’t look ashamed. Infact, he was twirling his moustaches and mocking at Bhagat Singh and Co.
A young undertrial couldn’t take it. He took off his shoe and threw it at Jaigopal. It shocked the Judge and other court officials. Abuses were being hurled. The Judge ordered undertrials to be handcuffed.
Bhagat Singh and his friend protested. There were unruly scene. The proceedings had to be suspended for that day.
The next day, undertrials refused to go to the court. The police tried to use force. There were scuffles. After a great struggle and wrestling the police was able to load only five undertrials on the lorry. But at the court, the five clung to one another so fiercely that they could not be off loaded. No proceeding on that day too.
The following day the undertrials were brought to the court on the promise that their handcuffs would be taken off during the trial. At the court the officials went back on their promise.
At lunch time Bhagat Singh laughed and said, “Come on friends, at least let us eat with free hands.”
Their handcuffs were taken off. But after the lunch undertrials refused to wear the cuffs.
Then, a barbaric scene was enacted never seen before in an Indian court. At the order of the magistrate the undertrials were mercilessly beaten in the court. The main target was Bhagat Singh. Eight pathans pounced on him and pilloried him. The undertrials were taken back to jail and again beaten severely.
Next day, the police reported that the undertrials couldn’t be brought to the court. They would rather die.
The barbaric act was reported in the press. The British government earned a lot of hatred and criticism from all quarters. Protest demonstrations were held in India and abroad.
The government softened up. The trial again began. The court saw the arrival of Subhash Chandra Bose, Baba Gurudutt Singh, K.F. Nariman, Raja Kalakanker, Rafi Ahmad Kidwai and Mohanlal Sexena.
Meanwhile, Bhagat Singh again undertook hunger strike alleging non-compliance of earlier recommendations on 4th January, 1930. The government apologized and promised to do the needful. He broke his fast but he had some other complaints. The accused revolutionaries stopped going to the court. A newspaper reported that undertrials were boycotting the court.
Bhagat Singh wrote a long letter citing a number of reasons for their inability to attend the court.
Meanwhile, on 12th September, 1930 British government had introduced a bill in the Central Assembly according to which if an accused made himself unable to attend trial in whatever way, the magistrate concerned will have the power to continue the proceedings in absentia. It was fiercely opposed and it got stalled. But the government announced that if ever need arose it would pass the bill using its special powers.
On 1st May, 1930 Governor General Lord Irwin issued special order called ‘Lahore Conspiracy Case Ordinance.’ According to it a three judge tribunal was formed which had the power to decide a case even in absence of the accused, defence lawyers or witnesses.
Punjab High court constituted the tribunal with Justice J. Coldstream as the president and the members were Justice Aga Haider and Justice G.G. Whilton. It was to try Bhagat Singh and 16 other co-accused. Bhagat Singh and his friends decided to boycott the tribunal. They thought that if the tribunal gave a verdict in their absentia the people would explode in anger and the government would face big trouble.
On 5th May, 1930 the tribunal sat for its first hearing. Somehow Bhagat Singh and his friends allowed themselves to be taken to the tribunal court.
They began to play their old game of singing songs and shouting slogans to thwart the proceedings. The two British judges would watch it seething in anger. But the Indian judge Aga Haider would watch the scene calmly, perhaps laughing up his sleeve enjoying the discomfiture of his British colleagues.
The two judges further got antagonised when they were told the meaning of the slogans and the verses Bhagat Singh and company was shouting and singing. Of course, they were blantantly offensive to the English ears.
Whenever calm descended the undertrials raised questions and created procedural hurdles.
One day, just as fed up President Coldstream took chair the slogan shouting started. He asked the accused to stop it. There was no stopping Bhagat and his friends. They began to sing a song very loudly.
Coldstream blew his top. He asked the policemen to get the singing stopped. It was 12th May, 1930. Again the same old barbaric act was repeated. The undertrials were mercilessly beaten in the court.
Justice Aga Haider couldn’t take it. He rose up to walkout in protest. His walkout could have tarnished the image of the Tribunal. So, Mr. Coldstream made personal request to him to remain seated.
He sat down but he kept his face covered with a newspaper—‘At least I would be able to say to Khuda that I saw nothing.’
Justice Coldstream wrote in the proceedings—‘Owing to disorderly conduct of the accused the case is adjourned till tomorrow. The court was cleared and the accused were removed—’J. Coldstream, G.G. Whilton.
Justice Aga Haider didn’t sign the note. He wrote his separate note—‘I was not the party to the order of the removal of the accused from the court to the jail and nor I was responsible for it in anyway. I disassociate myself from all that took place today in the consequences of that order.’— Aga Haider.
Naturally, Justice Aga Haider was removed from the Tribunal. The new Tribunal consisted of Justice G.G. Whilton President, Justice Abdul Qadir member, Justice J.K. Topp member.
Bhagat Singh and his friends boycotted the new tribunal. The proceedings continued unilaterally for three months and closed on 26th August, 1930. The tribunal wrote to the accused if they wanted to put up a defence. No accused was interested. The main accused knew what the verdict would be.
Bhagat Singh wrote two letters to his younger brother briefing him about what should be coming and about the last meeting they would be having. Bhagat’s mother had come to see him but the jail authorities had refused her permission. Bhagat wrote to his brother not to bring the mother again as she was emotionally fragile.
On 5th September, 1930 there was some unusual atmosphere in the jail. The undertrials were informed that there was going to be last dinner. The jail authorities also sat for dinner with the undertrials. To the surprise of the officials the revolutionaries were not tense. They were laughing and cracking jokes with the officials. Jokes were being enjoyed. For once the jail officials were treating the accused as their own kith and kin. Infact they were overwhelmed at seeing the bravery of the revolutionaries. The last dinner was clear indication that some bad news were coming.
The 7th October morning saw the jail being besieged by armed police. Something was in the offing.
Sometime later a messenger of the Tribunal arrived and he read out the verdict in ‘Sanders Shooting’ case. It was so arranged because the Tribunal knew that the accused won’t come to its court to hear the verdict.
Why would they when they had boycotted the trial proceedings all through?
It was a 68 pages verdict which announced the following punishments and acquittals :
1.Death by hanging to Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru.
2.Life sentence to Kamal Nath Tiwari, Vijay Kumar Sinha, Jaidev Kapoor, Shiva Verma, Gaya Prasad, Kishori Lal and Mahavir Singh. They were to serve the sentence in Kala Pani jail of Andeman. (Later, the last named died there after a 9 day hunger strike over some issue).
3.Kundal Lal to serve seven year and Prem Dutt three year jail sentence.
4.Master Asha Ram, Ajay Ghose, Surendra Nath Pandey, Deshraj and Jitendra Sanyal were acquitted.
The government tried to keep the verdict a guarded secret but it leaked out somehow. It feared that the people might get angry at the judgment and create law and order problem. Section 144 was imposed in Lahore. Meetings and rallies were banned.
By 8th October, 1930 most of the people of Lahore and the rest of the country learnt about the verdict. Waves of anger were sweeping through. Students Union called for a strike. The schools and the colleges closed down. Many students and 17 women were arrested. A D.A.V. college professor and 80 students attacked a police party. All over the country, there were rallies protest meetings and strikes against the punishment.
By December, 1930 it became clear that the rulers will hang Bhagat Singh come what may.
The desperate father Sardar Kishan Singh wrote a mercy petition to the Viceroy in which he tried to prove that his son Bhagat Singh was in Calcutta on the day Sanders was shot dead in Lahore.
The petition greatly anguished and angered Bhagat Singh. He at once wrote a letter to his father almost condemning him. Some excerpts from the letter read :
‘I was surprised to learn that you have forwarded a mercy petition to save me. It is so agonising that I can’t take it calmly.
Being your son I fully respect your paternal feelings and wishes. At the same time I firmly believe that you had no right to file mercy petition without consulting me.
I believe that you must be remembering how from the very beginning you had been trying to persuade me to fight the case carefully and intelligently to defend myself. And you know that I always rejected that line of thinking.
I am of the view that all political activists in such situation must ignore and defy the courts. The resultant harsh penalty should be gladly accepted as a duty.
My life is not as precious as you think. At least I don’t think that my life so valuable as to be traded for the high principles of life.
Father, I am a bit worried. I am afraid that I might cross the limit of civility while accusing you or condemning your act in harsh words unwittingly. But I will say it clearly that had any other person done that act I would have without hesitation called him a traitor. But in your case I can’t say that.
I must only say that it was a weakness, a very lowly emotional aberration. It was a time when every one of us was on test. Father, I want to say that you have failed that test. I know that you have been a patriot as good as anyone can be. I know that you have dedicated your entire life to the freedom struggle of the country. Then, I don’t understand why had you to show such weakness at this hour!’
As wished by Bhagat Singh, his father Sardar Kishan Singh got the letter printed in many of the newspapers to make the situation clear to the people.
Meanwhile, the efforts were on to get the verdict of the Tribunal challenged to reverse the decision. A defence committee had been set up.
But Bhagat Singh wanted the death sentence to
stay as he thought that it would arouse the conscience of the youth resulting in the massive uprising against the government. Sometimes he would get worried and confide the Vijay Kumar Sinha, “Brother, if the hanging gets stalled it will be bad. Our sacrifice is essential to serve the revolution.”
Advocate Pran Nath Mehta met Bhagat Singh in jail and persuaded him to agree for appeal in Privy Council on the plea that it would get him one more chance to make yet another inciting statement.
For Bhagat there was one more angle. A peace pact was being worked out between Lord Irwin and Mahatma Gandhi. He was certain that the pact won’t satisfy the people and the youth would get disillusioned would be ready to explode in frustration. If his hanging took place at that time it would ignite the anger of the youth and the command of the Congress party would get wrested by its aggressive youth wing.
He said, “The hanging must take place at a time when the people are emotionally at boiling point and their attention is riveted on us.”
The appeal to the Privy Council could stall the hanging upto that right moment, he guessed.
So, in November, 1930 the appeal was made.
In the month of February, 1931 Gandhi-Irwin Pact was worked out. All the political workers who were in jails as a result of Non-Cooperation and Civil Disobedience movements were released. Gandhiji refused to intervene in the cases of the revolutionaries who were involved in killings, bombings and such acts of violence. Gandhiji had always made it clear that he won’t ever compromise on the principle of non-violence.
During the trial, Chandra Shekhar Azad made some daring plans to rescue Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt from the jail.
But Bhagat Singh refused to cooperate.
Meanwhile, the Privy Council rejected the mercy appeal.
The Viceroy of India ignored all appeals made by individuals or organisations in the respect.
