The 1945-46 INA Trials: How it accelerated India’s independence!

  Dr. Sudhanshu Mani

Ideas such as history, freedom, nationalism, justice, and polity, which once animated the intellectual and moral life of the nation, are steadily receding from public discourse, increasingly drowned out by noise, hype, fake outrage, and shrinking attention spans. It has therefore become imperative to revive a culture of informed, open-minded dialogue and to invite distinguished thinkers and public intellectuals to share perspectives that provoke reflection rather than merely reinforce prejudice. At Awadh Conclave, we attempt to contribute to this endeavour through conclaves, discussions, and interactive sessions, both online and in person, alongside various cultural and social initiatives.

 

In continuation of this effort, my friend Anand Vardhan Singh and I, on behalf of Awadh Conclave, organized a reading and discussion session in Lucknow on 24 May 2026 on Dr. Ashis Ray’s remarkable book, The Trial That Shook Britain: How a Court Martial Hastened Acceptance of Indian Independence.

Those as young as I am would instantly recognize that unforgettable baritone, rich, measured, and deeply evocative, which became the soundtrack to several defining moments of modern Indian sporting history. Equally compelling were his words and writings, marked by clarity, elegance, and an instinctive feel for history in the making. It was this voice and these words that carried from London the triumphant echoes of Prakash Padukone’s historic 1980 All England Badminton victory, the moment Indian badminton announced itself to the world. A few years later, during the 1983 Cricket World Cup, the same voice became inseparable from India’s improbable conquest at Lord’s. As the BBC’s first and only Asian ball-by-ball commentator for the tournament, Dr. Ashis Ray brought every thrilling moment of that unforgettable final against the mighty West Indies alive for millions of Indian listeners. For an entire generation, his voice and words became inseparably intertwined with the memory of India’s greatest sporting underdog story. The owner of that legendary voice and those immortal words is, of course, Dr. Ashis Ray himself.

Dr. Ray has authored several important works, notably Cricket World Cup: The Indian Challenge and Laid to Rest: The Controversy over Subhas Chandra Bose’s Death. We were privileged that he agreed to visit Lucknow to speak about his latest and perhaps most historically consequential work. Incidentally, he is also the grandson of Sarat Chandra Bose, elder brother of Subhas Chandra Bose.

The occasion was further enriched by the presence of Subhashini Ali as the keynote speaker. Uncompromising in her convictions, she has spent a lifetime championing labour rights, women’s empowerment, secularism, and social justice. One may agree or disagree with her role in Kanpur’s turbulent industrial years and subsequent downfall, but few can deny that her staunch convictions define her public life. Yet, beyond ideology, she carries an extraordinary historical inheritance. She is the daughter of two of the most celebrated soldiers of the Indian National Army, Lakshmi Sahgal and Prem Kumar Sahgal. Captain Lakshmi was personally chosen by Netaji to lead the legendary Rani Jhansi Regiment, one of the world’s earliest all-women combat regiments in modern history. Colonel Prem commanded INA formations in the Burma campaign, including the fierce battles around Mount Popa. Together, they embodied a generation that wagered everything for India’s freedom.

The session proved deeply illuminating. Ms. Ali delivered a powerful and nuanced address on the life, ideals, and political philosophy of Netaji, as well as the epochal INA trials of 1945–46 held at the Red Fort. This was followed by Dr. Ray’s engrossing presentation and interaction with the audience, where he read from his book and expanded upon its painstaking historical and investigative research into the court martial trials and their far-reaching consequences; proceedings which electrified the nation and profoundly shook the legitimacy of British rule in India.

Those interested may watch the complete session here:

https://www.youtube.com/live/a1EtOjZyeWY?si=RlHlHAjGGTs5eZqK

What follows here is a brief overview of the book and some of the exceptionally significant insights that emerged during the discussion. It is not my place to pronounce judgments on those observations but merely to place them before readers. History rarely offers absolute truths; rather, it presents competing interpretations through which societies understand themselves.  I have added a few reflections of my own in blue, and encourage thoughtful engagement, for it is ultimately the quality of our thinking that shapes the character of a nation.

The book exposes a war-exhausted Britain’s fatal miscalculation: attempting to crush Indian defiance by putting three INA heroes on trial for treason. Instead of enforcing colonial dominance, the Red Fort became an explosive ideological battleground. Ray captures the raw fury of a subcontinent united. This single trial shattered deep sectarian divides, binding Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs in shared outrage. The narrative brilliantly uncovers a profound political irony. The Indian National Congress, deeply rooted in Gandhian non-violence, pivoted to capitalise on the public's ferocious mood. Leaders like Nehru weaponised the INA's armed defiance to corner the Raj. As panic rippled through British high command, the trial triggered historic mutinies across the Royal Indian Navy and the British Indian Army. Ray proves that this legal theatre permanently broke the illusion of imperial control. It violently transformed a polite plea for gradual self-governance into an immediate, explosive, and completely non-negotiable exit strategy for the British Empire.

The foundational narrative that non-violence alone won India’s freedom demands an urgent, uncompromising correction. While peaceful resistance shook the empire, it was the armed defiance of the Indian National Army (INA), the volcanic outrage of the Red Fort trials, and the subsequent military mutinies that dealt the lethal blow to British rule. If not for these catalysts, independence would have been agonizingly delayed.

Future generations must not only learn about peaceful protest; they must revere the bravehearts who dared to pick up weapons and look the British Empire dead in the eye.

The three iconic INA officers put on trial: Major General Shah Nawaz Khan, Colonel Prem Kumar Sahgal, and Colonel Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon. They were originally commissioned in the British Indian Army before transferring their allegiance to Netaji’s revolutionary force in Southeast Asia. They stood in the dock representing India's three major faiths. Crucially, Sahgal and Dhillon hailed from two communities that colonial politics had viciously set at loggerheads with the third. Yet, they stood indivisible, fiercely refusing to beg for imperial clemency. They knew they had done their patriotic duty, ready to make the ultimate sacrifice..

There is no greater symbol of India’s syncretic soul and unyielding nationalism. If we fail to highlight their unity, we risk erasing our own heritage.

This brings us to a striking truth: of all the giants of the freedom struggle, perhaps only two remain universally uncriticised and deeply revered by every single Indian. The great Mahatma is not one of them. Those two undisputed icons are Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and Shaheed-e-Azam Bhagat Singh.

It is a stunning realization, but undeniably true and profoundly significant.

Dr. Ray sought to heal a deep historical rift by shedding light on the complex bond that Netaji shared with Gandhi and Nehru. Ideological differences with Netaji emerged because Gandhi leaned toward the right-wing faction of the Congress party, whereas Nehru shared more common ground with his leftist vision.

We must not sweep these deep ideological fractures under the rug. Yet, beneath the political friction lay a profound and undeniable mutual reverence among the three of them.

The aftermath of INA’s struggle brought immense heartbreak. Virtually all nearly 24,000 brave souls of the British Indian Army who risked everything to join the INA  were barred from entering the armed forces of free India. Nehru made this agonizing call under pressure from Lord Mountbatten and British and Indian military chiefs of the newly formed Indian Army. They argued that welcoming back soldiers who broke their oaths for the sacred cause of freedom threatened to infect the new military with insubordination. This cold policy stripped these patriots of their regular military pensions and cast them into financial exile. For over two decades, the state treated them as mutineers rather than heroes. It was only in 1972, under Indira Gandhi, that India finally recognized them as freedom fighters and offered financial relief.

This decision remains a subject of debate and I would respect all opinions. I, however, consider it a painful scar on our history and cannot condone it. For a nation reborn from the ashes of tyranny, the burning spirit of patriotism should have triumphed over military fears of indiscipline. To deny these warriors their livelihood for over twenty years, forcing countless bravehearts to perish in grinding poverty, is a shameful stain on our national conscience. While these heroes have long since passed into the quiet of the forgotten, we must do whatever it takes to restore their stolen dignity and honor their sacrifice.


Comments

  1. Neerav Nimesh AgrawalMay 26, 2026 at 11:15 AM

    Thank you for putting this so clearly.
    Essential for all to know.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shatrughan PrajapatiMay 29, 2026 at 8:33 PM


      A deeply thoughtful and powerfully written reflection on one of the most consequential chapters of India’s freedom struggle. The Red Fort trials and the sacrifices of the INA deserve far greater space in our national memory. What stands out most is the reminder that history is never one-dimensional; it is shaped by competing ideas, courage in different forms, and individuals willing to risk everything for freedom.

      Equally important is the emphasis on dialogue, historical inquiry, and intellectual honesty in an age increasingly dominated by noise and outrage. Conversations like these are essential not merely for revisiting the past, but for strengthening the moral and civic imagination of the present.

      Kudos to Awadh Conclave for creating such meaningful spaces for reflection and engagement.

      Delete
  2. Thanks for sharing this eye opening history. I salute these Braveheart.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Very well written Sir. The greatest strength of history — it never truly dies.
    It simply returns, time and again, in the form of new questions standing before us.

    ReplyDelete
  4. So nice to see our forgotten freedom fighters getting their proper due. But one thing that gets overburdening is a hypothesis, controversial but maybe worth considering, regarding our beloved Netaji's inclination to invite Japanese army for fighting against the Britishers. Could it have been that if INA had won, then Japanese were to rule India, replacing Britishers. Japan had at that time invaded, annexed and occupied large parts of Korea and China, unleashing torturous regime. What could have been, remains a figment of imagination, but is a point to ponder.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Very sensitive topic, nicely covered. Congratulations.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Replies
    1. when the POWs joined, they were aware of the sacrifice they were making for the cause. This included cutting their links with the British Indian Army.. so their reemployment in the armed forces was not required, apart from it setting a bad precedent For discipline. It goes without saying that they could have been honoured and taken care of better in other ways.

      Delete
    2. We are not taking of reemployment in British Indian Army but army of Independent India. In any case, as i said, there is no absolute troth, to each his won. 🙏

      Delete
  7. Sir

    Your piece is both evocative and intellectually stirring. It reminds us why history must remain a living, contested space rather than a settled script.

    Your portrayal of Dr. Ashis Ray is deeply engaging—especially the way you weave together his role as a chronicler of defining sporting moments with his contribution as a serious historian.

    The discussion around the INA trials is especially compelling. There is no denying that the Red Fort trials ignited an extraordinary wave of public sentiment and played a catalytic role in unsettling British authority. The idea that these events accelerated the end of colonial rule is persuasive and deserves far greater space in mainstream narratives.

    The end of British rule in India was likely the result of multiple converging forces—decades of mass political mobilization, economic exhaustion after World War II, international pressure, the moral force of non-violent resistance, and indeed, the shockwaves created by the INA trials and subsequent mutinies.

    Your emphasis on the unity embodied by Shah Nawaz Khan, Prem Sahgal, and Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon is particularly powerful. In today’s context, that image of shared sacrifice across faiths carries immense relevance. It is a reminder that the idea of India was forged not just in ideology, but in lived solidarity.

    The reflections on the treatment of INA veterans after independence are poignant and raise difficult but necessary questions.

    Finally, your call to restore dignity to forgotten contributors of history is not just about the past; it is about shaping the moral compass of the present.

    In essence, your piece does what good historical writing should—it provokes thought, invites debate, and resists easy conclusions. That, in itself, is a valuable contribution to the very culture of dialogue you advocate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very well summarised, grateful. Thanks indeed for not only reading but posting detailed comments 🙏

      Delete
  8. Om Prakash Chaube SCA 73May 27, 2026 at 12:19 PM

    Now that we have no influence at all from British in our governance , why can’t present Govt identify descendants of the those Defence servicemen and offer respectable opportunities in present defence establishments. It’s still not very very late .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True, sir. Par in ke paas ye sab karne ka time kahan? 😐

      Delete
  9. My father, influenced by INA, was a mutineer, in RIN ( Royal Indian Navy) in a Navy Ship anchored around Bombay . He got favoured appointment in Indian Railways as he was given “ Honourably Discharged “ certificate from District Soldiers Board post Independence in 1947.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Very beautifully written by you. Extremely illuminating.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Very informative. An ideal soldier chooses his allegiance once and lives for it. However soldier has a mind of his own and is effected by larger sentiment.
    Britain shouldn't have insisted that these men shouldn't be taken back in to Indian Army.
    An alternative employment could have also been given, by free government of India.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thanks for sharing light on some aspects of our country during pre-independence days that there were different actors fighting in their own way the British rulers. It is ironic that however best Gandhi and after his death Nehru and the Congress party tried to have the narration in the public domain that only the work of Nehru and selected congress party members is given not only importance but traces of the body of work was completely suppressed for reasons best known to the three organs of democracy as well as the Press. The consequences of these decisions we are still paying. Appreciate your attempt to bring this into public discussion be evidence through players who had first hand information of those bygone era.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thank you for this powerful and deeply moving piece. You’ve done more than just narrate a forgotten chapter of history—you’ve held a mirror to how easily a nation’s truth can be reshaped, not by malice alone, but by cold pragmatism dressed as necessity.

    Your opening insight—that a lie told several times becomes truth—is hauntingly apt. For decades, the official narrative painted these soldiers as mutineers, and society accepted it. The real tragedy, as you so eloquently argue, is that this distortion was systemic, deliberate, and came from the very leaders who had fought for freedom. Nehru’s agonizing choice, made under Mountbatten’s shadow and the military’s fears, reveals how the birth of a nation can also carry the seeds of its own moral failures.

    You’ve given voice to those who died in grinding poverty, stripped of pensions and dignity. Your unflinching condemnation—“a painful scar,” “a shameful stain”—is not hyperbole; it is righteous sorrow. And yet, you leave room for debate and respect for differing opinions, which only strengthens your moral clarity.

    Thank you for restoring, at least in words, the stolen dignity of these forgotten heroes. Your article is a necessary act of remembrance and a reminder that truth, however buried, must be unearthed again and again.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Very well articulated.

    ReplyDelete
  15. A very thought-provoking read.
    The way you’ve connected the INA trials with the larger shift in India’s freedom movement makes a lot of sense.
    Many such chapters rarely get discussed in mainstream narratives.
    Thank you for sharing your perspective so clearly and sincerely.
    Adore it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I had no idea that nearly 24,000 INA soldiers were barred from the military and denied pensions for over two decades after independence. That part really stung to read, and I completely agree that it's a stain on our history. It’s so important that we keep talking about these forgotten stories and give these heroes the respect they earned.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Very well written and thought provoking piece. Independence movement was a collective effort and multiple leaders deserve recognition for same . We should start having photos of more freedom fighters on INR notes of different denominations.

    ReplyDelete
  18. A very well written article. We had so many such bravehearts during the time of invaders, whom unfortunately remains forgotten due to the way our history books were written.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Very well written👏👏 some painful and provoking history which may not be known to many Indians, historically it’s the people who protect us who are die for the country ignored mostly due to political differences or gains. Thank you for sharing🙏👍

    ReplyDelete
  20. Very well written. Today's generation has forgotten how India got it's freedom. The painful past can't be erased but one needs to start acknowledging the sacrifices our leaders and the braveheart soldiers. No matter how much one might hate Nehru or Gandhi, you cannot undo their role in the freedom movement. Mistakes have been made, yes but they are after all human. They wanted the betterment of the country. Nobody should be treated like good. They have all done their bit due to which we are able to talk about things right now.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Very well described, we need to understand that it was the moment when our country was divided into many different groups and factions because of the silent support of the then rulers for a particular community and all out efforts to brainwash the truth from public and future generation's .
    Indeed our lost hero the great Netaji and the truth behind him was denied to us by the conniving powers and hypocrisy

    ReplyDelete
  22. Thanks, Sudhanshu for this powerfully written piece on INA. India's freedom happened due to a variety of causes, including (but not limited to) the increasing difficulty of managing this vast portion of the empire, the finances and the truth that now there was so much less to loot from India, the change of government in UK, and the pressure from US to grant freedom for the colonies. INA, and the mutinies, especially the Naval Mutiny, were undoubtedly major factors. But whatever pressure Nehru was under at that time, nothing stopped him from reviewing the decision to treat the INA people as mere mutineers and give them the pensionary and other benefits they deserved. Shame that it took such a long time to do what was plainly right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Thanks a lot, sir, for reading and commenting🙏

      Delete
  23. Dear Sudhanshu,
    Congratulations to the author.
    Incidentally,Col Dhillon's wife and my mother were in adjacent beds in the Lady Reading Hospital Maternity ward in Shimla
    They became best of friends and my mother proudly told me , I was privileged to meet a freedom fighter's wife.
    My sister was born on 14th April 1947.Mrs Dhillon delivered a baby girl the next day.
    Col.Dhillon was probably still in prison.
    After many years, the family moved to Gwalior where a plot of land was allotted to them.
    Dhillons had two sons older to the girl.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. Thanks a lot, sir, for reading and commenting🙏

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

High-Speed Talgo Trains in Uzbekistan Much faster than Vande Bharat!

When Institutions Fail Women

Repaying My Debt to Mohammad Shahid: A Turf for a Titan