Once upon an Emergency

Thirty-nine years ago, on this day, began India’s tryst with despotism

Written by Inder Malhotra | Updated: June 25, 2014 9:42 am
A few of Indira Gandhi’s sensible well-wishers had suggested that the best course was to step down temporarily A few of Indira Gandhi’s sensible well-wishers had suggested that the best course was to step down temporarily.

On the 39th anniversary today of the Emergency (1975-77) — a most squalid chapter in independent India’s history — it is necessary to remind ourselves what a hammer blow it was. The poison it injected into Indian public life took long years to be pumped out of the body politic. Purely coincidentally, this discussion is also a direct sequel to my latest column on this page (‘After the victory, the unraveling’, IE, June 23). That piece had described the huge upheaval in Gujarat in January 1974 that called itself the Nav Nirman agitation against corruption and its transformation into the countrywide “JP Movement”, so named after its highly respected leader, Jayaprakash Narayan, who emerged from self-exile from politics to take command of the great and growing upsurge to oust Indira Gandhi from the office of prime minister. There is no doubt that the tremendous polarisation for and against her had created an atmosphere for what eventually followed. But there were two other factors that played a far more powerful role in the imposition of the Emergency at the midnight hour on June 25.

emergency-480

It is arguable, to say the least, that Gandhi might have contained or crushed the JP Movement as she had done in the case of the Nav Nirman agitation in Gujarat. But this proposition became totally irrelevant on June 12, 1975, when Justice Jagmohan Lal Sinha of the Allahabad High Court, in his judgment on a 1971 election petition against her, unseated her and debarred her from holding political office for six years. This was the most shattering of the three blows she suffered that day, the other two being the death of a confidant, D.P. Dhar, and the Congress party’s massive defeat in the Gujarat assembly elections by a combination of four opposition parties hurriedly cobbled together by JP.

No wonder, Indira’s supporters were stunned while all those that had jumped on the JP juggernaut were jubilant. Their loud cry was: she must go. So stupendous was the sentiment against her that few were prepared even to concede that the charges on which she was convicted were trivial. It was left to British newspapers to point out that it was “as though a head of government should go to the block for a parking ticket”. Moreover, the high court’s verdict was subject to appeal to the Supreme Court, and there was more than an even chance that she would win the appeal. Since Sinha had given the ruling party only 20 days to make “alternative arrangements”, the real and agonising question was what to do during the four to six months that the apex court would take to hear the appeal and decide on it. That is where the second major factor, the power and influence of Indira Gandhi’s second son, Sanjay, came in.

A few of her sensible well-wishers had gingerly suggested that the best course was to step down temporarily, leaving the government under the charge of a trusted colleague, win her appeal, resume office and hold fresh elections. But Sanjay overruled this firmly, and ordered that no one should talk of his mother stepping down “even for a day”.

An unconditional stay on the Allahabad HC judgment would have surely strengthened Gandhi’s position, but on June 24, the SC’s vacation judge, V.R. Krishna Iyer, in his much-awaited order, gave Gandhi only a conditional stay, which meant she could speak in Parliament but not vote — a highly embarrassing situation for a head of government. Sanjay and his cohorts worsened it by organising an unending series of raucous rallies against the Allahabad judgment.

With a whoop of delight, JP declared that, to secure Gandhi’s resignation, there would be daily demonstrations not only in New Delhi and the state capitals but also at the headquarters of each of the 356 districts. At a mammoth and exuberant public meeting at Delhi’s Ramlila grounds the next day, he renewed his appeal to the army, the police and the bureaucracy “not to obey Indira but abide by the Constitution”. Morarji Desai, in an interview to a foreign journalist, exuded even greater confidence: “We intend to overthrow her… Thousands of us will surround her house and prevent her from going out… We shall camp there night and day.”

Ironically, just when JP and Desai were conjuring up joyous visions of Gandhi throwing in the towel, she was setting in motion her counter-stroke that she had planned in utmost secrecy with the help of only a small coterie of trusted loyalists. Even her cabinet was not taken into confidence. At about 11pm she, accompanied by Siddhartha Shankar Ray, West Bengal’s chief minister and a leading lawyer, went to Rashtrapati Bhavan to get President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed’s signatures on the Emergency proclamation. Ray explained to him that the prime minister’s word was enough. No cabinet resolution was needed. The president complied.

Almost immediately, JP and Desai were roused from sleep and told that they were under arrest. Tens of thousands of similar arrests were being made across the country. At midnight, the lights on Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, Delhi’s “Fleet Street”, went out. Such power cuts were routine those days. But usually, the lights came back after a couple of hours. This did not happen on the night of June 25, and newspapers could not be printed because the Emergency regime so wanted.

Consequently, most Indians first heard of the imposition of the Emergency, the arrests of JP, Desai and other political leaders, including several prominent Congressmen, and the assumption of sweeping powers by the government at 7.30am on June 26 from the BBC World Service. Half an hour later, the prime minister broadcast to the nation: “The president has declared a state of Emergency. There is no need to panic.” As John Grigg, a friend of India, was to write in The Spectator, “Nehru’s ‘tryst with destiny’ seemed to have been turned into a tryst with despotism — and by his own daughter”. Others commented that with a single stroke of a “pliant president’s pen”, the world’s largest democracy was reduced to a “tin-pot dictatorship”, the likes of which then abounded in the Third World.

The writer is a Delhi-based political commentator

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App now

  1. A
    Abhishek
    Jun 25, 2014 at 7:08 am
    Considering it was the cold war era and CIA plots to overthrow governments were commonplace, the fears of it happening in India, a pro-Soviet country, were not entirely unfounded. Indira did what she thought was right for the country (and herself and her family!) at that time. Else she would not have announced elections in 1977.
    Reply
    1. R
      Rudrapratap
      Jun 25, 2014 at 9:15 am
      Sad is it not that India honors Indira and her hoodlum son Sanjay by naming public buildings after them ?
      Reply
      1. R
        Rudrapratap
        Jun 25, 2014 at 9:17 am
        The only reason I still read the Indian Express is because it stood firmly against the Emergency hurricane and endures. Bravo !
        Reply
        1. R
          Rudrapratap
          Jun 25, 2014 at 1:24 pm
          You will also not read about the 1962 India-China war and other ic policy disasters visited on India since Independence by Jawahrlal Nehru and his descendants in history books. It would take the sheen off the Nehru-hi Dynasty. Far better to keep the general poce in ignorance and more manageable you see.
          Reply
          1. T
            TIHARwale
            Jun 25, 2014 at 4:23 am
            Had the emergency continued for at least a decade today India would have been even better than China as an economic power.
            Reply
            1. T
              TIHARwale
              Jun 25, 2014 at 4:28 am
              What many are not aware that the Allhabad HC Judge Jagmohan Lal Sinha had a friend visiting him with a message tutored by Shanti Bhushan that " Himmat hai to Indiraji pe ungli utah kar dekho" and a thus provoked Sinha wrote a strong verdict when the fact of the matter was the charge against Indira hi was no better than a red light violation when her election agent Yashpal Kapur was driving the car of Indira hi
              Reply
              1. B
                Bhavdeep
                Jun 25, 2014 at 5:01 am
                A shameful exhibition of people in congress worshipping a family which subverted the consution of India to save guard the interest of their first family. This is what happens when any individual, any family becomes more important than the nation and its people. Even today the same congressman defends the acts of the family without any justification.
                Reply
                1. S
                  SSM
                  Jun 25, 2014 at 10:26 am
                  Why is this not taught in schools?
                  Reply
                  1. N
                    Neerja kamal
                    Jun 25, 2014 at 7:32 am
                    It was India & not stan that she had to do this. there was no such urgency or the need at the time except her fear that she will be out of power. She was highly insecure lady. She only announced election because she got the feedback that she could win & there was lot of international pressure.
                    Reply
                    1. N
                      Neerja kamal
                      Jun 25, 2014 at 11:38 am
                      well if there was an anarchy ,she handled it well by forced sterilisation/ banning the press & denying the right to live.
                      Reply
                      1. R
                        Ravishankar
                        Jun 25, 2014 at 5:11 am
                        Even now Party members like Singhvi, Tiwari& Chidbaram race to say"Three bags full". Where is their conviction? Sycophancy secures positions.After all they are paid workers of the party.
                        Reply
                        1. H
                          Hemalatha Ramasubramanian
                          Jun 25, 2014 at 6:27 am
                          Sad moments of history. Signed by the blood stanied pen of Fakruddin Ali Ahmad.not fair at all to our previous generation as well as Us.
                          Reply
                          1. J
                            jai
                            Jun 25, 2014 at 12:43 pm
                            All the more reason why many of those being shunted out by the current government need to go.Being a part of a party and ideology is one thing, being a servant of a dynasty is another thing all together.
                            Reply
                            1. K
                              K
                              Jun 25, 2014 at 6:25 am
                              The word "Emergency" would be for ever part and parcel of the "legacy" of the Indian National Congress Party. Journalists like Sundarrajan and Arun Shourie stand out for their courageous exposition of the Emergency defying then Prime Minister Mrs Indira hi, while many others came out of their s only after the 1977 election results.
                              Reply
                              1. M
                                Manoj Parikh
                                Jun 25, 2014 at 1:53 pm
                                It is ironic that, The architect of this was current President Pranav Mukharjee and the person who opposed and went underground is Current PM Hon. Modiji.The congress did not allow this black page of our democracy to be taught in schools. For this single act, we have to make sure is is Congress. Free.
                                Reply
                                1. N
                                  Nityananda
                                  Jun 25, 2014 at 3:44 am
                                  It was unwise of Indira to listen to her son and avoid going on appeal to the SC.But it was also unwise of Morarji and JP to ask the Army and Police to stop obeying the Govt of the day .That would surely have led to anarchy if not breakup of the nation.Both Opposition and ruling groups seem to have displa scant respect for democracy and national insutions.
                                  Reply
                                  1. R
                                    Ravi Ranjan
                                    Jun 25, 2014 at 5:12 am
                                    It was a day one shudders to remember specially if one was a working journalist.
                                    Reply
                                    1. S
                                      SV
                                      Jun 25, 2014 at 4:56 pm
                                      Thank God there are at least a few people who remember the emergency and its atrocities. As SSM said it should be taught in schools especially "Forty-second Amendment of the Consution of India". It's not just frustrating and annoying but also disgusting how media in India has forgotten all about this and doesn't write a word about emergency.
                                      Reply
                                      1. U
                                        Upen Dwivedi
                                        Jun 25, 2014 at 2:36 pm
                                        A big blot on Indian democracy...
                                        Reply
                                        1. Load More Comments