Premium

Eight decades after Netaji disappeared, his daughter backs plea in SC for return of ashes

“We make it very clear, we respect their sentiments, and we would ensure her sentiments are translated into legal action. But she must step forward,” Justice Bagchi told Senior Advocate A M Singhvi who appeared for the petitioner.

Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose disappearance, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose ashes, Renko-ji temple, Renko-ji temple in Tokyo, Tokyo, Supreme Court, Indian express news, current affairsA bust of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose at the Renko-ji temple in Tokyo (Photo: Shyamlal Yadav)

Eight decades after Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose disappeared, presumed dead in an air crash in Taihoku (Taipei, Taiwan) in 1945, his daughter, Anita Bose Pfaff, appeared before the Supreme Court Thursday in “support” of a petition seeking the return to India of his mortal remains, believed to have been preserved at the Renko-ji temple in Tokyo.

The bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi declined to entertain the plea filed by Ashis Ray, Netaji’s grandnephew, saying Pfaff should “step forward” and file a petition herself.

Pfaff, 84, appeared before the bench via video conference from Austria.

“We make it very clear, we respect their sentiments, and we would ensure her sentiments are translated into legal action. But she must step forward,” Justice Bagchi told Senior Advocate A M Singhvi who appeared for the petitioner.

“Because there are differences, to our knowledge, in the family itself with regard to the incidents which occurred,” Justice Bagchi said.

Singhvi told the bench that Ray is Netaji’s grandnephew, and his petition has the “support” of Pfaff, Netaji’s sole heir.

“Let the heir come before us. It cannot be a fight behind the clouds. If the heir wants the ashes… to be brought back to the country, the heir must come before us,” Justice Bagchi said.

Story continues below this ad

Singhvi pointed out that Pfaff was present online, and urged the court to hear her, but the bench was not inclined.

Asthi Kalash placed inside Renkoji temple. (Express Photo by Shyamlal Yadav) Ashes urn (Asthi Kalash) placed inside Renkoji temple. (Express Photo by Shyamlal Yadav)

The CJI pointed out that petitions regarding Netaji had come to the Supreme Court earlier too, and were dismissed. “How many times will this issue come to the Supreme Court?” he asked.

In November 2024, the top court had rejected a petition filed by a Cuttack resident who sought an inquiry into Netaji’s death. The court told him that the issue did not fall within the domain of judicial review.

Singhvi said the issue raised in the current petition was different, and it did not seek any declaration on Netaji’s death.

Story continues below this ad

However, the CJI said the question of his death could arise “indirectly or directly”, and “we also understand why this petition is coming up again after it was dismissed last year.”

Justice Bagchi, too, said the question of ashes cannot arise unless the issue of death is discussed.

“First of all, where are the ashes? What is the proof?” the CJI asked.

Referring to the temple in Tokyo where the ashes are believed to be preserved, Singhvi said, “The fact that every Head of State from India, Prime Ministers, have paid obeisance to the Renko-ji temple is recorded.”

Story continues below this ad

The CJI said, “First, we have to know how many surviving family members are there. He was the greatest leader of this nation… All of us bow before his supreme sacrifice.”

Singhvi said Pfaff is the sole heir.

A picture of the Renkoji Temple, Tokyo where Netaji's, said to be ashes are preserved. (Express Photo by Shyamlal Yadav) A picture of the Renkoji Temple, Tokyo where Netaji’s, said to be ashes are preserved. (Express Photo by Shyamlal Yadav)

The CJI also questioned the “timing” of the petition. “…We know the timing also. Don’t compel us to say something,” he said.

Singhvi said, “There is no timing in this because she has been writing consistently… She has never said no.”

With the bench not inclined to entertain the plea, Singhvi sought permission to withdraw it, with the liberty to return with a fresh petition. The court agreed to the request.

Story continues below this ad

Ray’s petition, filed through Advocate Ritika Vohra, stated: “Netaji’s remains were kept at Renko-ji Temple ‘for a few months’ but have remained there for over 80 years – preserved and honoured by successive head priests – forming a continuing state of affairs of ‘posthumous exile’ and non-closure for Netaji’s now late wife and daughter Professor Anita Bose Pfaff.”

“The petition is fully endorsed by Netaji’s daughter and sole surviving heir Professor Anita Bose Pfaff, including by her most recent statements on her father’s ashes and her desire expressed therein that these be brought to India for final rites with dignity and finality… The petitioner only seeks time-bound repatriation of Netaji’s ashes by the Government of India or, in the alternative, facilitation to the petitioner and Professor Anita Bose Pfaff to repatriate the ashes of Netaji from Japan to India,” it stated.

“The petitioner invokes the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under Article 32 to enforce fundamental rights arising from a continuing constitutional wrong: the Union of India’s prolonged failure to take a final, reasoned, and time-bound decision to repatriate (or at least facilitate repatriation) to India of the mortal remains/ ashes attributed to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, preserved at Renko-ji Temple, Tokyo, Japan, so that Netaji’s daughter and sole surviving heir and direct lineal descendant, Professor Anita Bose Pfaff, may perform final rites in India with dignity and finality,” it stated.

Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry. He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments