by Anuj Dhar
It was. Telegram No 28407 in File No 2(64)/56-PM, Volume I has New Delhi's response issued by Kaul on May 22:
Matter has been placed before Prime Minister. We had to make it clear to committee in Delhi that it would not be practicable or advisable for them to visit Formosa. The only possible advantage of going there might have been to see entries in hospital registers. ...We have considered the matter again and are not in favour of the committee visiting Formosa. Japanese good offices may enable committee to land there but it is unlikely that the Formosan government will give any facilities. In fact they may put obstacles and suggest degrading conditions. Apart from this, politically this will be very embarrassing for us and might lead to complicating situation. [42]
Kaul’s telegram also informed the embassy that the Government had opened another channel to obtain relevant evidence from Taiwan.
At the committee’s request we had approached UK High Commissioner here to get this information for us but have not had a reply yet. The Japanese Ambassador in Formosa would be in a better position to handle this matter than the British who have only a Consul.
Kaul was proven wrong in an instant. The British proceeded expeditiously. Through their good offices they approached the Taiwanese authorities and requested for an inquiry along the line specified by the Government of India on the basis of Harin Shah’s claims.
“Indian official concerned was obviously embarrassed at making this request. Nevertheless I think there is some advantage in trying to establish the facts in this case and to put a stop to legends about Bose’s survival,” [43] the High Commissioner wrote to the British Consul in Tamsui, Taiwan, on 3 May 1956. On May 24 Kaul informed the Tokyo embassy that the
UK High Commission have just informed us that their Consul in Taipeh has telegraphed that Formosan authorities are willing to allow five Chinese whose names were given by committee to be examined by British Consul in the presence of Formosan officials. They are however not prepared to let them to go to Hong Kong to appear before our committee. [44]
The Government of India did not view this as a positive development. The Taiwanese government’s decision not to let their people appear before a panel appointed by a government which did not recognise it made New Delhi smell a conspiracy. “Formosan authorities’ refusal to allow witnesses to go to Hong Kong is significant,” Kaul wrote and conjectured that “it is possible that they may possess their witnesses and make them give wrong statements which may only complicate the work of the committee. Our opinion therefore that committee should not visit Formosa is confirmed”. These thoughts were relayed to Shah Nawaz by AK Dar. On May 26, Dar submitted:
I am to say further that the Government of India have not heard as yet from the UK authorities about the entries in the crematorium register and the British Consul at Formosa is being reminded in the matter. The Government of India feel, I am to add, that this attitude of the Formosan authorities in refusing the Chinese witnesses to give evidence to the committee directly at Hong Kong is indicative of what may be expected. However, if the committee would like the British Consul at Formosa to record the evidence of the relevant witnesses under the conditions stipulated by the Formosan authorities the Government of India would consider arranging for the same.
His May 28 communication repeated New Delhi’s conspiracy theory that the Taiwanese wouldn’t cooperate with the inquiry, put obstacles and stipulate degrading conditions and all this would be politically embarrassing and might lead to complicating situations.
Shah Nawaz gave in. In his confidential letter to Dar on May 29 he conceded that the “committee has no option but to agree to only method by which evidence of Formosan witnesses is likely to be obtained”. Making demands for the crucial cremation permit and doctor’s report for Bose and other related information, Shah Nawaz requested that the “arrangements may please be made to have the statements of Formosan witnesses recorded, as suggested by the British Consul General and make them available to the committee either during their return to India, care of the Ministry of External Affairs”.
Dar sounded out the Counselor at British Embassy, RW Selby, as well as Hisaji Hattori of the Gaimusho. On June 14, Hattori informed Dar that his government was unable to trace the records sought by the Indian government despite "thorough investigations made on the files of doctors' reports, Karte and death certificates, which had been transferred from the former Taipei army hospital to…[the Ministry of Welfare in Tokyo] for custody".
This was strange. Because Dr Yoshimi testified before the committee that he had issued the doctor’s report in the name of “Chandra Bose” only.
An apprehensive Ministry of External Affairs in a secret telegram nudged the Embassy in Japan on July 3 that it should “enquire from Japanese government whether they have received any report from their Ambassador in Formosa regarding hospital entries and other records concerning Netaji”.
Hattori’s intriguing July 24 response must have wrinkled Dar’s head. All that the Japanese could trace was a cremation permit, which they claimed was issued for Bose in extraordinary and secretive circumstances. Dar looked at it and found nothing in it to relate with Bose. The name was someone else’s, the date of death was different, the cause of death was altogether at variance with the crash theory. The Gaimusho had in fact belied Dr Yoshimi’s tearful statement to the committee.
On July 25 Dar sent the record provided by the Japanese to Kaul in New Delhi. He added that “the Gaimusho have mentioned verbally in addition that they have been unable to trace any further records whether in their custody or in Formosa”.
Kaul would take half a month to acknowledge Dar’s forwarding him the Japanese discovery. During this period the committee report had been submitted to the Prime Minister and the matter was closed. Neither the committee nor the ministry waited for the findings of the British/Taiwanese inquiry. But arrive they did and were duly shared with the Ministry of External Affairs at the same time Kaul wrote to Dar.
The specific queries of the Indian government to the British had been forwarded to the Chairman of Taiwan Provincial Government. CK Yen, in turn, ordered the Department of Health to carry out an investigation. The findings of official Kang Fu Chaing, who supervised all crematoria on the island, were reported back to the British High Commissioner on 4 July 1956. There was no real proof of Bose’s death. Harin Shah had evidently cooked up characters and fictitious details to make his account appear more credible. There was no evidence that a nurse by the name of Tsan Pi Sha ever worked in the hospital where Bose had reportedly died.
A Franklin, the British Consul in Tamsui, Taiwan, reported to the Foreign Office in London on July 10 that “it will be seen that most of the witnesses the Indian authorities requested us to obtain evidence from, have either died, disappeared or know nothing”. [45] The old Japanese records said to be for Bose turned out to be for a soldier, as Hattori had already informed Dar. The Taiwanese traced the municipal bureau clerks who had met Harin Shah. Chen Chih Chi and Li Chin Qui, who were in charge of the issue of cremation permit in 1945, said: “We were not acquainted with Bose in his lifetime; it therefore follows that we could not identify him after his death.” [46]
Kaul must have seen the British/Taiwanese report and it must have brought his eyebrows closer as well. Far from proving Bose’s death, it had put a big question mark against it. And then those who were imputing trickery to the Taiwanese, wished away the British/Taiwanese report. It was officially never spoken of or ever heard of in India. Just like SA Ayer’s secret handwritten report.
Suresh Bose came out with his Dissentient report in November 1956. With neither the Government nor any private publisher willing to publish it, he went on his own. As a result, the report never became widely available and with no editor ever simplifying its convoluted sentences, it was anything but lucid. Dissentient report sank, but released ripples of disbelief crashing against the Netaji Inquiry Committee report, eroding its legitimacy.
Rewinding Suresh Bose’s observation
s is a far more illuminating experience today than it was fifty-five years back—when there was no such a thing as investigative journalism and consequently no way to access secret government records in the larger public good:
* [Shah Nawaz] continued calling for new witnesses and examining them not with the intention of arriving at the truth, but to fill up the gaps in the evidence and for explaining and reconciling discrepant and contradictory statements that stood in the way of his coming to the conclusion that the plane had crashed and that Netaji had died.
* The evidence does not justify the finding that the plane crash took place and that Netaji died therefrom. I, therefore, feel it my duty, not merely out of respect for Netaji, but in the national interest and in deference to truth and candour, to record my considered verdict....
* Netaji’s plan of going to Russia via Manchuria, after his failure in his armed struggle against the Anglo-Americans in Southeast Asia, was not a cursory suggestion, but was a carefully-thought-of well-matured plan, which, as a matter of fact, was the only alternative left to him, as he did not want to surrender himself to the Anglo-Americans and thereby be instrumental in not only finishing himself, but also bringing to an end his only cherished goal in life, viz. the independence of his mother country.
* It would have been an act of extreme meanness and downright treachery on the part of the Japanese government to have handed over Netaji, their erstwhile friend and collaborator, to the Anglo-Americans and of this they were incapable, as a self-respecting and a cultured nation. The only other alternative, therefore, was to broadcast his death after he had left, and continue to support it with what manufactured and tutored evidence.... They could not very well say that Netaji had escaped from their territory to an unknown destination, as they would have been accused of aiding and abetting the flight of a man who, in the eyes of the Anglo-Americans, was a war criminal.
* The conduct of the Japanese, in offering only one seat to Netaji, could reasonably be surmised to be the outcome of their and Netaji’s agreed plan of removing him as secretly as possible and with the minimum of publicity, so that their conduct would not be exposed to the Anglo-Americans to whom they had surrendered.... They were taking a great risk and it involved great danger to themselves, if their plan was found out by their victors.
* Taihoku was nearest to and only one stop from Dairen, without any Indian national there and very far from Saigon, which was practically the easternmost end of Netaji’s area of activities and where a large number of Indians lived. As the Japanese could not possibly announce that Netaji’s plane had met with an accident in Manchuria, so Taihoku would be the most suitable place for a plane accident.
* If Netaji had received injuries and burns, as a result of that plane crash and had been treated in a hospital and he had actually died there and if his dead body had been cremated, the Japanese government, for warding off any calumny or treachery, that may have been suggested against them, if not for anything else, would have decidedly taken pains to maintain correct and detailed photographic records of the true incident for the satisfaction of the Indian people....
* As Netaji did not die, his dead body was not available for being photographed.
* The evidence regarding Netaji’s injuries, his treatment in the hospital and his death there...is so discrepant and contradictory, that no reliance can be placed on the same.... Narration of a true incident, even after a lapse of ten years could not be so discrepant and contradictory. ...such worthless evidence only proves that those alleged incidents did not take place, such stories were concocted to support the secret plan of the Japanese as well as of Netaji to announce that Netaji had died.
* [Bose’s nephews Dwijendra Nath Bose and Aurobindo Bose] have stated before us that, though they helped Netaji in leaving Calcutta secretly on 16-1-41, they declared his departure on 26-1-41, after they received information that he had crossed the Indian frontier and had entered Afghanistan and this was in accordance with the instructions Netaji had left with them. They also stated that the Japanese government had also done the same....
* Col Rahman was selected by Netaji from the last six of his trusted and loyal followers.... It, therefore, naturally follows that Netaji considered him to be his most reliable follower, in whom he could repose his trust, confidence and secrets, who would not disclose them under all trials and tribulations, who would implicitly obey all his commands and instructions and who would ever remain loyal to him.
* The statements made by the colonel, whatever they are, are in accordance with the instructions, which, I am convinced, he had secretly received from and with the sole intention of protecting his “Beloved Leader” in his escape to a safe zone, which was beyond the reach of the victorious Anglo-Americans....
* [The other] witnesses are citizens of Japan, and whose unbound patriotism is probably unique in the world. They have made statements to different authorities at different times, supporting the aforesaid plan of their government. As such, I consider it an impossibility for them to go beyond their previously recorded statements and thereby disgrace themselves as well as their government, who, after all, had done a magnanimous act by giving succour to their friend and ally “Mr Chandra Bose”.
[Suresh Bose, right, is seen with Foreign Minister Mamoru Shigemitsu in this 1956 picture taken from his Dissentient report]
Suresh Bose concluded his report with an “appeal to my countrymen”. His demand for transparency in the matter was an impossible act to follow then, but is not today. He called on the people not to accept either his or Shah Nawaz-Shankar Maitra report and instead
make a demand to our Government to place at their disposal, the whole evidence that was made available to the committee and...form their own opinion after a careful perusal and consideration of the same, and, if the general opinion be that the aircraft accident did not take place and that Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose did not die, as alleged, to demand an impeachment of all those, who have taken part in this nefarious game. [47]
Just like a real-life incident based movie setting off the end with a brief foresight into the post-event lives of main characters, the saga of Netaji Inquiry Committee would be incomplete without a fitting postscript.
Shah Nawaz and SN Maitra were allegedly “rewarded” for their good work. One became a deputy minister and the other flew out on a plump diplomatic assignment. Shah Nawaz remained in limelight as minister and head of several government entities for the rest of his life. Throughout he received barbs from Bose’s near and dear ones for his “betrayal”. “Kya bhaijaan, deputy ministership ke liye aapne Netaji ko maar diyya!” (Brother, you killed Netaji for deputy ministership!) Shiela Sengupta taunted him once. HV Kamath took him straight on: “Suppose a murder takes place and the police investigate the case without going to the place where the murder took place, what will be the credibility of their investigation?” [48]
A minuscule view also grew that Shah Nawaz Khan—whose adopted daughter’s son is actor Shah Rukh Khan—had been “forced” to profess what he really did not believe in. A former INA buddy, Colonel AB Singh, was to paint him as a repentant man. Both were at the dining table in the early 1980s and persistent questioning made Shah Nawaz teary and say that he had “made the blunder of my life as chairman of Netaji Inquiry Committee”—whatever that meant.
Shah Nawaz died in December 1983. His funeral was attended by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and her son Rajiv. The Prime Minister hailed him as an embodiment of “truth, integrity and patriotism” that was “seldom surpassed in the history India”. Maitra outlived Shah Nawaz by more than a decade or so, spending his last years in Shantiniketan.
As for the others, AK Dar moved up the ladder and became an ambassador eventually. TN Kaul would have the distinction to serve as India’s Ambassador to the USSR and the United States both and also the Foreign Secretary. Subimal Dutt preceded Kaul as the Ambassador in Moscow. A botched up operation there led to his son’s death and he, a relative of his told me, was completely shattered.
But the old ICS picked up threads and lived till 1995, never talking about Bose publicly.
Prime Minister Nehru continued to blow hot and cold on the mystery. While holding up the Shah Nawaz report publicly, he nevertheless kept up his ante for any rumour or claim about Bose’s fate or his continued existence. He noted Muthuramalingam Thevar’s statement which had been laughed away by most. On 26 November 1957 he asked Foreign Secretary Dutt to find out from then Indian Ambassador in Japan, CS Jha, about the activities of Amiya Nath Bose there. It was quite an unusual step for the democrat Prime Minister, who, according to the memoirs of his intelligence chief, was reluctant to put even the suspected foreign diplomats in New Delhi under surveillance.
Jha replied that “Amiya Bose did not say that he had come to find out the truth about Netaji’s death but when I asked him whether he had any views on that controversial subject he merely said that there were circumstances indicating that Netaji had been preparing to leave for Russia”.
For the Bose family there was no closure, obviously. Suresh Bose slipped into obscurity. Six years after the Shah Nawaz-Shankar Maitra report had been accepted, he got back at the Prime Minister one last time. Irked by the PM’s 7 May 1962 statement in the Lok Sabha that “the basic conclusions reached by the committee have never been seriously questioned” and that the “Government are satisfied that there is no justification on the basis of available facts for the holding of a further inquiry into the question,” Suresh Bose wrote Nehru a letter which started a gentlemanly slanging match between the two. His 12 May 1962 letter requested Nehru to furnish the proof of Subhas’s death in support of his statement.
