Rizakars of Hyderabad Deccan, 1940-1950: The rise and fall of a Muslim militia - III

The Rizakars Behind Bars and the ICRC Intervention: The atmosphere of the immediate post-Operation Polo era was too communally charged for anyone to come to the Rizakars' rescue. The Muslim community was reeling under the massive blow just inflicted upon them. Leaderless, the Muslim elite simply retreated to the safety of their homes.
Unrelieved gloom had descended on thousands of imprisoned young men. In this dark horizon, help came to the Rizakars from an entirely unexpected quarter. On 17 September 1948, the Geneva-based International Cmmittee of Red Cross (ICRC) telegraphed to the Prime Ministers of India and Hyderabad.
Known for its absolute impartiality, an unblemished record of service to prisoners of war across the globe without regard to religious affiliation, the ICRC was and remains a universally respected organisation.
In his telegram, ICRC President Paul Ruegger, conveyed to the governments of India and Hyderabad an offer of services "in conformity with traditional humanitarian mission, the ICRC offer their services in all cases where a neutral intermediary based on the stipulations of the Red Cross conventions was required", proposing to arrange for "the exchange of lisps of captured army personnel, the visiting of places of internment by the Committee's delegates and the exchange of news, distribution of relief supplies placed by donors at their disposal...." It also planned the possibility of sending an ICRC representative to the scene.
Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru rebuffed Ruegger's offer of help. In a telegram to the ICRC chief, he told Ruegger on 19 September, "as you will have learnt already, hostilities have ceased in Hyderabad, there is no need therefore to ask for services of Red Cross. I am grateful all the same for your offer and the spirit behind it". The matter seemed to have ended there, but for the intercession of the Pakistan Red Cross Society. In a letter in late October 1948 to the ICRC chairman, the Pakistan Red Cross Society (PRCS) (Chief) said: "The Razakar corps was a recognised volunteer body raised by the State for the purpose of civil defence.
IT WOULD APPEAR TO HAVE FULFILLED THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE I OF THE REGULATIONS ANNEXED TO THE HAGUE CONVENTION OF THE 18 OCTOBER 1907, WHICH READ AS FOLLOWS:
THE LAWS, RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF WAR APPLY NOT ONLY TO THE ARMY BUT ALSO TO MILITIA AND VOLUNTEER CORPS FULFILLING ALL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. They must be commanded by a person responsible for the subordinates;
2. They must have a fixed, distinctive sign recognisable at a distance.
3. They must carry arms openly;
4. They must conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
The PRCS letter went on to say, "In countries where militia or volunteer corps constitute the army or form part of it, they are included under the denomination of army. If this is agreed, it clearly follows that the provisions of the Geneva Convention of 27 July 1929 relative to the treatment of Prisoners of War apply". The PRCS then cited a press report dated 21 September in which the Chief of the Indian Army Staff Lieutenant General Rajendra Sinji "declared that Razakars who had been captured would not be treated as prisoners of war.
They were not members of the Hyderabad State Forces and would be treated as ordinary prisoners".... [the press reports continues] "a batch of 78 prisoners from Hyderabad taken during the operations were brought to Madras yesterday under police escort for detention, as supplied by Associated Press of India. The PRC Society has been greatly surprised and distressed by this statement.
The Government of India is a signatory to the Geneva Convention, and my Society suggests that this declaration of Major General Rajendra Sinhji is not only a violation of the Hague and Geneva Conventions but is also against all humanitarian principles of the Red Cross.
I request that steps may kindly be taken to bring this contravention of the Conventions to the notice of the Government of India and to call upon them to honour the Convention by treating the Razakars as prisoners of war." Nawab Mo'in Nawaz Jang who had represented Hyderabad's case to the United Nations' Security Council supported the PRC Society's request. On representation from these quarters, the ICRC wrote to India's Ministry of External Affairs to enable the Rizakars to be treated as prisoners of war and to obtain the right to visit them. Before the ICRC wrote to the Indian government, it seems to have done a thorough homework.
The ICRC cited an official publication of the Indian Ministry of Information and Broadcasting in which the Rizakars were described as "military volunteer corps" in uniforms openly displaying weapons during a public parade. In response to the ICRC letter, R.K. Ramadhyani, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Defence wrote to ICRS on 7 December 1948: "Regarding prisoners taken during the Hyderabad operations, my enquiries show that regular troops of the Hyderabad State Force, who were taken prisoners, have all been disarmed and released. Rizakars and all others who are not part of the State Force have been handed over to the civil administration in Hyderabad.
It does not appear in these circumstances that any question of inspection by Red Cross representatives arises." Upon another entreaty by the ICRC on 7 January 1949, an Indian official L.G. Mirchandam, Deputy Secretary replied: "I understand on enquiry that there were no Razakars detained in Hyderabad. All the Razakars who were under detention were awaiting their trial in a court of law. This being the case, there seems hardly any point in Red Cross representative visiting the State.
It is open, however, to any one to visit Hyderabad and [if] you or any other representatives of the Red Cross wishes to do so we would be glad to inform the local administration of the visit". The ICRIC remained dissatisfied with the response and repeated the request, as the ICRC's Legal Commission rejected the Indian contention that the Rizakars were not military combatants deserving the status of prisoners of war. The New Delhi government was put in an awkward position.
In its campaign against Hyderabad State before the fall, the Indian government painted the Rizakars as a militia, supported by if not raised by the Hyderabad government, but when it came to treating the Rizakars after the fall; it backtracked as exemplified by the letter of A.C. Chatterjee of India's Ministry of States, dated 4 March 1949. According to Chatterjee, "The Razakars were a trained volunteer corps of the Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen surreptitiously armed and not part of the regular forces or State police. Those among the Razakars who are in custody today are so because there are serious criminal charges against them. The Hyderabad Governor is conducting investigations into these charges. Where, on investigation, the charges against individual Razakars are not proved, orders are issued for their release.
Those against whom a prima facie case has been established are being put up for trial and will be dealt with according to law. In the circumstances explained above you will appreciate that there can be no question of treating these Razakars on the same footing as prisoners of war. They have never formed part of the administration and in view of the serious offences committed by them, they cannot be treated other than as criminals.
Since they are being dealt with according to law, the question of the application of any international convention does not arise at all. The Government of India would have no objection to your visit if after reading this letter you still desire to do so".
Despite this further rebuff, the ICRC remained steadfast in demanding access to the Rizakar prisoners. On 25 March 1949 Dr Marti asked the Indian Ministry of States permission to "visit the Central Jail in Hyderabad, where numerous Razakars were detained as well as the detention centers at Bolaram and Trimullgherry where 25,000 Razakars and officials of the Hyderabad government were being held". Apparently the Indian government asked the ICRC representative in Delhi to contact M.K. Vellodi, then with the Ministry of States, and later the Chief Minister of Hyderabad, who informed the ICRC on 5 April 1949 that most of the Razakars have been freed except for 1521 who were waiting trial for serious charges.
On 9 April 1949, the ICRC, dissatisfied by the bureaucratic response, took up the matter with the Military Governor J.N. Chaudhuri, who confirmed the figure of 1520 Rizakars behind bars, but insisted they were not in the military penitentiaries of Bolaram or Trimullgherry. Upon hearing this, the ICRC asked M.K. Vellodi to: a . confirm the figure of the Rizakar prisoners in writing; b. allow an ICRC representative to visit them.
Both requests were denied. President ICRC demand triggered frustration in Vellodi, who told ICRC President Dr Marti: "You would cause Hyderabad Government serious embarrassment by visiting the prisoners". When the ICRC representative inquired the States Ministry for the dogged refusal, the reason for rejecting ICRC requests became clear. An Indian official told the ICRC representative "the negative response of the Indian government is due certainly to the upcoming hearing of the Hyderabad case at the United Nations Security Council, which in fact happened - twice on May 19 and 24, 1949. The visit of the Red Cross, the Indian official opined, would resurrect the whole question of Hyderabad all over again.
The Indian fears were not without foundation. In September 1948, the United Nations had heard the case of Hyderabad case overruling Indian objections. The same day, S. Narayanaswamy of the Ministry of States wrote to Dr Marti: "I am desired to inform you that the number of Razakars awaiting trial is 1520 and they are kept in custody all over Hyderabad. 760 of these are being brought to trial immediately and the rest as soon as possible". On 9 April, the ICRC took up the issue of the imprisoned Rizakars with the Indian Military Governor Major General J.N. Chaudhuri, who confirmed the number of prisoners as given by Vellodi.
Rebuffed by the bureaucrats of the Indian ministries of external affairs and States, ICRC decided to take up the issue at the highest political level. During Prime Minister Nehru's visit to Switzerland, the ICRC President Paul Ruegger met him in Geneva on 5 May 1949, and renewed his demands. He also asked for a magnanimous treatment of the Rizakars, expressing the hope that Nehru will permit the ICRC to visit and distribute 25,000 Swiss francs among the Kashmir refugees and the Rizakars.
The Indian anger at the ICRC's proposed humanitarian gesture triggered an intemperate comment by A.V. Pai, Nehru's private secretary, who angrily asked, "Why is the ICRC so concerned with the fate of the bandits, why not help their [alleged] victims? Predictably and characteristically, the ICRC's advocacy of the Rizakars' rights provoked the fury of Sardar Patel, the hawkish Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of States. Petulantly, Patel wrote to Nehru on 5 June 1949; "As regards the Razakar prisoners, I do not see what the Red Cross has to do with it.
People outside India seem to give our action the character of war. We should give such people no countenance whatsoever. I hope Dr Marti will be the wiser after your interview with him". Although Nehru did not consent to the ICRC visit, he evidently did not follow Patel's advice either. Instead he asked the ministries responsible to look into the Rizakars' question.
Thus M.K. Vellodi informed ICRC on 22 June 1949 "of the 17,500 persons arrested for crimes, more than 14,500 have been released and that no more than 1405 remain in prisons". Vellodi's remarks are significant in that it provides for the first time a somewhat precise figure - of 17,500 persons having been arrested right after the fall of Hyderabad, and that 14,500 were released, and another 1405 remained in prisons. Whatever happened to the rest - for the number of people released and those still in prison do not add up to the total arrested in the first instance.
Showing an amazing dedication and energy, the ICRC President Ruegger wired Nehru (29 July 1949) demanding access to the remaining prisoners to provide relief. Nehru wrote back the following day repeating the familiar Indian arguments disregarding Geneva conventions: "It is not quite clear to me what your approach is to the Razakars who are held in custody in Hyderabad. It would almost appear that you are looking upon them as some kind of prisoners of war. We all know that the Red Cross organisation is rightly interested in ameliorating the lot of prisoners of war.
But I was not aware of the fact that the Red Cross was equally interested in persons tried or convicted for criminal offences. The Razakar's now held in custody, after repeated screening, are being kept for criminal offences and being tried for them. The normal rules applying to such under-trial prisoners and convicts no doubt apply to them also". Despite the sarcastic tone of Nehru's letter to Ruegger, he confided to the ICRC chief what he denied at home. For he continued in his letter, "About the time the Indian forces were entering Hyderabad, and the old governmental structure had broken down, there were upheavals of the Hindu population especially in the rural areas. These people who had suffered from considerable repression from the Razakars, rose against them.
They were joined by refugees who returned to Hyderabad. The result was that murder, arson and looting was committed. When our forces spread out to the rural areas, they arrested these non-Muslims, who had misbehaved and these people are also going to be tried or have been tried. Thus both the Razakars and the Hindus have been arrested for criminal offences and are being tried. It is hardly possible to treat one group differently from the other. In both cases we have tried not to proceed for minor offences.
Any step taken in regard to the Razakars only and not for others would hardly be considered just and would be deeply resented by large numbers of people". Complying with Nehru's decision, Vellodi again conveyed India's refusal to allow the ICRC to visit the Rizakars. Undeterred, the ICRC representative wrote back again to the Ministry of States.
In response, N.M. Buch, Joint-Secretary of the Ministry wrote to N. Burckhardt on 24 April 1950, that as of the date, "no person has been detained in Hyderabad on the ground that he was or is a Razakar. There are at present altogether 128 Muslims in jail for offences committed before the Police Action: 71 of them are on trial for specific offences, while 57 are held in jail pending completion of the investigation for specific charges against them". This last bit of information from the Indian official closed the Rizakar chapter in Hyderabad's modern history. It is not clear if the number quoted here included the former ministers of the Mir La'iq Ali cabinet and others who were still imprisoned.
As noted earlier, when Hyderabad fell, the Military Governor banned the Rizakars, but not the parent organisation, the MIM. Shortly after his release from the Yerwada jail in Pune after nearly a decade of imprisonment, Qasim Rizawi came back to Hyderabad in September 1957, and summoned the Majlis-i-Shura of the MIM. A decision was taken to revive the Majlis, but not the Rizakars.
For about a decade the Rizakars were a front-page story in Hyderabad and India. Their brief dominance of Hyderabad politics left an unpleasant legacy. The very word disappeared from the vocabulary of Urdu journalism for volunteer, as the dictionary's innocuous meaning - volunteer - sank under the weight of its association with an armed militia resisting the Indian army. Despite the passing over of more than half a century since the events of the 1940s, Urdu newspapers in Hyderabad still laboriously avoid the worked Rizakar when referring to volunteers of any kind. The term Rizakars was also used during the East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) crisis of 1971, for volunteers aiding the Pakistani army with equally negative connotation as seen by some Bengali nationalists.
(Concluded)
- Courtesy Pakistan Historical Society Journal