According to the Home Department’s official documents, the Bombay Government gave the Superintendent of the Cellular Jail particular orders to keep an eye on Savarkar in case he escaped when he was moved to the Andamans in 1911. 

A metal badge with the letter “D” etched was fastened to his robe as he entered the cell’s jail. “Dangerous” is what the “D” stood for. a letter sent by Sir Reginald Craddock to the governor-general on November 23, 1913, en route back to mainland India after interviewing political detainees held in the Cellular Jail. The following is an excerpt from the note: “Savarkar’s prayer is one for mercy. Although it is difficult to say that he feels any regret or remorse, he does appear to have changed his mind, arguing that the desperate state of Indians in 1906–1907 served as his justification for joining a conspiracy.

Interestingly, Sachin Sanyal was released after he submitted his petition, but Savarkar was not. Sanyal mentioned it as: “मैने जवाब में यह कहा था कि “विनायक दामोदर सावरकर ने भी तो अपनी चिट्ठी मे ऐसी ही भावना प्रकट की थी जैसे कि मैंने की है तो फिर सावरकर को क्यों नही छोड़ा गया और मुझी को क्यों छोड़ा गया?”

*”दुसरी बात सावरकर के न छूटने मे यह थी कि सावरकरजी और उनके दो-चार साथियों की गिरफ्तारी के बाद महाराष्ट्र में क्रांतिकारी आंदोलन समाप्त-सा हो गया था इसलिये सरकार को यह डर था कि यदि सावरकर इत्यादि को छोड दिया जय तो ऐसा ना हो की फिर महाराष्ट्र में क्रांतिकारी आंदोलन प्रारंभ हो जाए।”*

That is, “I said in response that Vinayak Damodar Savarkar had also expressed the same sentiments in his letter as I did, then why Savarkar was not released and why was I released?

The second thing in Savarkar’s absence was that after the arrest of Savarkarji and his two or four companions, the revolutionary movement in Maharashtra had ended, so the government was afraid that if Savarkar, etc. Then the revolutionary movement should start in Maharashtra.”

Savarkar’s pledge of “loyalty to the English government” in the petition was a common vow made by revolutionaries, and the Britishers were aware that these pledges were broken once the revolutionaries were freed.

An excerpt from the Bombay government’s letter, dated June 19, 1920, in answer to Savarkar’s petition for conditional release, dated March 30, 1920, is as follows:

“The most recent secret reports on the activities of Barindra do not encourage this Government to believe that the extension of the amnesty to criminals of this type has been in any way useful. As for release on the adequate guarantee, Government thinks that conditions in such cases are useless.”

The British government was unconvinced by Savarkar’s pledge to remain loyal to the establishment by abandoning the revolutionary path: “Government has now re-examined his (Ganesh) case in the light of the observations made in your letter of the 20th May 1920 and Vinayak’s petition dated 30th March 1920, but they (government) are constrained to say that they (government) are unable to change their former opinion which was determined after very careful consideration.”

Additionally, the authorities resisted sending Savarkar to an Indian prison or releasing him from the Andaman Prison. It is clear from Reginald Craddock’s letter to the governor-general: “In the case of Savarkar it is quite impossible to give him any liberty here, and I think he would escape from any Indian jail. So important a leader is he that the European section of the Indian anarchists would plot for his escape which would before long be organized. If he were allowed outside the Cellular Jail in the Andamans, his escape would be certain. His friends could easily charter a steamer to lie off one of the islands and a little money distributed locally would do the rest.”

The deplorable jail environment and the inhumane conditions in which the political prisoners were held were frequent complaints. The majority of these petitions demanded that fundamental human rights and dignity be restored. This was discussed by Savarkar in his 1913 plea: “When I petitioned for promotion I was told I was a special class prisoner and so could not be promoted. When any of us asked for better food or any special treatment we were told. You are only ordinary convicts and must eat what the rest do. Thus, Sir, Your Honour would see that only for special disadvantages we are classed as special prisoners.”

The Bombay government telegram dated 8th December 1919 stated, “Political Prisoners as defined in your telegram. Government agrees to grant of a free pardon to all such prisoners for crimes committed in the jurisdiction of Bombay Government, with exception of Savarkar Brothers who were both leaders of the Nasik revolutionary society and determined and dangerous conspirators.”

To this, the Government of India replied on 30th December 1919: “Government of India agree that the Savarkar brothers should not be released under the Royal Amnesty.”

If one were to read the petitions, they would have understood that not much of “sorry” is mentioned there

Sources :

Penal Settlement in Andamans, R. C. Majumdar

Bandi Jeevan, Sachindranath Sanyal

Source Material for History of Freedom Movement in India Vol 2, Bombay government records.

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Manikar12929972?t=A4HmYbMF9DKvDE_lz0BJfA&s=08

DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text.