The strikes in the suburbs south of Lebanon’s capital came shortly after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the UN, vowing that Israel’s campaign against Hezbollah would continue

The strikes in the suburbs south of Lebanon’s capital came shortly after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the UN, vowing that Israel’s campaign against Hezbollah would continue

The Israeli military said on Friday it struck the central headquarters of Hezbollah in Beirut, where a series of massive explosions levelled multiple buildings, sending clouds of orange and black smoke billowing in the skies.

The strikes in the suburbs south of Lebanon’s capital came shortly after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the UN, vowing that Israel’s campaign against Hezbollah would continue. His comments further dimmed hopes for an internationally backed cease-fire aimed at preventing a spiral into all-out war.

Three major Israeli TV channels said Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah was the target of the strikes. But the unsourced reports could not immediately be confirmed by The Associated Press, and the army declined comment. But given the size and timing of the blast, there were strong indications that a high-value target may have been inside the buildings struck.

To a degree unseen in past conflicts, Israel this past week has aimed to eliminate Hezbollah’s senior leadership.

Friday’s bombings were the most powerful yet seen in the Lebanese capital the past year. The Israeli army spokesman, Rear Adm Daniel Hagari, said it targeted the main Hezbollah headquarters, located beneath residential buildings. Four buildings in the Haret Hreik neighbourhood of Dahiyeh were reduced to rubble, Hezbollah’s Al-Manar TV reported. The blast rattled windows and shook houses some 30 km (18 miles) north of Beirut. Ambulances were seen headed to the scene, sirens wailing.

Officials at a nearby hospital said they received at least 10 wounded, three critically including a Syrian child.

yangtse area & Subansiri valley sites firmly under Indian control for decades

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

s India and China discuss a potential resolution of their dispute along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) that has been ongoing for four years, Chinese negotiators have suggested to New Delhi that their troops be allowed to patrol in two sensitive areas along Arunachal Pradesh. – File photo

As India and China discuss a potential resolution of their dispute along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) that has been ongoing for four years, Chinese negotiators have suggested to New Delhi that their troops be allowed to patrol in two sensitive areas along Arunachal Pradesh.

The two spots — one in the Yangtse area north-east of Tawang, where the two sides had a deadly clash in December 2022, and the second in central Arunachal along the Subansiri river valley — have been firmly under Indian control for decades.

The recent Chinese demand came in response to the 21 rounds of talks that have been held between the two sides over the past four years, to discuss the existing dispute on the LAC in eastern Ladakh.

Here, Chinese soldiers have denied access to Indian troops to “patrol points” 10, 11, 12 and 13 (also known in military jargon as PP) on the LAC. All of these originate from “the bottleneck”, a geographical feature on the eastern flank of the 972 sq km Depsang plateau. Government sources, speaking to The Tribune on the condition of anonymity, said the Chinese demands were “unreasonable” and “devoid of logic”. “The last Indian Army patrol to the PP areas was in January 2020,” a source said.

The government sources reiterated that the so-called Chinese demand to allow its troops to patrol these two spots in Arunachal Pradesh was not a “quid pro quo”, as both had been in Indian control for decades.

On the other hand, the issue of patrolling PP 10, 11, 12 and 13 in eastern Ladakh is a dispute that cropped up in April 2020. Ever since, the two armies have been locked in a military standoff.

External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, speaking at an event in the US on Tuesday, for the first-time admitted that a part of the continuing India-China dispute along the LAC was to do with access to patrolling areas. “The main issue right now is the patrolling,” Jaishankar said, pointing out that the patrolling arrangements since 2020 had been disturbed. He went on to describe the India-China relationship as “significantly disturbed”. Military sources have separately confirmed that since April 2020, Chinese troops have not allowed Indian soldiers to patrol areas — PP 10, 11, 12 and 13 — which the Indian side had patrolled until the incursions by Beijing.

The aforesaid government sources explained that the two spots in Arunachal Pradesh the Chinese are demanding access to patrol, are important to hold. After the December 2022 clash at Yangtse, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh had then told Parliament: “The PLA (People’s Liberation Army) troops on December 9 tried to transgress the LAC in Yangtse area of Tawang sector and unilaterally change the status quo.”

There have been face-offs in the Yangtse area in the past, a major one being in October 2021. The Chinese had then attempted to get access to the top of the 17,000-foot-high peak that provides a commanding view on both sides of the LAC. India is in firm control of the top and its access routes from its own side.

The two armies have also had face-offs in the past at the second spot, in the Subansiri valley in central Arunachal.

The sources said over the last 21 rounds of talks, India has suggested to China a graded three-step process for resolving the Eastern Ladakh issue. The first involves disengagement of troops within close proximity to each other in grey zones along the LAC and getting back to positions as on April 2020. The next two steps — de-escalation and de-induction — entail pulling back troops and equipment to the pre-April 2020 levels.

Eastern Ladakh dispute pending

• In eastern Ladakh, the dispute is about patrolling by Indian troops along four locations near the LAC
• EAM Jaishankar during his ongoing US trip termed ‘patrolling the LAC’ an important pending issue
• India has suggested to China a graded three-step process for resolving the eastern Ladakh issue

Not many people are aware of the fact that 10-year-old Bhagat Singh had planted a Beri (tree) in 1917 at his birthplace Bangay village, Jaranwala tehsil, at present in Pakistan. This tree is over 100 years old. It was successfully…

Not many people are aware of the fact that 10-year-old Bhagat Singh had planted a Beri (tree) in 1917 at his birthplace Bangay village, Jaranwala tehsil, at present in Pakistan. This tree is over 100 years old. It was successfully cloned at the Museum of Trees in Chandigarh in 2020. One can visit and see the four-year-old tree along with other species at the museum spread over five acres in Hallo Majra here.

Cuttings of the historic tree were obtained by creator and curator of the Museum of Trees, former IAS officer Damanbir Singh Jaspal, on January 25, 2020, during a personal visit to Bangay village.

“Since Bhagat Singh’s home has been designated as a heritage site with restricted access, the visit was made possible by the intervention of Pakistan Prime Minister’s office after my two-year effort,” said Jaspal.“Young Bhagat Singh planted a Beri tree in defiance of the laws introduced by the British, according to which farmers were reduced to mere sharecroppers. They were not allowed to cut trees on their own land. Nor were they supposed to build houses there or sell their land,” he said.

Jaspal has documented sacred trees of Sikhism in his book “Tryst with Trees: Punjab’s Sacred Heritage”. He created the Museum of Trees in 2010 as a grove for preserving and propagating the surviving sacred trees by reproducing true genotypes of parent trees. Apart from genetic replicas of 12 sacred trees, the museum has over 150 other species, of which many are rare and endangered.

12 replicas of sacred trees

Among 12 genetically true replicas of sacred trees at the Museum of Trees are the Dukh Bhanjani Beri of the Golden Temple, Amritsar; the Beri tree of Gurdwara Ber Sahib, Sultanpur Lodi; the Beri tree of Gurdwara Ber Sahib, Sialkot, Pakistan; and the Peepal tree of Gurdwara Pipli Sahib, Amritsar. The project, the first of its kind in the world, has been funded by the Ministry of Culture, Government of India. It is promoted by the Chandigarh Nature and Health Society, a registered NGO.

Bhagat Singh (27 September 1907^[1] – 23 March 1931) was an Indian anti-colonial revolutionary,^[3] who participated in the mistaken murder of a junior British police officer in December 1928^[4] in what was to be retaliation for the death of an Indian nationalist.^[5] He later took part in a largely symbolic bombing of the Central Legislative Assembly in Delhi and a hunger strike in jail, which—on the back of sympathetic coverage in Indian-owned newspapers—turned him into a household name in the Punjab region, and after his execution at age 23 into a martyr and folk hero in Northern India.^[6] Borrowing ideas from Bolshevism and anarchism,^[7] the charismatic Singh^[8] electrified a growing militancy in India in the 1930s, and prompted urgent introspection within the Indian National Congress‘s nonviolent but eventually successful campaign for India’s independence.^[9]

In December 1928, Bhagat Singh and an associate, Shivaram Rajguru, both members of a small revolutionary group, the Hindustan Socialist Republican Association (also Army, or HSRA), shot dead a 21-year-old British police officer, John Saunders, in Lahore, Punjab, in what is today Pakistan, mistaking Saunders, who was still on probation, for the British senior police superintendent, James Scott, whom they had intended to assassinate.^[10] They held Scott responsible for the death of a popular Indian nationalist leader Lala Lajpat Rai for having ordered a lathi (baton) charge in which Rai was injured and two weeks thereafter died of a heart attack. As Saunders exited a police station on a motorcycle, he was felled by a single bullet fired from across the street by Rajguru, a marksman.^[11][12] As he lay injured, he was shot at close range several times by Singh, the postmortem report showing eight bullet wounds.^[13] Another associate of Singh, Chandra Shekhar Azad, shot dead an Indian police head constable, Channan Singh, who attempted to give chase as Singh and Rajguru fled.^[11][12]

After having escaped, Bhagat Singh and his associates used pseudonyms to publicly announce avenging Lajpat Rai’s death, putting up prepared posters that they had altered to show John Saunders as their intended target instead of James Scott.^[11] Singh was thereafter on the run for many months, and no convictions resulted at the time. Surfacing again in April 1929, he and another associate, Batukeshwar Dutt, set off two low-intensity homemade bombs among some unoccupied benches of the Central Legislative Assembly in Delhi. They showered leaflets from the gallery on the legislators below, shouted slogans, and allowed the authorities to arrest them.^[14] The arrest, and the resulting publicity, brought to light Singh’s complicity in the John Saunders case. Awaiting trial, Singh gained public sympathy after he joined fellow defendant Jatin Das in a hunger strike, demanding better prison conditions for Indian prisoners, the strike ending in Das’s death from starvation in September 1929.

Bhagat Singh was convicted of the murder of John Saunders and Channan Singh, and hanged in March 1931, aged 23. He became a popular folk hero after his death. Jawaharlal Nehru wrote about him: “Bhagat Singh did not become popular because of his act of terrorism but because he seemed to vindicate, for the moment, the honour of Lala Lajpat Rai, and through him of the nation. He became a symbol; the act was forgotten, the symbol remained, and within a few months each town and village of the Punjab, and to a lesser extent in the rest of northern India, resounded with his name.”^[15] In still later years, Singh, an atheist and socialist in adulthood, won admirers in India from among a political spectrum that included both communists and right-wing Hindu nationalists. Although many of Singh’s associates, as well as many Indian anti-colonial revolutionaries, were also involved in daring acts and were either executed or died violent deaths, few came to be lionised in popular art and literature as did Singh, who is sometimes referred to as the Shaheed-e-Azam (“Great martyr” in Urdu and Punjabi).^[16]

Early life

Bhagat Singh was born into a Punjabi Jat Sikh^[17] family on 27 September 1907^[1] in the village of Banga in the Lyallpur district of the Punjab in what was then British India and is today Pakistan; he was the second of seven children—four sons, and three daughters—born to Vidyavati and her husband Kishan Singh Sandhu.^[18] Bhagat Singh’s father and his uncle Ajit Singh were active in progressive politics, taking part in the agitation around the Canal Colonization Bill in 1907, and later the Ghadar Movement of 1914–1915.^[18]

After being sent to the village school in Banga for a few years, Bhagat Singh was enrolled in the Dayanand Anglo-Vedic School in Lahore.^[18] In 1923, he joined the National College in Lahore, founded two years earlier by Lala Lajpat Rai in response to Mahatma Gandhi‘s non-cooperation movement, which urged Indian students to shun schools and colleges subsidized by the British Indian government.^[18]

Police became concerned with Singh’s influence on youths and arrested him in May 1927 on the pretext that he had been involved in a bombing that had taken place in Lahore in October 1926. He was released on a surety of Rs. 60,000 five weeks after his arrest.^[19] He wrote for, and edited, Urdu and Punjabi newspapers, published in Amritsar^[20] and also contributed to low-priced pamphlets published by the Naujawan Bharat Sabha that excoriated the British.^[21] He also wrote for Kirti, the journal of the Kirti Kisan Party (“Workers and Peasants Party”) and briefly for the Veer Arjun newspaper, published in Delhi.^[22][a] He often used pseudonyms, including names such as Balwant, Ranjit and Vidhrohi.^[24]

Revolutionary activities

Killing of John Saunders

In 1928, the British government set up the Simon Commission to report on the political situation in India. Some Indian political parties boycotted the Commission because there were no Indians in its membership,^[b] and there were protests across the country. When the Commission visited Lahore on 30 October 1928, Lala Lajpat Rai led a march in protest against it. Police attempts to disperse the large crowd resulted in violence. The superintendent of police, James A. Scott, ordered the police to lathi charge (use batons against) the protesters and personally assaulted Rai, who was injured. Rai died of a heart attack on 17 November 1928. Doctors thought that his death might have been hastened by the injuries he had received. When the matter was raised in the Parliament of the United Kingdom, the British Government denied any role in Rai’s death.^[26][27][28]

Singh was a prominent member of the Hindustan Republican Association (HRA) and was probably responsible, in large part, for its change of name to Hindustan Socialist Republican Association (HSRA) in 1928.^[29] The HSRA vowed to avenge Rai’s death.^[19] Singh conspired with revolutionaries like Shivaram Rajguru, Sukhdev Thapar, and Chandrashekhar Azad to kill Scott.^[22] However, in a case of mistaken identity, the plotters shot John P. Saunders, an Assistant Superintendent of Police, as he was leaving the District Police Headquarters in Lahore on 17 December 1928.^[30]

Contemporary reaction to the killing differs substantially from the adulation that later surfaced. The Naujawan Bharat Sabha, which had organised the Lahore protest march along with the HSRA, found that attendance at its subsequent public meetings dropped sharply. Politicians, activists, and newspapers, including The People, which Rai had founded in 1925, stressed that non-cooperation was preferable to violence.^[31] The murder was condemned as a retrograde action by Mahatma Gandhi, the Congress leader, but Jawaharlal Nehru later wrote that:

Bhagat Singh did not become popular because of his act of terrorism but because he seemed to vindicate, for the moment, the honour of Lala Lajpat Rai, and through him of the nation. He became a symbol, the act was forgotten, the symbol remained, and within a few months each town and village of the Punjab, and to a lesser extent in the rest of northern India, resounded with his name. Innumerable songs grew about him and the popularity that the man achieved was something amazing.^[32]

Killing of Channan Singh

After killing Saunders, the group escaped through the D.A.V. College entrance, across the road from the District Police Headquarters. Chanan Singh, a Head Constable who was chasing them, was shot dead by Chandrashekhar Azad.^[33] They then fled on bicycles to pre-arranged safe houses. The police launched a massive search operation to catch them, blocking all entrances and exits to and from the city; the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) kept a watch on all young men leaving Lahore. The fugitives hid for the next two days. On 19 December 1928, Sukhdev called on Durgawati Devi, sometimes known as Durga Bhabhi, wife of another HSRA member, Bhagwati Charan Vohra, for help, which she agreed to provide. They decided to catch the train departing from Lahore to Bathinda en route to Howrah (Calcutta) early the next morning.^[34]

Escape from Lahore

Bhagat Singh and Rajguru, both carrying loaded revolvers, left the house early the next day.^[34] Dressed in Western attire (Bhagat Singh cut his hair, shaved his beard and wore a hat over cropped hair), and carrying Devi’s sleeping child, Singh and Devi passed as a young couple, while Rajguru carried their luggage as their servant. At the station, Singh managed to conceal his identity while buying tickets, and the three boarded the train heading to Cawnpore (now Kanpur). There they boarded a train for Lucknow since the CID at Howrah railway station usually scrutinised passengers on the direct train from Lahore.^[34] At Lucknow, Rajguru left separately for Benares while Singh, Devi and the infant went to Howrah, with all except Singh returning to Lahore a few days later.^[35][34]

Delhi Assembly bombing and arrest

For some time, Bhagat Singh had been exploiting the power of drama as a means to inspire the revolt against the British, purchasing a magic lantern to show slides that enlivened his talks about revolutionaries such as Ram Prasad Bismil who had died as a result of the Kakori conspiracy. In 1929, he proposed a dramatic act to the HSRA intended to gain massive publicity for their aims.^[21] Influenced by Auguste Vaillant, a French anarchist who had bombed the Chamber of Deputies in Paris,^[36] Singh’s plan was to explode a bomb inside the Central Legislative Assembly. The nominal intention was to protest against the Public Safety Bill, and the Trade Dispute Act, which had been rejected by the Assembly but were being enacted by the Viceroy using his special powers; the actual intention was for the perpetrators to allow themselves to be arrested so that they could use court appearances as a stage to publicise their cause.^[24]

The HSRA leadership was initially opposed to Bhagat’s participation in the bombing because they were certain that his prior involvement in the Saunders shooting meant that his arrest would ultimately result in his execution. However, they eventually decided that he was their most suitable candidate. On 8 April 1929, Singh, accompanied by Batukeshwar Dutt, threw two bombs into the Assembly chamber from its public gallery while it was in session.^[37] The bombs had been designed not to kill,^[38] but some members, including George Ernest Schuster, the finance member of the Viceroy’s Executive Council, were injured.^[39] The smoke from the bombs filled the Assembly so that Singh and Dutt could probably have escaped in the confusion had they wished. Instead, they stayed shouting the slogan “Inquilab Zindabad!” (“Long Live the Revolution”) and threw leaflets. The two men were arrested and subsequently moved through a series of jails in Delhi.^[40]

Assembly case trial

According to Neeti Nair, “public criticism of this terrorist action was unequivocal.”^[38] Gandhi, once again, issued strong words of disapproval of their deed.^[15] Nonetheless, the jailed Bhagat was reported to be elated, and referred to the subsequent legal proceedings as a “drama”.^[40] Singh and Dutt eventually responded to the criticism by writing the Assembly Bomb Statement:

We hold human life sacred beyond words. We are neither perpetrators of dastardly outrages … nor are we ‘lunatics’ as the Tribune of Lahore and some others would have it believed … Force when aggressively applied is ‘violence’ and is, therefore, morally unjustifiable, but when it is used in the furtherance of a legitimate cause, it has its moral justification.^[38]

The trial began in the first week of June, following a preliminary hearing in May. On 12 June, both men were sentenced to life imprisonment for: “causing explosions of a nature likely to endanger life, unlawfully and maliciously.”^[40][41] Dutt had been defended by Asaf Ali, while Singh defended himself.^[42] Doubts have been raised about the accuracy of testimony offered at the trial. One key discrepancy concerns the automatic pistol that Singh had been carrying when he was arrested. Some witnesses said that he had fired two or three shots while the police sergeant who arrested him testified that the gun was pointed downward when he took it from him and that Singh “was playing with it.”^[43] According to an article in the India Law Journal, the prosecution witnesses were coached, their accounts were incorrect, and Singh had turned over the pistol himself.^[44] Singh was given a life sentence.^[45]

Arrest of associates

In 1929, the HSRA had set up bomb factories in Lahore and Saharanpur. On 15 April 1929, the Lahore bomb factory was discovered by the police, leading to the arrest of other members of HSRA, including Sukhdev, Kishori Lal, and Jai Gopal. Not long after this, the Saharanpur factory was also raided and some of the conspirators became informants. With the new information available, the police were able to connect the three strands of the Saunders murder, Assembly bombing, and bomb manufacture.^[28] Singh, Sukhdev, Rajguru, and 21 others were charged with the Saunders murder.^[46]

Hunger strike and Lahore conspiracy case

Singh was re-arrested for murdering Saunders and Chanan Singh based on substantial evidence against him, including statements by his associates, Hans Raj Vohra and Jai Gopal.^[44] His life sentence in the Assembly Bomb case was deferred until the Saunders case was decided.^[45] He was sent to Central Jail Mianwali from the Delhi jail.^[42] There he witnessed discrimination between European and Indian prisoners. He considered himself, along with others, to be a political prisoner. He noted that he had received an enhanced diet at Delhi which was not being provided at Mianwali. He led other Indian, self-identified political prisoners he felt were being treated as common criminals in a hunger strike. They demanded equality in food standards, clothing, toiletries, and other hygienic necessities, as well as access to books and a daily newspaper. They argued that they should not be forced to do manual labour or any undignified work in the jail.^[47][48]

The hunger strike inspired a rise in public support for Singh and his colleagues from around June 1929. The Tribune newspaper was particularly prominent in this movement and reported on mass meetings in places such as Lahore and Amritsar. The government had to apply Section 144 of the criminal code in an attempt to limit gatherings.^[49]

Jawaharlal Nehru met Singh and the other strikers in Central Jail Mianwali. After the meeting, he stated:

I was very much pained to see the distress of the heroes. They have staked their lives in this struggle. They want that political prisoners should be treated as political prisoners. I am quite hopeful that their sacrifice would be crowned with success.^[50]

Muhammad Ali Jinnah spoke in support of the strikers in the Assembly, saying:

The man who goes on hunger strike has a soul. He is moved by that soul, and he believes in the justice of his cause … however much you deplore them and, however, much you say they are misguided, it is the system, this damnable system of governance, which is resented by the people.^[51]

The government tried to break the strike by placing different food items in the prison cells to test the prisoners’ resolve. Water pitchers were filled with milk so that either the prisoners remained thirsty or broke their strike; nobody faltered and the impasse continued. The authorities then attempted force-feeding the prisoners but this was resisted.^[52][c] With the matter still unresolved, the Indian Viceroy, Lord Irwin, cut short his vacation in Simla to discuss the situation with jail authorities.^[54] Since the activities of the hunger strikers had gained popularity and attention nationwide, the government decided to advance the start of the Saunders murder trial, which was henceforth called the Lahore Conspiracy Case. Singh was transported to Borstal Jail, Lahore,^[55] and the trial began there on 10 July 1929. In addition to charging them with the murder of Saunders, Singh and the 27 other prisoners were charged with plotting a conspiracy to murder Scott, and waging a war against the King.^[44] Singh, still on hunger strike, had to be carried to the court handcuffed on a stretcher; he had lost 14 pounds (6.4 kg) from his original weight of 133 pounds (60 kg) since beginning the strike.^[55]

The government was beginning to make concessions but refused to move on the core issue of recognising the classification of “political prisoner”. In the eyes of officials, if someone broke the law then that was a personal act, not a political one, and they were common criminals.^[56] By now, the condition of another hunger striker, Jatindra Nath Das, lodged in the same jail, had deteriorated considerably. The Jail committee recommended his unconditional release, but the government rejected the suggestion and offered to release him on bail. On 13 September 1929, Das died after a 63-day hunger strike.^[55] Almost all the nationalist leaders in the country paid tribute to Das’ death. Mohammad Alam and Gopi Chand Bhargava resigned from the Punjab Legislative Council in protest, and Nehru moved a successful adjournment motion in the Central Assembly as a censure against the “inhumane treatment” of the Lahore prisoners.^[57] Singh finally heeded a resolution of the Congress party, and a request by his father, ending his hunger strike on 5 October 1929 after 116 days.^[44] During this period, Singh’s popularity among common Indians extended beyond Punjab.^[58]

Singh’s attention now turned to his trial, where he was to face a Crown prosecution team comprising C. H. Carden-Noad, Kalandar Ali Khan, Jai Gopal Lal, and the prosecuting inspector, Bakshi Dina Nath.^[44] The defence was composed of eight lawyers. Prem Dutt Verma, the youngest amongst the 27 accused, threw his slipper at Gopal when he turned and became a prosecution witness in court. As a result, the magistrate ordered that all the accused should be handcuffed.^[44] Singh and others refused to be handcuffed and were subjected to brutal beating.^[59] The revolutionaries refused to attend the court and Singh wrote a letter to the magistrate citing various reasons for their refusal.^[60][61] The magistrate ordered the trial to proceed without the accused or members of the HSRA. This was a setback for Singh as he could no longer use the trial as a forum to publicise his views.^[62]

Special Tribunal

To speed up the slow trial, the Viceroy, Lord Irwin, declared an emergency on 1 May 1930 and introduced an ordinance to set up a special tribunal composed of three high court judges for the case. This decision cut short the normal process of justice as the only appeal after the tribunal was to the Privy Council located in England.^[44]

On 2 July 1930, a habeas corpus petition was filed in the High Court challenging the ordinance on the grounds that it was ultra vires and, therefore, illegal; the Viceroy had no powers to shorten the customary process of determining justice.^[44] The petition argued that the Defence of India Act 1915 allowed the Viceroy to introduce an ordinance, and set up such a tribunal, only under conditions of a breakdown of law-and-order, which, it was claimed in this case, had not occurred. However, the petition was dismissed as being premature.^[63]

Carden-Noad presented the government’s charges of conducting robberies, and the illegal acquisition of arms and ammunition among others.^[44] The evidence of G. T. H. Hamilton Harding, the Lahore superintendent of police, shocked the court. He stated that he had filed the first information report against the accused under specific orders from the chief secretary to the governor of Punjab and that he was unaware of the details of the case. The prosecution depended mainly on the evidence of P. N. Ghosh, Hans Raj Vohra, and Jai Gopal who had been Singh’s associates in the HSRA. On 10 July 1930, the tribunal decided to press charges against only 15 of the 18 accused and allowed their petitions to be taken up for hearing the next day. The trial ended on 30 September 1930.^[44] The three accused, whose charges were withdrawn, included Dutt who had already been given a life sentence in the Assembly bomb case.^[64]

The ordinance (and the tribunal) would lapse on 31 October 1930 as it had not been passed by the Central Assembly or the British Parliament. On 7 October 1930, the tribunal delivered its 300-page judgement based on all the evidence and concluded that the participation of Singh, Sukhdev, and Shivaram Rajguru in Saunder’s murder was proven. They were sentenced to death by hanging.^[44] Of the other accused, three were acquitted (Ajoy Ghosh, Jatindra Nath Sanyal and Des Raj) Kundan Lal received seven years’ rigorous imprisonment, Prem Dutt received five years of the same, and the remaining seven Kishori Lal, Mahavir Singh, Bijoy Kumar Sinha, Shiv Verma, Gaya Prasad, Jaidev Kapoor and Kamal Nath Tewari were all sentenced to transportation for life.^[65]

Appeal to the Privy Council

In Punjab province, a defence committee drew up a plan to appeal to the Privy Council. Singh was initially against the appeal but later agreed to it in the hope that the appeal would popularise the HSRA in Britain. The appellants claimed that the ordinance which created the tribunal was invalid while the government countered that the Viceroy was completely empowered to create such a tribunal. The appeal was dismissed by Judge Viscount Dunedin.^[66]

Reactions to the judgement

After the rejection of the appeal to the Privy Council, Congress party president Madan Mohan Malaviya filed a mercy appeal before Irwin on 14 February 1931.^[67] Some prisoners sent Mahatma Gandhi an appeal to intervene.^[44] In his notes dated 19 March 1931, the Viceroy recorded:

While returning Gandhiji asked me if he could talk about the case of Bhagat Singh because newspapers had come out with the news of his slated hanging on March 24th. It would be a very unfortunate day because on that day the new president of the Congress had to reach Karachi and there would be a lot of hot discussion. I explained to him that I had given a very careful thought to it but I did not find any basis to convince myself to commute the sentence. It appeared he found my reasoning weighty.^[68]

The Communist Party of Great Britain expressed its reaction to the case:

The history of this case, of which we do not come across any example in relation to the political cases, reflects the symptoms of callousness and cruelty which is the outcome of bloated desire of the imperialist government of Britain so that fear can be instilled in the hearts of the repressed people.^[67]

A plan to rescue Singh and fellow HSRA inmates from the jail failed. HSRA member Durga Devi’s husband, Bhagwati Charan Vohra, attempted to manufacture bombs for the purpose, but died when they exploded accidentally.^[69]

Execution

Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev were sentenced to death in the Lahore conspiracy case and ordered to be hanged on 24 March 1931.^[70] The schedule was moved forward by 11 hours and the three were hanged on 23 March 1931 at 7:30 pm^[71] in the Lahore jail. It is reported that no magistrate at the time was willing to supervise Singh’s hanging as was required by law. The execution was supervised instead by an honorary judge named Nawab Muhammad Ahmed Khan Kasuri, who also signed the three death warrants, as their original warrants had expired.^[72] The jail authorities then broke a hole in the rear wall of the jail, removed the bodies, and secretly cremated the three men under cover of darkness outside Ganda Singh Wala village, and then threw the ashes into the Sutlej river, about 10 kilometres (6.2 mi) from Ferozepore.^[73]

Criticism of the tribunal trial

Singh’s trial has been described by the Supreme Court as “contrary to the fundamental doctrine of criminal jurisprudence” because there was no opportunity for the accused to defend themselves.^[74] The Special Tribunal was a departure from the normal procedure adopted for a trial and its decision could only be appealed to the Privy Council located in Britain.^[44] The accused were absent from the court and the judgement was passed ex-parte.^[62] The ordinance, which was introduced by the Viceroy to form the Special Tribunal, was never approved by the Central Assembly or the British Parliament, and it eventually lapsed without any legal or constitutional sanctity.^[59]

Reactions to the executions

The executions were reported widely by the press, especially as they took place on the eve of the annual convention of the Congress party at Karachi.^[75] Gandhi faced black flag demonstrations by angry youths who shouted “Down with Gandhi”.^[76] The New York Times reported:

A reign of terror in the city of Cawnpore in the United Provinces and an attack on Mahatma Gandhi by a youth outside Karachi were among the answers of the Indian extremists today to the hanging of Bhagat Singh and two fellow-assassins.^[77]

Hartals and strikes of mourning were called.^[78] The Congress party, during the Karachi session, declared:

While dissociating itself from and disapproving of political violence in any shape or form, this Congress places on record its admiration of the bravery and sacrifice of Bhagat Singh, Sukh Dev and Raj Guru and mourns with their bereaved families the loss of these lives. The Congress is of the opinion that their triple execution was an act of wanton vengeance and a deliberate flouting of the unanimous demand of the nation for commutation. This Congress is further of the opinion that the [British] Government lost a golden opportunity for promoting good-will between the two nations, admittedly held to be crucial at this juncture, and for winning over to methods of peace a party which, driven to despair, resorts to political violence.^[79]

In the issue of Young India of 29 March 1931, Gandhi wrote:

Bhagat Singh and his two associates have been hanged. The Congress made many attempts to save their lives and the Government entertained many hopes of it, but all has been in a vain.

Bhagat Singh did not wish to live. He refused to apologise, or even file an appeal. Bhagat Singh was not a devotee of non-violence, but he did not subscribe to the religion of violence. He took to violence due to helplessness and to defend his homeland. In his last letter, Bhagat Singh wrote, ” I have been arrested while waging a war. For me there can be no gallows. Put me into the mouth of a cannon and blow me off.” These heroes had conquered the fear of death. Let us bow to them a thousand times for their heroism.

But we should not imitate their act. In our land of millions of destitute and crippled people, if we take to the practice of seeking justice through murder, there will be a terrifying situation. Our poor people will become victims of our atrocities. By making a dharma of violence, we shall be reaping the fruit of our own actions.

Hence, though we praise the courage of these brave men, we should never countenance their activities. Our dharma is to swallow our anger, abide by the discipline of non-violence and carry out our duty.^[80]

Gandhi’s role

On 23 March, Mahatama Gandhi had written a letter to viceroy appealing for commutation for the death sentences against Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru.^[81] While there have been unfounded claims that Gandhi had an opportunity to stop Singh’s execution, it is held that Gandhi did not have enough influence with the British to stop the execution, much less arrange it,^[82] but that he did his best to save Singh’s life.^[83] Gandhi supporters assert that Singh’s role in the independence movement was no threat to Gandhi’s role as its leader, so he would have no reason to want him dead.^[27] Gandhi always maintained that he was a great admirer of Singh’s patriotism. He also stated that he was opposed to Singh’s execution (and for that matter, capital punishment in general) and proclaimed that he had no power to stop it.^[82] Of Singh’s execution Gandhi said: “The government certainly had the right to hang these men. However, there are some rights which do credit to those who possess them only if they are enjoyed in name only.”^[84] Gandhi also once remarked about capital punishment: “I cannot in all conscience agree to anyone being sent to the gallows. God alone can take life, because he alone gives it.”^[85] Gandhi had managed to have 90,000 political prisoners, who were not members of his Satyagraha movement, released under the Gandhi–Irwin Pact.^[27] According to a report in the Indian magazine Frontline, he did plead several times for the commutation of the death sentences of Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev, including a personal visit on 19 March 1931. In a letter to the Viceroy on the day of their execution, he pleaded fervently for commutation, not knowing that the letter would arrive too late.^[27] Lord Irwin, the Viceroy, later said:

As I listened to Mr. Gandhi putting the case for commutation before me, I reflected first on what significance it surely was that the apostle of non-violence should so earnestly be pleading the cause of the devotees of a creed so fundamentally opposed to his own, but I should regard it as wholly wrong to allow my judgement to be influenced by purely political considerations. I could not imagine a case in which under the law, penalty had been more directly deserved.^[27]

Ideals and opinions

Communism

Singh regarded Kartar Singh Sarabha, a founding-member of the Ghadar Party as his hero. Bhagat was also inspired by Bhai Parmanand, another founding-member of the Ghadar Party.^[86] Singh was attracted to anarchism and communism.^[87] He was an avid reader of the teachings of Mikhail Bakunin and also read Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky.^[88] In his last testament, “To Young Political Workers”, he declares his ideal as the “Social reconstruction on new, i.e., Marxist, basis”.^[89] Singh did not believe in the Gandhian ideology – which advocated Satyagraha and other forms of non-violent resistance, and felt that such politics would replace one set of exploiters with another.^[90]

From May to September 1928, Singh published a series of articles on anarchism in Kirti. He was concerned that the public misunderstood the concept of anarchism, writing that: “The people are scared of the word anarchism. The word anarchism has been abused so much that even in India revolutionaries have been called anarchist to make them unpopular.” He clarified that anarchism refers to the absence of a ruler and abolition of the state, not the absence of order. He went on to say: “I think in India the idea of universal brotherhood, the Sanskrit sentence Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam etc., has the same meaning.” He believed that:

The ultimate goal of Anarchism is complete independence, according to which no one will be obsessed with God or religion, nor will anybody be crazy for money or other worldly desires. There will be no chains on the body or control by the state. This means that they want to eliminate: the Church, God and Religion; the state; Private property.^[87]

On 21 January 1930, during the trial of the Lahore Conspiracy Case, Bhagat Singh and his HSRA comrades, appeared in the court wearing red scarves. When the magistrate took his chair, they raised slogans “Long Live Socialist Revolution”, “Long Live Communist International”, “Long Live People” “Lenin’s Name Will Never Die”, and “Down with Imperialism“.^[91] Bhagat Singh then read the text of a telegram in the court and asked the magistrate to send it to the Third International. The telegram stated:

On Lenin day we send harty greetings to all who are doing something for carrying forward the ideas of the great Lenin. We wish success to the great experiment Russia is carrying out. We join our voice to that of the international working class movement. The proletariat will win. Capitalism will be defeated. Death to Imperialism.^[91]

Historian K. N. Panikkar described Singh as one of the early Marxists in India.^[90] The political theorist Jason Adams notes that he was more enamoured with Lenin than with Marx.^[88] From 1926 onward, he studied the history of the revolutionary movements in India and abroad. In his prison notebooks, he quoted Lenin in reference to imperialism and capitalism and also the revolutionary thoughts of Trotsky.^[92]

On the day of his execution, Bhagat Singh was reading the book, Reminiscences of Lenin, authored by Clara Zetkin, a German Marxist.^[93][91] When asked what his last wish was, Singh replied that he was studying the life of Lenin and he wanted to finish it before his death.^[94]

Atheism

Singh began to question religious ideologies after witnessing the Hindu–Muslim riots that broke out after Gandhi disbanded the Non-Cooperation Movement. He did not understand how members of these two groups, initially united in fighting against the British, could be at each other’s throats because of their religious differences.^[95] At this point, Singh dropped his religious beliefs, since he believed religion hindered the revolutionaries’ struggle for independence, and began studying the works of Bakunin, Lenin, Trotsky – all atheist revolutionaries. He also took an interest in Soham Swami‘s book Common Sense.^[d][96]

While in prison in 1930–31, Bhagat Singh was approached by Randhir Singh, a fellow inmate, and a Sikh leader who would later found the Akhand Kirtani Jatha. According to Bhagat Singh’s close associate Shiva Verma, who later compiled and edited his writings, Randhir Singh tried to convince Bhagat Singh of the existence of God, and upon failing berated him: “You are giddy with fame and have developed an ego that is standing like a black curtain between you and God”.^[97][e] In response, Bhagat Singh wrote an essay entitled “Why I Am an Atheist” to address the question of whether his atheism was born out of vanity. In the essay, he defended his own beliefs and said that he used to be a firm believer in the Almighty, but could not bring himself to believe the myths and beliefs that others held close to their hearts.^[99] He acknowledged the fact that religion made death easier, but also said that unproven philosophy is a sign of human weakness.^[97] In this context, he noted:

As regard the origin of God, my thought is that man created God in his imagination when he realised his weaknesses, limitations and shortcomings. In this way he got the courage to face all the trying circumstances and to meet all dangers that might occur in his life and also to restrain his outbursts in prosperity and affluence. God, with his whimsical laws and parental generosity was painted with variegated colours of imagination. He was used as a deterrent factor when his fury and his laws were repeatedly propagated so that man might not become a danger to society. He was the cry of the distressed soul for he was believed to stand as father and mother, sister and brother, brother and friend when in time of distress a man was left alone and helpless. He was Almighty and could do anything. The idea of God is helpful to a man in distress.^[97]

Towards the end of the essay, Bhagat Singh wrote:

Let us see how steadfast I am. One of my friends asked me to pray. When informed of my atheism, he said, “When your last days come, you will begin to believe.” I said, “No, dear sir, Never shall it happen. I consider it to be an act of degradation and demoralisation. For such petty selfish motives, I shall never pray.” Reader and friends, is it vanity? If it is, I stand for it.^[97]

“Killing the ideas”

In the leaflet he threw in the Central Assembly on 8 April 1929, he stated: “It is easy to kill individuals but you cannot kill the ideas. Great empires crumbled, while the ideas survived.”^[100] While in prison, Singh and two others had written a letter to Lord Irwin, wherein they asked to be treated as prisoners of war and consequently to be executed by firing squad and not by hanging.^[101] Prannath Mehta, Singh’s friend, visited him in the jail on 20 March, three days before his execution, with a draft letter for clemency, but he declined to sign it.^[27]

Influence

Subhas Chandra Bose said that: “Bhagat Singh had become the symbol of the new awakening among the youths.” Nehru acknowledged that Bhagat Singh’s popularity was leading to a new national awakening, saying: “He was a clean fighter who faced his enemy in the open field … he was like a spark that became a flame in a short time and spread from one end of the country to the other dispelling the prevailing darkness everywhere”.^[76] Four years after Singh’s hanging, the Director of the Intelligence Bureau, Sir Horace Williamson, wrote: “His photograph was on sale in every city and township and for a time rivaled in popularity even that of Mr. Gandhi himself”.^[76]

Legacy and memorials

See also: Hussainiwala National Martyrs Memorial

Bhagat Singh remains a significant figure in Indian iconography to the present day.^[102] His memory, however, defies categorisation and presents problems for various groups that might try to appropriate it. Pritam Singh, a professor who has specialised in the study of federalism, nationalism and development in India, notes that

Bhagat Singh represents a challenge to almost every tendency in Indian politics. Gandhi-inspired Indian nationalists, Hindu nationalists, Sikh nationalists, the parliamentary Left and the pro-armed struggle Naxalite Left compete with each other to appropriate the legacy of Bhagat Singh, and yet each one of them is faced with a contradiction in making a claim to his legacy. Gandhi-inspired Indian nationalists find Bhagat Singh’s resort to violence problematic, the Hindu and Sikh nationalists find his atheism troubling, the parliamentary Left finds his ideas and actions as more close to the perspective of the Naxalites and the Naxalites find Bhagat Singh’s critique of individual terrorism in his later life an uncomfortable historical fact.^[103]

• On 15 August 2008, an 18-foot tall bronze statue of Singh was installed in the Parliament of India, next to the statues of Indira Gandhi and Subhas Chandra Bose.^[104] A portrait of Singh and Dutt also adorns the walls of the Parliament House.^[105]

• The place where Singh was cremated, at Hussainiwala on the banks of the Sutlej river, became Pakistani territory during the partition. On 17 January 1961, it was transferred to India in exchange for 12 villages near the Sulemanki Headworks.^[73] Batukeshwar Dutt was cremated there on 19 July 1965 in accordance with his last wishes, as was Singh’s mother, Vidyawati.^[106] The National Martyrs Memorial was built on the cremation spot in 1968^[107] and has memorials of Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev. During the 1971 India–Pakistan war, the memorial was damaged and the statues of the martyrs were removed by the Pakistani Army. They have not been returned^[73][108] but the memorial was rebuilt in 1973.^[106]
• The Shaheedi Mela (Punjabi: Martyrdom Fair) is an event held annually on 23 March when people pay homage at the National Martyrs Memorial.^[109] The day is also observed across the Indian state of Punjab.^[110]
• The Shaheed-e-Azam Sardar Bhagat Singh Museum opened on the 50th anniversary of his death at his ancestral village, Khatkar Kalan. Exhibits include Singh’s ashes, the blood-soaked sand, and the blood-stained newspaper in which the ashes were wrapped.^[111] A page of the first Lahore Conspiracy Case’s judgement in which Kartar Singh Sarabha was sentenced to death and on which Singh put some notes is also displayed,^[111] as well as a copy of the Bhagavad Gita with Bhagat Singh’s signature, which was given to him in the Lahore Jail, and other personal belongings.^[112][113]
• The Bhagat Singh Memorial was built in 2009 in Khatkar Kalan at a cost of ₹168 million (US$2.0 million).^[114]
• The Supreme Court of India established a museum to display landmarks in the history of India’s judicial system, displaying records of some historic trials. The first exhibition that was organised was the Trial of Bhagat Singh, which opened on 28 September 2007, on the centenary celebrations of Singh’s birth.^[74][59]

Modern days

The youth of India still draw tremendous amount of inspiration from Singh.^[115][116] He was voted the “Greatest Indian” in a poll by the Indian magazine India Today in 2008, ahead of Bose and Gandhi.^[117] During the centenary of his birth, a group of intellectuals set up an institution named Bhagat Singh Sansthan to commemorate him and his ideals.^[118] The Parliament of India paid tributes and observed silence as a mark of respect in memory of Singh on 23 March 2001^[119] and 2005.^[120] In Pakistan, after a long-standing demand by activists from the Bhagat Singh Memorial Foundation of Pakistan, the Shadman Chowk square in Lahore, where he was hanged, was renamed as Bhagat Singh Chowk. This change was successfully challenged in a Pakistani court.^[121][122] On 6 September 2015, the Bhagat Singh Memorial Foundation filed a petition in the Lahore high court and again demanded the renaming of the Chowk to Bhagat Singh Chowk.^[123]

headquarters’ Recruiting Zone, Kolkata, said that recruit ment of Agniveers from West Bengal in 2024 is highly unlikely as the state government has failed to provide support for organ ising physical and medical tests for candidates who cleared the online Com mon Entrance Examina tion (CEE). “The first rounds of phys ical and medical screenings for the successful candi dates were to be conduct ed in July and August at Barrackpore and Siliguri. Despite requests to the Department of Home Af fairs, Government of West Bengal, no administrative support was forthcoming for these screenings which are loosely referred to as ‘recruit ment rallies’,” said a senior official of Headquarters Re cruiting Zone, Kolkata. He added that the admin istrative support includes maintenance of law and order at the venues and traffic control. “As a result, the screenings could not be conducted,” he said. The official added that the screenings scheduled for September and November in Kolkata and Murshid abad have also been put on hold as the first two could not be conducted. “This ef fectively means that there will be no recruitment to the Army from West Bengal in 2024,” he said. The state Home Depart ment has yet to respond to these allegations. However, sources at the Recruitment Zone, Kolkata, said that immediate steps need to be taken to prevent West Bengal’s quota from moving to other states. “The most structured and formal policy toward equi table representation in the Armed Forces across states took shape after 1999 with the introduction of the Zon al Recruitment Policy. This policy was designed to en sure a balanced recruitment process and adequate repre sentation from all states in the Indian Armed Forces. Such incidents will affect the whole process,” the of ficial added. In 2023, nearly 3,900 youngsters from West Bengal had joined the Army as Agniveers. Of them, about 1,000 have the chance of being permanently absorbed by the Army, while the remain ing will be returning after four years and can then apply for recruitment in the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs). The CAPFs, including the BSF, SSB, CRPF, and CISF, have announced relaxations in the recruitment process for Agniveers who return after serving in the Indian armed forces for four years. According to the, nearly 37,500 candidates from West Bengal registered themselves for the recruit ment process in 2024. About 16,000 of them cleared the CEE that was conducted between April 22 and May 3, 2024. Adequate support was provided by the state home department dur ing the online CEE. IANS

President Droupadi Mur mu visited the Indian Ar my’s Siachen Base Camp in Ladakh on Thursday and paid tribute to the mar tyrs at the Siachen War Memorial. The memorial symbol ises the sacrifice of Army soldiers and officers who have been martyred since Operation Meghdoot be gan at the Siachen Glacier in April 1984. Under Operation Megh doot in 1984, the Army established full control over the glacier, which is known as the world’s high est battlefield. Dressed in Army fatigues, the Presi dent addressed the troops stationed in Siachen, ex pressing her pride as the supreme commander of the armed forces and stat ing that all citizens salute their bravery. The President empha sised that since the com mencement of Operation Meghdoot in April 1984, the brave soldiers and of ficers of the Indian Armed Forces have ensured the security of this region. PT

Dressed in Army fatigues, the President addressed the troops posted in Siachen and said that, as the supreme commander of the armed forces, she felt very proud of them and that all

President Droupadi Murmu on Thursday visited the Siachen base camp and told soldiers posted at the world’s highest battlefield that all citizens salute their bravery. Addressing the troops, she said in difficult situations like heavy snowfall and minus 50 degrees…

President Droupadi Murmu pays tribute at the Siachen War Memorial. PTI

President Droupadi Murmu visits Siachen base camp

President Droupadi Murmu on Thursday visited the Siachen base camp and told soldiers posted at the world’s highest battlefield that all citizens salute their bravery. Addressing the troops, she said in difficult situations like heavy snowfall and minus 50 degrees…

President Droupadi Murmu pays tribute at the Siachen War Memorial. PTI

President Droupadi Murmu on Thursday visited the Siachen base camp and told soldiers posted at the world’s highest battlefield that all citizens salute their bravery.

Addressing the troops, she said in difficult situations like heavy snowfall and minus 50 degrees temperature, they present extraordinary examples of sacrifice and tolerance in protecting the motherland.

The President said as the supreme commander of the armed forces, she felt very proud of them and that “all citizens salute their bravery”.

World helpless to stop mayhem in Lebanon

A typically belligerent Israel is pulling out all the stops to inflict damage on Hezbollah in Lebanon. The international community, not for the first time, looks helpless to stop the no-holds-barred offensive that has killed hundreds of Lebanese people in a matter of days. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who will address the UN General Assembly in New York today, has told his army to fight on. He has no qualms about creating a mess that he can’t or won’t clean up. Brimming with overconfidence, Israel feels that it can handle two Iran-backed militant groups — Hezbollah and Hamas — at the same time, like a master juggler. It’s another matter that Hamas has proved too hot to handle for Netanyahu since the October 7, 2023, terror attacks.

The West lacks the guts to question Israel’s sledgehammer tactics, but it is desperate to avoid the ignominy of being labelled a mere spectator. The US, France and other allies jointly called for an ‘immediate’ 21-day ceasefire to allow for negotiations. US President Joe Biden was naïve enough to suggest that getting Israel and Hezbollah to agree to a ceasefire could help achieve a cessation of hostilities in Gaza. Does he really believe that this was a ‘buy one, get one free’ scheme of sorts? Defying its close ally, Israel was quick to burst Biden’s bubble of hope by rejecting the truce proposal.

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has tried to show the mirror to the powerful but deeply fractured Security Council, lambasting it for its failure to end wars in Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan and beyond. Lebanon has been added to this blood-soaked list, but the UN body — tasked with ensuring international peace and security — couldn’t care less. Expecting Israel to voluntarily take its foot off the pedal is akin to waiting for the leopard to change its spots. The world must realise that giving Israel carte blanche is a sure-fire recipe for disaster.

Rear Admiral Ankur Sharma, Nausena Medal (NM), took charge as Admiral Superintendent, Naval Dockyard, Mumbai, on September 24. An alumnus of St Edward’s School, Shimla, and the Naval College of Engineering, Rear Admiral Ankur Sharma was commissioned into the Navy…

ear Admiral Ankur Sharma, Nausena Medal (NM), took charge as Admiral Superintendent, Naval Dockyard, Mumbai, on September 24.

An alumnus of St Edward’s School, Shimla, and the Naval College of Engineering, Rear Admiral Ankur Sharma was commissioned into the Navy in November 1989. He is an engineering graduate (electrical) and postgraduate in MBA (IT) from the Jamnalal Bajaj Institute of Management Studies. He is also an alumnus of the coveted National Defence College Course. He is presently pursuing his PhD from IIT, Hyderabad.

An alumnus of St Edward’s School, Shimla, and the Naval College of Engineering, Rear Admiral Ankur Sharma was commissioned into the Navy in November 1989. He is an engineering graduate (electrical) and postgraduate in MBA (IT) from the Jamnalal Bajaj Institute of Management Studies. He is also an alumnus of the coveted National Defence College Course. He is presently pursuing his PhD from IIT, Hyderabad.

In his rich and illustrious career spanning 33 years, Rear Admiral Ankur Sharma has expertise in various fields, including maintenance and R&D of maritime systems. The Flag Officer has worked on frontline warships, design agencies and naval dockyards. His areas of interest include Big Data Analytics & AI and the adaptation of futuristic technologies to maritime domain and synergising commercial cutting-edge technologies to battlefield applications.r the reins of the Naval Dockyard in Mumbai, the Flag Officer was holding the prestigious appointment of Director-General, Weapons and Electronics Systems Engineering Establishment (WESEE)

Havildar Suresh R, 33, was brought to the Army’s Research and Referral Hospital in Delhi for further treatment from Israeli city in a military aircraft amid escalating tension between Israel and Lebanon

India on Thursday evacuated an Indian soldier from Tel Aviv after he suffered a head injury in an accident while serving the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) in Golan Heights.

Havildar Suresh R, 33, was brought to the Army’s Research and Referral Hospital in Delhi for further treatment from Israeli city in a military aircraft amid escalating tension between Israel and Lebanon.

The UNDOF is a peacekeeping force that is mandated to maintain a ceasefire between Israel and Syria and supervise the disengagement between militaries of the two countries.

“In a remarkable display of synergy, the Indian Armed Forces, supported by the #MoD successfully conducted a critical medical evacuation of Havildar Suresh R from United Nations Disengagement Observer Force #UNDOF Golan Heights,” the India Army said on X.

“On 20 Sept 2024, the individual suffered grievous injuries in the line of duty and was transferred to a #UN hospital in #Israel. However, as his situation required further treatment, it was decided to evacuate him to India,” it said.

The Army, the Indian Air Force, Integrated Defence Staff (IDS) and Department of Military Affairs (DMA) were involved in evacuation of the soldier.

“A team of Army Medical Corps #AMC in close collaboration with #IAF, #IDS & #DMA, in a highly coordinated mission, not only ensured that the injured soldier was evacuated amidst an extremely uncertain situation, but also provided state-of-the-art critical care support en route to the patient,” the Army said.

It said the “mission exemplifying the highest values of the Armed Forces, highlights the unwavering commitment to saving lives, even in the most challenging circumstances.”

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh complimented all those involved in the evacuation of Havildar Suresh.

“I compliment our Armed Forces for displaying remarkable jointness in planning and successfully executing the evacuation of Havildar Suresh R, our injured soldier from overseas Mission deployment,” he said on X.

“Proud of our Armed Forces who have once again demonstrated their unwavering commitment to ensure the safety of troops always,” Singh added.

China and India were able to “reduce differences” and build “some consensus” on disengaging troops from friction points to end the standoff in eastern Ladakh and agreed to maintain dialogue to reach a reso lution acceptable to both sides at an “early date”, Chinese Defence Ministry said on Thursday. Under the guidance of two leaders, China and In dia have maintained com munication with each other through diplomatic and military channels includ ing between two foreign ministers and China’s For eign Minister and India’s National Security Advisor and through the border consultation mechanisms, Zhang Xiaogang said. Both China and India through talks were “able to reduce their differences and build some consensus be sides agreeing to strengthen dialogue to accommodate each other’s legitimate con cerns”, Zhang, a spokes person for the Ministry of National Defence, told a media briefing here. “The two sides agreed to reach a resolution at an early date acceptable to both sides,” he said. He was replying to a question on the talks be tween the two countries on disengagement from the remaining friction points especially Demchok and Depsang to end the over four-year-long military standoff in eastern Ladakh resulting in a freeze of re lations between the two countries. Zhang referred to the meeting between External Affairs Minister S Jaishan kar and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi as well as the recent meeting on the sidelines of the BRICS meeting in Russia between Wang and National Secu rity Advisor Ajit Doval. On September 3, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokes person Mao Ning, while commenting on the talks between Wang and Doval, said the “front-line armies of the two countries have realised disengagement in four areas in the western sector of the China-India border, including the Gal wan Valley”. In his reply to the ques tion, Zhang didn’t com ment on the progress of the disengagement from the remaining areas in cluding Depsang and Demchok but said both sides will continue to con solidate the outcomes. “We will continue to consolidate the outcomes we have reached and re spect bilateral agreements and confidence-building measures to safeguard peace and tranquillity at the border,” he said. His comment respecting bilateral agreements came as Jaishankar while addressing an event hosted by Asia So ciety Policy Institute in New York on Tuesday said there were a series of agreements between the two countries that went into greater and greater detail on how to make sure the border remained peaceful and stable. PTI