The Emergency Of 1975: Why History Never Forgets And Forgives

History never forgets and forgives.

With this statement, let us go back to the events of 1975. Raj Narain had been defeated in the Lok Sabha elections of 1971 by Indira Gandhi from Rae Bareilly.

Then, Raj Narain filed an election petition before the Allahabad High Court alleging that Indira Gandhi had resorted to electoral malpractices such as bribery, using government machinery and resources to gain an unfair advantage in contesting the election.

It was alleged that government employees while being on the payroll of the government had been used as election agents and for organising campaign activities in the constituency. On 12 June, 1975, Justice Jagmohanlal Sinha found Gandhi of electoral malpractices and declared the election “null and void” and barred Gandhi from holding an elected office for six years.

While Justice Sinha dismissed the charges of bribery, he found Indira Gandhi guilty of misusing government machinery. In appeal to the Supreme Court, on 24 June, 1975, Justice VR Krishna Iyer granted a conditional stay on Justice Sinha’s verdict, allowing Indira Gandhi to continue as the Prime Minister but she was debarred from taking part in parliamentary proceedings and draw salary as an MP.

As a fallout, Jayprakash Narayan and Morarji Desai called for daily anti-government protests and the next day JP organised a big rally in Delhi. The very next day, Indira Gandhi requested the President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed to proclaim a state of emergency.

Within three hours, electricity to all the major newspapers was cut and major opposition leaders were arrested. President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed mechanically issued the emergency proclamation under Article 352 of the Constitution. The ground given in the proclamation was the prevailing “internal disturbance.”

Emergency is the most drastic act in the governance of a country. The question I have asked myself time and again is: How could Emergency be declared so casually and mechanically?

Gandhi had seen in her lifetime, being a member of first political family of India, two Emergencies being declared earlier and hence it was treated by her casually. The first instance of an Emergency in India was between 26th October, 1962 and 10th January, 1968. Six long years!

The reason given was that “the security of India” was “threatened by external aggression.” While the 1962 the Indo-China war had occurred, there was no reason for an emergency for six long years. The second instance of an emergency declared in 1971 was a consequence of the India-Pakistan war.

For Indira Gandhi, emergency was a plaything and not an exceptional constitutional instrument to be used in the gravest situation of “internal disturbance”.

For her, losing a court battle to Raj Narain and not getting the desired relief from the Apex Court was “internal disturbance”. As originally provided in the constitution, an Emergency could be declared on the grounds of “external aggression or war” and “internal disturbance” in the whole of India or a part of its territory.

The six fundamental freedoms under Article 19 (freedom of speech and expression; to assemble peaceably and without arms; to form associations or unions; to move freely throughout the territory of India; to reside and settle in any part of the territory and to practise any profession; or to carry on any occupation, trade, or business) are automatically suspended. But the right to life and liberty under Article 21 could not be suspended according to the Constitution originally made.

However, in January, 1977, during the emergency declared in 1975, the government led by Indira Gandhi decided to suspend even the fundamental right to life and personal liberty by dispensing with the writ of Habeas Corpus.

As a result of this, many citizens were arrested across the country without any legal remedy available to them. Every citizen of India today and future, must reflect and visualise the drastic consequences of the Emergency declared in 1975. The Constitutional validity of the suspension of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty was challenged before the Supreme Court in ADM Jabalpur case.

The majority upheld the suspension of the right to life and personal liberty. ADM Jabalpur has been said to be the most controversial decision of the Apex Court.

However, Justice H.R.Khanna dissented and said;

The cases before us raise questions of utmost importance and gravity, questions which impinge not only upon the scope of the different constitutional provisions, but have impact also upon the basic values affecting life, liberty, and the rule of law.

More is at stake in these cases than the liberty of a few individuals or the correct construction of the wording of an order. What is at stake is the rule of law.

The question is not whether there can be curtailment of personal liberty when there is threat can be curtailment, even on an extensive scale, in the face of such threat. The question is whether the laws speaking through the authority of the courts shall be absolutely silenced and rendered mute because of such threat”.

While the majority opinion was severely criticised, the dissent of Justice Khanna found a place of pride and is amongst the exemplary instances of judicial statesmanship. Justice Khanna’s dissent received wide acclaim.

What are the lessons we learn from the emergency of 1975?

We the People of India must elect our leaders with extreme care and caution. While we had a leader like Mrs. Indira Gandhi who declared Emergency only because she lost a legal battle and thus took away even the fundamental right to life and personal liberty of the citizens, we have a Prime Minister in Narendra Modi who only lives and breathes ‘Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Prayas’. History never forgets and forgives.