The Jaganmohan Reddy Committee Report on the Mulki Agitation (1952)
As the Mulki agitation escalated, the Hyderabad State Government appointed a committee under the chairmanship of Justice Pingali Jaganmohan Reddy to investigate the police firing on protestors during the agitation on September 3rd and 4th, 1952, in Hyderabad. The committee conducted an extensive inquiry into the circumstances leading to the violence, the role of law enforcement, and the political impact of the movement.
Investigation Process and Key Findings
The Jaganmohan Reddy Committee visited the affected areas, including the High Court, City College, Pattarghat, and Afzalgunj. The inquiry was conducted publicly, with nearly 100 eyewitnesses providing their testimonies. The committee also interviewed key officials, including Chief Minister Burgula Rama Krishna Rao, Inspector General of Police Mohanappa, Police Commissioner Shivakumarlal, Deputy Commissioner of Police Sunder Pillai, Brigadier Subbaiah, City College Principal Ramlal, and the Collector of Hyderabad. After an in-depth examination, the committee submitted its final report on December 28, 1952.
Key Observations and Analysis
The committee found that the police firing in Patherghat, Afzalgunj, and City College was largely due to a lack of coordination between political leaders, representatives, and law enforcement authorities. Despite opening fire, the police failed to effectively control the situation, highlighting serious lapses in handling public protests.
The report noted that the agitators numbered around 40,000, and their commitment to the movement was intense. During the protests, demonstrators burned a wireless van and attacked police officers with stones. The agitation had reached a point where the protestors appeared to be moving towards attacking a police station, which prompted the police to resort to firing.
Role of Political Leaders and Public Sentiment
The committee observed that political leaders and government officials made efforts to pacify the protesting students. However, the deep-rooted insecurity among students regarding non-Mulkis continued to fuel the movement, making negotiations ineffective.
Despite initial confidence that they could control the agitators, the police resorted to firing, which the committee deemed unnecessary. The report also accused certain political leaders of exploiting the movement and manipulating students for personal gains.
Recommendations and Government Response
The committee urged students, parents, and the general public to maintain discipline and adhere to principles of responsible citizenship. More importantly, it strongly recommended that the government implement and enforce Mulki rules and regulations to address local grievances and prevent further unrest.
The Jaganmohan Reddy Committee Report played a crucial role in shaping future policies related to employment and administrative reforms in Hyderabad. It also underscored the importance of government accountability and effective crisis management in handling mass movements.
Enumerate the main findings and recommendations of Justice Jagan Mohan Reddy Committee report.
| Why was this question asked? | Keywords in the syllabus: Justice Jagan Mohan Reddy Committee Report |
| Approach:
|
The examiner will expect your answer to include the following things:
· Circumstances in which the commission was appointed. · Findings and recommendations of the report released. |
| Introduction:
|
The Home Department of the Hyderabad state had appointed a commission under the chairmanship of Justice Jagan Mohan Reddy on 09 September 1952 to enquire into the firing incidents which happened on 3rd and 4th September 1952. These police firing incidents which happened at City College and Osmania Hospital area respectively, had killed 8 people. The committee submitted its report with some findings and recommendations, on 28 December 1952. |
| Body:
|
Findings and recommendations of the report:
· The committee felt that police were left with no choice but to fire. According to the committee, 30,000 to 40,000 people participated in a procession even against police orders on the 3rd. Lathi charge and tear gas could not control the crowds, who showered stones and burnt police vehicles. · The committee believed that in a democracy, people can place their problems before the government in writing, or through elected members; coming on roads and committing unlawful activities cannot be supported. · The committee did not hold the police guilty of the incidents as it felt that the situation demanded stern action. It is police’s duty to control violence. · It recommended compensation to the families of dead and injured. It was unfortunate that lives were lost, some of them may be passers by who were not involved. · The committee concluded that the City College incident could have been avoided if both the students and police exercised some restraint. |
| Conclusion:
|
It is worth noting that the commission even cross examined the then Chief Minister of Hyderabad state, Burgula Ramakrishna Rao. Other witnesses included were Shivkumarlal (City Police Commissioner) and Hayagreeva Chary (Congress Leader). |