Modern Indian History: Concise UPSC Notes, Timelines & Practice

    Modern Indian History is a high-priority section for UPSC Prelims and Mains. These revision-ready notes cover the British Company's rise, the Revolt of 1857, social reforms, the freedom movement, constitutional reforms, and Partition (1947). Each chapter contains concise summaries, mains key points, prelims tips and practice MCQs.

    Chapter index

    Modern Indian History

    Interactive study materials with AI assistance

    Modern History Playlist

    19 chapters0 completed

    1

    Advent of Europeans in India

    10 topics

    2

    Decline of the Mughal Empire

    7 topics

    3

    Emergence of Regional States

    11 topics

    4

    Expansion and Consolidation of British Power

    23 topics

    5

    British Government & Economic Policies (1757-1857)

    7 topics

    6

    Social Reform Movements

    24 topics

    7

    People’s Resistance before 1857

    13 topics

    8

    The revolt of 1857

    7 topics

    9

    Growth of Nationalism and Moderate Phase of Congress

    9 topics

    10

    British Administration in India

    9 topics

    11

    Era of Militant Nationalism (1905-1909)

    6 topics

    12

    First Phase of Revolutionary Activities(1907-1917)

    8 topics

    13

    India’s Response to First World War and Home Rule Movement

    5 topics

    14

    Emergence of Gandhi

    10 topics

    15

    Non-Cooperation Movement and Khilafat Movement

    10 topics

    16

    Emergence of Swarajists, Socialist Ideas, Revolutionary Activities

    8 topics

    17

    Struggle For Swaraj: 1928-1935

    16 topics

    Practice
    18

    Period from 1935-42

    12 topics

    19

    Period from 1942-47

    25 topics

    Progress (0%)
    0 / 19 complete

    Chapter 17: Struggle For Swaraj: 1928-1935

    Chapter Test
    16 topicsEstimated reading: 48 minutes

    Simon Commission Report (1927–1930): The Boycott and Political Radicalization

    Key Point

    The Simon Commission, appointed in 1927 , was intensely boycotted by most Indian political parties because of the complete exclusion of Indian members. The 1930 Report was strategically conservative, failing to grant Dominion Status. The protests against the Commission catalyzed the radicalization of Indian politics and led directly to the Congress’s demand for Purna Swaraj.

    The Simon Commission, appointed in 1927 , was intensely boycotted by most Indian political parties because of the complete exclusion of Indian members. The 1930 Report was strategically conservative, failing to grant Dominion Status. The protests against the Commission catalyzed the radicalization of Indian politics and led directly to the Congress’s demand for Purna Swaraj.

    Detailed Notes (15 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. The Boycott (1927–1928): An Assertion of Dignity:
    Background and Timing: The Commission was appointed two years early (1927) to review the Government of India Act, 1919, but comprised entirely of 7 British MPs, chaired by Sir John Simon.
    Reason for Boycott: The exclusion of Indians was seen as an outright insult and a denial of India's right to frame its own constitution, prompting a joint boycott by the Congress and the Muslim League (Jinnah faction).
    Mass Protest: The slogan 'Simon Go Back' became the nationwide rallying cry upon the Commission's arrival in 1928. Police repression of protests in Lahore led to the fatal injury of Lala Lajpat Rai.
    Radical Impact: Lala Lajpat Rai’s death spurred the HSRA to take revenge (Saunders’ assassination), contributing to the radicalization of the youth movement.
    II. Simon Commission Report (1930): Strategic Conservatism:
    Rejection of National Demand: The Report rejected the demand for Dominion Status and offered no concrete plan for self-government at the Centre, which was to remain under British control.
    Provincial Autonomy: Recommended the abolition of Dyarchy and the introduction of Provincial Autonomy (responsible government) but ensured Governors retained vast special powers (veto, emergency).
    Federal Structure: Suggested setting up a Federal Assembly with representation from provinces and princely states (a means to dilute nationalist influence).
    Communal Division: Strongly supported the continuation and extension of separate communal electorates for minorities (Muslims, Sikhs, Christians) to institutionalize fragmentation.
    III. Divergent Indian Reactions and Long-Term Impact:
    Congress Rejection: The Congress outright rejected the report, denouncing it as reactionary.
    Muslim League Division: The Commission caused a split in the Muslim League: the Jinnah faction criticized it for inadequate Muslim safeguards, while the Shafi faction welcomed it as it upheld separate electorates.
    Radicalization and Purna Swaraj: The national disillusionment fueled the adoption of the resolution for Purna Swaraj (Complete Independence) by the Congress in the 1929 Lahore Session, replacing the earlier demand for Dominion Status.
    Constitutional Legacy: Despite its political rejection, the Simon Commission Report formed the primary basis for the discussions in the Round Table Conferences (1930–32) and provided source material for the Government of India Act, 1935.

    Simon Commission Recommendations

    AspectRecommendationCritical Evaluation
    Provincial Dyarchy Abolish dyarchy; grant provincial autonomyGovernors retained special powers (veto) to undermine Indian ministers.
    Central Government No self-government; central control to remain BritishA direct rejection of the Dominion Status demand.
    Federal Assembly Proposed with provinces and princely statesDesigned to dilute nationalist strength by including loyal Princes.
    Communal Representation Continue and expand separate electoratesA political strategy to institutionalize division among Indians.

    Reactions to Simon Commission

    Group/SectionViewStrategic Context
    Congress Rejected ; demanded Purna SwarajAsserted India's right to frame its own constitution.
    Muslim League (Jinnah) Criticized for not protecting Muslim rights enoughAttempted to use the boycott to press for more safeguards.
    Muslim League (Shafi) Welcomed due to continuation of separate electoratesSupported the institutionalization of communal representation.
    Princes Interested in federation but cautiousInterested in maintaining their autonomy within a federal setup.

    Fun Facts

    The Simon Commission protests spurred the formation of the Nehru Report (1928), as Indian leaders took up the challenge to draft their own constitution.

    The fatal attack on Lala Lajpat Rai in Lahore inspired Bhagat Singh to kill Saunders in revenge.

    Mains Key Points

    Structural Insult: The exclusion of Indians was a structural insult, asserting colonial dominance and denying India’s right to self-determination.
    Political Catalyst: The protests and the death of Lala Lajpat Rai radicalized Indian politics, forcing the national goal to shift from Dominion Status to Purna Swaraj (1929).
    Strategic Conservatism: The report itself was strategically conservative, offering limited provincial power while retaining central imperial control and institutionalizing fragmentation through extended separate electorates.
    Foundation for 1935 Act: Despite being rejected, the report provided the core material and ideas (federation, provincial autonomy) that were ultimately incorporated into the Government of India Act, 1935.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Simon Commission appointed in 1927; no Indian member.
    'Simon Go Back' slogan raised during protests.
    Report (1930) recommended provincial autonomy but retained communal electorates.
    Lala Lajpat Rai died following the police crackdown on protests in 1928.

    Nehru Report (1928): India’s First Constitutional Blueprint

    Key Point

    The Nehru Report of 1928 , drafted by a committee chaired by Motilal Nehru , was the first major attempt by Indians to draft a comprehensive constitutional framework. It was a direct response to the Simon Commission, but its recommendation for Dominion Status and the rejection of separate communal electorates caused a critical split with both the Muslim League and younger radical leaders (Jawaharlal Nehru, Subhas Bose).

    The Nehru Report of 1928 , drafted by a committee chaired by Motilal Nehru , was the first major attempt by Indians to draft a comprehensive constitutional framework. It was a direct response to the Simon Commission, but its recommendation for Dominion Status and the rejection of separate communal electorates caused a critical split with both the Muslim League and younger radical leaders (Jawaharlal Nehru, Subhas Bose).

    Detailed Notes (16 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Genesis and Key Recommendations:
    Context (Colonial Challenge): The Report was prepared in response to Lord Birkenhead's challenge that Indians could not draft a constitution acceptable to all diverse communities. The All Parties Conference (1928) accepted this challenge.
    Committee: Chaired by Motilal Nehru , with members including Jawaharlal Nehru, Tej Bahadur Sapru, and Subhas Bose .
    Status: India should be given Dominion Status within the British Commonwealth (the consensus demanded by the Moderates).
    Governance: Proposed a Parliamentary system with a bi-cameral legislature at the center and Provincial Autonomy (ending Dyarchy).
    Rights: Guaranteed a set of Fundamental Rights (the first such list in Indian history), including equality before law, freedom of expression, and the proposal for Universal Adult Suffrage.
    Communal Representation: Recommended Joint Electorates (to promote national unity) with limited exceptions for Muslims in provinces where they were a minority.
    II. The Dual Nationalist Split (Communal and Radical):
    Muslim League Opposition: M.A. Jinnah’s faction vehemently opposed the Report, demanding separate electorates and one-third reservation in the Central Legislature.
    Jinnah's 14 Points (1929): Jinnah responded to the rejection of separate electorates by formulating his decisive '14 Points', which became the minimum constitutional demands for Muslims.
    Radical Youth Disillusionment: Younger leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhas Bose strongly criticized the central demand for Dominion Status, arguing that the Congress should demand Purna Swaraj (Complete Independence) immediately.
    Hindu Mahasabha: The Hindu Mahasabha supported the report as it opposed the continuance of separate electorates.
    III. Long-Term Analytical Impact:
    Constitutional Precedent: The Report was a crucial psychological victory, successfully challenging the British assertion of Indian incapacity for self-governance. It became the indigenous precedent for future constitutional debates.
    Foundation of the Republic: Its provisions on Fundamental Rights, federalism, and the parliamentary system heavily influenced the eventual Constitution of Independent India (1950).
    Exposed Limits of Consensus: The Report's ultimate failure to resolve the communal demands exposed the limits of national consensus and the deep difficulty of resolving the communal dilemma within the nationalist framework.

    Key Recommendations of Nehru Report (1928)

    AspectRecommendationMains Relevance
    Status Dominion Status within British CommonwealthReflected moderate consensus; rejected by radical youth.
    Communal Representation Joint Electorates ; limited exceptions for MuslimsDirectly led to Jinnah’s 14 Points and the breakdown of communal consensus.
    Fundamental Rights Guaranteed equality, freedom, associationFirst time such rights were demanded in an Indian constitutional document.
    Franchise Universal adult suffrage (gradual)Highly progressive step for its time.
    Provinces Provincial autonomy , end of DyarchyAccepted as a necessary improvement over the 1919 Act.

    Reactions to Nehru Report and the Communal Dilemma

    Group/SectionReactionStrategic Position
    Congress Supported; Common framework for Dominion StatusDemonstrated Congress's willingness to lead constitutional drafting.
    Muslim League (Jinnah) Opposed vehementlyRejected joint electorates; Formalised Muslim demands into 14 Points.
    Radical Youth (Nehru, Bose) Criticized the Dominion Status demandLed to the eventual Purna Swaraj demand at the Lahore Session (1929).
    Hindu Mahasabha SupportedSupported the rejection of the separate electorates principle.

    Fun Facts

    The committee drafting the Nehru Report met at the Nehru family residence in Allahabad, known as Anand Bhavan.

    It was the first document in Indian history to formally demand and guarantee a list of Fundamental Rights.

    The split between the radical youth (Jawaharlal) and the older generation (Motilal) was a key development that year.

    Mains Key Points

    Constitutional Sovereignty: The Report was a crucial assertion of India's sovereignty and self-determination, refuting the British claim that Indians were incapable of self-rule.
    Dual Failure: The Report’s ultimate failure was dual: it alienated the Muslim League (due to joint electorates) and the radical youth (due to Dominion Status), exposing the limits of national political consensus.
    Foundation for Modern India: Its provisions on Fundamental Rights, secularism, and federal structure laid a clear foundation for the Constitution of Independent India (1950).
    Shift to Radicalism: The rejection of the Report's Dominion Status demand by the British provided the younger generation the necessary pretext to shift the Congress's goal entirely to Purna Swaraj (Complete Independence) in 1929.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Nehru Report (1928) → Chaired by Motilal Nehru; first Indian constitutional draft.
    Proposed Dominion Status and Universal Adult Suffrage.
    Rejected separate electorates (except in limited cases).
    Jinnah responded with 14 Points (1929).

    Jinnah’s Fourteen Points (1929): Consolidating Communal Demands

    Key Point

    Jinnah’s Fourteen Points , presented in March 1929 , were a direct, decisive response to the Nehru Report (1928) . They formally crystallized the Muslim League’s demands for constitutional safeguards, becoming the definitive basis for Muslim political strategy and the institutionalization of the communal divide until the Pakistan Resolution (1940) .

    Jinnah’s Fourteen Points , presented in March 1929 , were a direct, decisive response to the Nehru Report (1928) . They formally crystallized the Muslim League’s demands for constitutional safeguards, becoming the definitive basis for Muslim political strategy and the institutionalization of the communal divide until the Pakistan Resolution (1940) .

    Detailed Notes (15 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Genesis and Strategic Intent:
    Context (Rejection of Nehru Report): The Nehru Report (1928) rejected the Muslim League’s core demand for separate electorates and adequate weightage (reservation of seats), leading Jinnah to abandon the idea of constitutional collaboration with Congress.
    Strategic Intent: Jinnah drafted the Fourteen Points to unite the fractured Muslim League (which was split into the Jinnah and Shafi factions) and provide a clear, non-negotiable constitutional charter that safeguarded Muslim political rights against the Congress’s perceived 'Hindu majority rule'.
    Political Positioning: The Points marked a crucial shift in Congress-League relations—from the temporary cooperation of the Lucknow Pact to a posture of constitutional confrontation.
    II. Key Demands and Institutionalization of Division:
    Federalism and Residuary Power (Point 1): A Federal Constitution with residuary powers vested in the provinces (not the Centre). This aimed to ensure maximum autonomy for Muslim-majority provinces.
    Separate Electorates (Point 6): Separate electorates to continue in all elections. This was a direct rejection of the Nehru Report's Joint Electorates and aimed at the institutionalization of the communal divide.
    Central Representation (Point 14): One-third representation for Muslims in the Central Legislature (far exceeding their population share). This was a demand for weightage to ensure the Muslim vote was indispensable in central politics.
    Provincial Integrity (Point 7 & 10): No territorial redistribution to affect Muslim majority provinces (Punjab, Bengal, NWFP). Sindh to be separated from Bombay Presidency (Point 10) to secure the geographical boundaries of Muslim-majority political units.
    Cultural Safeguard (Point 13): Constitutional provision for the protection of Muslim culture, education, language, and religion.
    III. Legacy and Impact on Indian Nationalism:
    Blueprint for Confrontation: The Fourteen Points became the definitive constitutional framework for the League, making it virtually impossible for Congress to reach a political settlement with the League for the next decade.
    Deepening the Communal Divide: By reiterating and extending the demand for separate electorates and weightage, the Points cemented the communal principle into the fabric of Indian politics.
    Consolidation of Muslim Identity: Jinnah successfully used the Report and the Points to consolidate his leadership among diverse Muslim factions, establishing himself as the primary spokesman for the community's constitutional demands.
    Enduring Charter: They functioned as the 'Charter of Muslim India' from 1929 until the Pakistan Resolution in 1940, fundamentally shaping the entire trajectory of the nationalist movement in the critical 1930s.

    Jinnah’s Fourteen Points (1929)

    No.DemandStrategic Purpose
    1 Federal constitution with provincial residuary powersMaximize autonomy of Muslim-majority provinces.
    6 Separate electorates to continueDirect rejection of Nehru Report; institutionalize communal politics.
    10 Sindh separated from Bombay PresidencySecure geographical integrity of future political units.
    14 One-third Muslim representation in Central LegislatureDemand for disproportionate weightage in central politics.
    13 Protection of Muslim culture, education, language, religionEmphasized religious identity as the basis for political rights.

    Fun Facts

    The Fourteen Points became the 'charter of Muslim India' until the Lahore Resolution (1940).

    Jinnah presented them to counterbalance the Nehru Report, strengthening his leadership in the Muslim League.

    They were an attempt to reconcile the demands of various Muslim factions (especially between Punjab and Bengal Muslims).

    Mains Key Points

    Strategic Confrontation: The Points marked a shift from cooperation to constitutional confrontation between the Congress and the League, making the path to political settlement virtually impossible.
    Institutionalizing Division: The core demands for separate electorates and provincial residuary powers effectively cemented the communal principle into the constitutional framework, paving the way for the later demand for Pakistan.
    Political Consolidation: The charter successfully consolidated Jinnah's leadership and the political identity of the Muslim community as a distinct political entity in the national negotiations.
    Impact on Congress: The rejection of the Fourteen Points by Congress further fueled the League's narrative that the Congress was a party representing only the majority community, strengthening the trust deficit.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Jinnah’s Fourteen Points (1929) → direct response to the Nehru Report.
    Key demand: continuation of separate electorates.
    Called for one-third Muslim representation at the center.
    The Points became the League’s demands until the Lahore Resolution (1940).

    Civil Disobedience Movement: Significant Developments Before Launch (1927–1930)

    Key Point

    The launch of the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) in 1930 was the culmination of a three-year period (1927–1930) marked by British constitutional betrayal, nationalist assertion, and the finalization of the Congress’s ultimate political goal. These developments set the perfect political and ideological stage for Mahatma Gandhi to launch his second nationwide mass struggle.

    The launch of the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) in 1930 was the culmination of a three-year period (1927–1930) marked by British constitutional betrayal, nationalist assertion, and the finalization of the Congress’s ultimate political goal. These developments set the perfect political and ideological stage for Mahatma Gandhi to launch his second nationwide mass struggle.

    Detailed Notes (16 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Constitutional Crisis and Nationalist Assertion:
    Failure of Montford Reforms (1919): The Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms proved inadequate, and the flawed Dyarchy system was unworkable, fueling the conviction that cooperation with the British was futile.
    Simon Commission Boycott (1927): The appointment of the All-White Simon Commission (1927), denying Indians the right to determine their own constitution, provoked an unprecedented, widespread national protest (the 'Simon Go Back' movement).
    - Radicalization: The brutal police crackdown in Lahore, leading to the death of Lala Lajpat Rai (1928), further radicalized the youth and inspired revolutionary actions.
    The Indian Challenge (Nehru Report, 1928): Drafted by Motilal Nehru, it was the first Indian attempt at framing a constitution, demanding Dominion Status and guaranteed Fundamental Rights.
    - Internal Conflict: The demand for Dominion Status was immediately opposed by the younger, radical faction—the Nehru-Bose group—who demanded Purna Swaraj (Complete Independence).
    II. Communal Dilemma and Final Goal:
    Jinnah’s Fourteen Points (1929): The Muslim League (Jinnah faction) rejected the Nehru Report primarily because it proposed joint electorates. Jinnah responded by formulating his 'Fourteen Points', which reiterated the demands for separate electorates and one-third Muslim representation at the center, deepening the Hindu-Muslim political divide.
    Lahore Congress Session (December 1929): Presided over by Jawaharlal Nehru.
    - Purna Swaraj Declaration: The Congress formally adopted 'Purna Swaraj' (Complete Independence) as its ultimate political goal, replacing the old demand for Dominion Status. The resolution was adopted on December 19, 1929.
    - Launch Decision: The Congress authorized the launch of the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi.
    Independence Day Pledge (January 26, 1930): The nation observed January 26, 1930, as 'Purna Swaraj Day' or 'Independence Day', taking a nationwide pledge for complete independence.
    IV. Gandhi’s Preparations (The 11 Demands):
    Strategic Appeal: Before launching the CDM, Gandhi published a list of '11 Demands' (covering economic, administrative, and political issues) in the newspaper *Young India* and sent them to Viceroy Lord Irwin.
    Key Demands: The list was wide-ranging, including: abolition of the salt tax, reduction of land revenue by 50%, protection of Indian industry, reduction of military expenditure, and the release of political prisoners.
    Failure of Negotiation: The British government's failure to respond positively to these demands provided Gandhi with the necessary moral justification to launch the CDM, choosing the symbolic salt tax as the central issue for mass action.

    Developments Before Civil Disobedience Movement

    YearEventSignificance
    1927 Simon Commission appointed All-White exclusion led to 'Simon Go Back' protests and radicalization.
    1928 Nehru Report drafted First Indian constitutional draft; demand for Dominion Status; rejected by Jinnah.
    1929 Jinnah’s Fourteen Points Consolidated Muslim League’s demands; formalized the Hindu–Muslim political divide.
    1929 Lahore Session of Congress Purna Swaraj declared as the goal; decision for Civil Disobedience under Gandhi.
    1930 (Jan) Independence Day observed Nationwide pledge taken; set the moral tone for the CDM.

    Fun Facts

    The Congress adopted the tricolour flag (with the spinning wheel at the center) as the national flag during the Lahore Session (1929).

    January 26 was observed as 'Independence Day' from 1930 onwards until it became Republic Day in 1950.

    Jawaharlal Nehru , just 40 years old, presided over the historic Lahore Session.

    Mains Key Points

    Shift to Purna Swaraj: The Lahore Session (1929) marked the definitive ideological break from the British Empire by replacing the old, conditional demand for Dominion Status (Nehru Report) with the unambiguous goal of Purna Swaraj (Complete Independence).
    Constitutional Impasse: The failure of the Simon Commission (exclusion) and the subsequent rejection of the Nehru Report (by the British and the Muslim League) exposed the hollowness of the constitutional path, convincing Congress that only mass action could achieve Swaraj.
    Gandhi’s Strategic Preparation: Gandhi’s 11 Demands were a masterful strategic move. They served as a compromise formula appealing to all classes (peasants, businessmen, general public), providing a clear moral justification for the mass disobedience that followed.
    The Final Catalyst: The non-acceptance of the demands and the symbolic observance of 'Purna Swaraj Day' (Jan 26, 1930) set the stage for the Salt Satyagraha, framing the upcoming CDM not just as a political protest but as a moral and collective national defiance.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Civil Disobedience Movement launched in 1930 after Gandhi’s 11 demands were rejected.
    Lahore Session (1929) → Purna Swaraj declared (Resolution adopted Dec 19, 1929).
    January 26, 1930 observed as first Independence Day.
    Gandhi’s 11 Demands included the abolition of the salt tax and reduction of military expenditure.

    Gandhi’s 11 Demands and the Salt March (1930): The Salt Satyagraha

    Key Point

    The Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) formally began with Gandhi’s 11 demands (January 1930) and the historic Salt March (March–April 1930) . The demands strategically synthesized economic grievances into a unified political appeal. When Viceroy Lord Irwin ignored them , Gandhi launched the Salt Satyagraha, making the salt tax the central symbol of colonial exploitation and national defiance.

    The Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) formally began with Gandhi’s 11 demands (January 1930) and the historic Salt March (March–April 1930) . The demands strategically synthesized economic grievances into a unified political appeal. When Viceroy Lord Irwin ignored them , Gandhi launched the Salt Satyagraha, making the salt tax the central symbol of colonial exploitation and national defiance.

    Detailed Notes (11 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Gandhi’s 11 Demands (January 1930): The Strategic Compromise:
    The Appeal: Gandhi wrote to Viceroy Lord Irwin (31 January 1930) with the 11 demands, giving an ultimatum of March 2, 1930.
    Key Economic Demands: Include abolish salt tax and government salt monopoly (Point 6), Reduce land revenue by 50%; Protect Indian textile industry, and change rupee-sterling exchange ratio.
    Key Political/Administrative Demands: Reduce expenditure on army and civil services, Release all political prisoners, and introduce currency and exchange reforms in favor of Indians.
    Strategic Significance: The demands were designed to appeal to peasants, workers, and nationalist businessmen alike, creating a multi-class unity and providing a clear moral basis for the impending movement.
    Failure of Negotiations: Lord Irwin’s failure to respond provided Gandhi with the necessary moral justification to launch mass Civil Disobedience.
    II. The Salt March (March–April 1930): Symbolism and Action:
    Choosing Salt: Gandhi deliberately chose the salt tax as the central symbol of protest because it was a universal necessity affecting the rich and the poor alike, highlighting the immorality of colonial taxation.
    The March: The Satyagraha commenced on March 12, 1930 , when Gandhi started the march from Sabarmati Ashram (Ahmedabad) with 78 trusted followers. They walked about 240 miles in 24 days to reach Dandi on the Gujarat coast.
    Defiance: On April 6, 1930 , Gandhi symbolically broke the salt law by making salt from sea water, formally launching the CDM.
    Impact: The march was a non-violent moral spectacle that captured worldwide attention. It instantly sparked mass civil disobedience across India: defiance of salt laws, boycotts of foreign goods, refusal to pay taxes, and defiance of forest laws in tribal areas.

    Gandhi’s 11 Demands (The Strategic Appeal)

    No.DemandTarget Group
    1 Reduce expenditure on army and civil services. Taxpayers/Middle Class
    2 Lower rupee-sterling exchange ratio. Indian Industry/Businessmen
    3 Protect Indian textile industry from foreign competition. Indian Industry/Businessmen
    4 Levy customs duty on foreign cloth. Indian Industry/Businessmen
    5 Reduce land revenue by 50% and abolish zamindari system. Peasants
    6 Abolish salt tax and government salt monopoly. General Public/Poor (Universal Appeal)
    7 Reform currency and exchange system in favor of Indians. Businessmen/Nationalist Economists
    8 Release all political prisoners. Political Class/Activists
    9 Accept postal, telegraph and railway reforms.General Public/Administration
    10 Introduce prohibition of liquor.Social Reformers/Women
    11 Abolish the CID (Criminal Investigation Department) or control its methods.Civil Liberties Activists/Political Class

    Salt March (1930) Summary

    AspectDetails
    Start 12 March 1930, Sabarmati Ashram
    End 6 April 1930, Dandi (Law broken)
    Distance/Duration 240 miles in 24 days
    Followers 78 trusted satyagrahis initially
    Symbolism Salt: A universal necessity that revealed the immorality of colonial taxation.

    Fun Facts

    The march gained worldwide attention, with *The New York Times* giving front-page coverage.

    At each village, Gandhi addressed crowds, spreading awareness of swaraj and civil disobedience.

    The salt made at Dandi was auctioned publicly to defy British law.

    Mains Key Points

    Strategic Masterstroke: The Salt Satyagraha was a strategic masterstroke because the 11 Demands offered a point of unity for peasants, workers, and businessmen under one political umbrella.
    Symbolism of Salt: The choice of salt was brilliant because it was a basic necessity affecting every stratum of society, making the violation of the law a simple, non-violent act of moral and national defiance that resonated globally.
    Conversion to Mass Action: The March effectively converted the abstract declaration of Purna Swaraj (Lahore 1929) into a concrete program of mass action, thereby providing the practical mechanism for achieving independence.
    Moral Authority: The march was a moral spectacle that severely tested the loyalty of the British bureaucracy, forcing them to directly confront the moral implications of upholding an unjust law against peaceful defiance.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Civil Disobedience Movement launched in 1930 after Gandhi’s 11 demands were rejected.
    Salt chosen as symbol because it affected all classes.
    March: 12 March–6 April 1930, Sabarmati to Dandi .
    Gandhi broke the salt law at Dandi on April 6, 1930 .

    Why Gandhi Chose Salt & Spread of Salt Law Disobedience (1930)

    Key Point

    Mahatma Gandhi's decision to launch the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) by breaking the salt law was a stroke of strategic brilliance. Salt, being a universal necessity, transformed the abstract political demand for Purna Swaraj into a concrete act of moral and economic defiance against the colonial state, leading to the rapid proliferation of the movement across India.

    Mahatma Gandhi's decision to launch the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) by breaking the salt law was a stroke of strategic brilliance. Salt, being a universal necessity, transformed the abstract political demand for Purna Swaraj into a concrete act of moral and economic defiance against the colonial state, leading to the rapid proliferation of the movement across India.

    Detailed Notes (12 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Why Salt Became the Symbol of Defiance:
    Universal Necessity & Equality: Salt is a basic necessity of life consumed by all classes (rich and poor alike). Taxing it highlighted the immorality and indiscriminate nature of colonial rule.
    Symbol of Exploitation: The British monopoly and heavy salt tax constituted the most direct and easily understood symbol of everyday colonial exploitation. Gandhi called it the 'most inhuman poll tax on the poor'.
    Simplicity of the Law: The salt law was easy to break (making salt from seawater or collecting natural salt). This simplicity ensured that participation was immediately accessible to the illiterate masses and required only minimal organizational effort.
    Moral High Ground: By attacking a law concerning a survival item, Gandhi ensured that the subsequent British repression appeared barbaric and unjust to the global community.
    II. Spread of Salt Law Disobedience (The CDM Multiplies):
    Coastal Regions (Salt Manufacturing): After Gandhi broke the law at Dandi (6 April 1930), mass violations occurred across the entire coast. Leaders like C. Rajagopalachari led the parallel Vedaranyam Salt March (Tamil Nadu), and K. Kelappan led the Satyagraha at Payyanur (Malabar).
    Inland Areas (Beyond Salt): The movement expanded to include other forms of civil disobedience:
    - No-Tax Campaigns: Refusal to pay land revenue (Gujarat, UP) and Chowkidari tax (Bihar and Bengal).
    - Forest Satyagrahas: Peasants and tribals in Central Provinces and Orissa defied repressive Forest Laws.
    - Boycotts: Boycott of foreign goods, liquor shops, and government offices intensified.
    Women's Leading Role: The movement saw unprecedented mobilization of women. Leaders like Sarojini Naidu accompanied Gandhi, and women volunteers openly manufactured and sold contraband salt in markets, injecting huge moral force.

    Gandhi’s 11 Demands and Salt March (1930) Summary

    AspectDetailsMains Link
    Salt Symbolism Universal necessity; exposed British monopoly/tax. Moral high ground ; ensured multi-class appeal.
    11 Demands Included abolition of salt tax, 50% land revenue reduction, and political reforms.Provided moral justification and a compromise formula to unite political and economic demands.
    The March 12 March – 6 April 1930 , Sabarmati to Dandi (240 miles). Conversion of Purna Swaraj (abstract) into Mass Action (concrete).
    Disobedience Spread Vedaranyam March (C.R. Rajagopalachari), Payyanur Satyagraha (K. Kelappan), No-Tax Campaigns.Demonstrated decentralization and local adaptation of the CDM to regional grievances.

    Spread of Salt Law Disobedience (Regional Actions)

    RegionLeader/ActionNature of Disobedience
    Tamil Nadu C. Rajagopalachari Vedaranyam Salt March and picketing
    Malabar (Kerala) K. Kelappan Salt Satyagraha at Payyanur
    North West Frontier Province (NWFP) Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan (Frontier Gandhi) Organized Khudai Khidmatgars (Red Shirts); non-violent defiance
    Andhra Pradesh Local leaders (Coastal districts)Illegal salt manufacture and Forest Satyagrahas
    Bihar Rajendra Prasad and local leadersNo-Chowkidari Tax campaign (as salt making was not feasible inland)
    Maharashtra/Gujarat Sarojini Naidu, Sardar Patel Salt manufacturing and the Dharasana Salt Works Raid (non-violent mass action)
    United Provinces (UP) Jawaharlal Nehru Intense No-Revenue/No-Rent campaign against land taxes

    Fun Facts

    The march gained worldwide attention, with *The New York Times* giving front-page coverage.

    Sarojini Naidu led the non-violent raid on the Dharasana Salt Works after Gandhi’s arrest, facing brutal police beating.

    Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan’s Khudai Khidmatgars were popularly known as the Red Shirts.

    Mains Key Points

    Strategic Masterstroke: The Salt Satyagraha was a strategic masterstroke because the 11 Demands and the choice of salt offered a point of unity for peasants, workers, and businessmen under one umbrella, securing multi-class participation.
    Moral Authority: The march was a moral spectacle that severely tested the loyalty of the British bureaucracy, forcing them to directly confront the moral implications of upholding an unjust law against peaceful defiance.
    Conversion to Mass Action: The March effectively converted the abstract declaration of Purna Swaraj (Lahore 1929) into a concrete program of mass action, thereby providing the practical mechanism for achieving independence.
    Decentralization: The success of the CDM lay in its decentralized implementation where local leaders adapted the salt defiance to various forms of civil disobedience (No-Tax, Forest Satyagraha) according to regional grievances.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Salt chosen as symbol because it affected all classes.
    March: 12 March–6 April 1930, Sabarmati to Dandi .
    C. Rajagopalachari led the Vedaranyam Salt March (Tamil Nadu).
    Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan organized the Khudai Khidmatgars in NWFP.
    The Dharasana Salt Works Raid was led by Sarojini Naidu after Gandhi’s arrest.

    Nationwide Participation in the Civil Disobedience Movement (1930–34)

    Key Point

    The Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) (1930–34) became the broadest-based nationalist movement before independence, successfully integrating diverse sections including peasants, women, students, workers, and merchants. Different regions witnessed diverse forms of struggle, united by the common act of salt law disobedience and no-tax campaigns.

    The Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) (1930–34) became the broadest-based nationalist movement before independence, successfully integrating diverse sections including peasants, women, students, workers, and merchants. Different regions witnessed diverse forms of struggle, united by the common act of salt law disobedience and no-tax campaigns.

    Detailed Notes (11 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Social Groups and Forms of Resistance:
    Peasants: Launched No-Tax Campaigns in Gujarat (Kheda and Bardoli revenue refusal) and No-Rent Campaigns in U.P. In Andhra, Forest Satyagrahas were common.
    Women: Large numbers came into public life for the first time. Leaders like Sarojini Naidu, Kamaladevi Chattopadhyay , and Perin Captain played leading roles. They made salt, picketed foreign cloth and liquor shops, and courted arrest.
    Students and Youth: Boycotted government schools and colleges; joined mass processions, distributed nationalist literature. Formed the active organizational backbone of the movement.
    Merchants and Traders: Organized the boycott of foreign goods; set up indigenous stores and promoted swadeshi products. Contributed funds to Congress and local satyagrahas.
    Workers: Industrial workers in Sholapur (Maharashtra) went on strikes and clashed with police, briefly setting up parallel administration. Mill workers in Bengal, Assam, and Bombay joined hartals.
    Tribal Groups: Defied Forest Laws (Andhra, Central Provinces, Maharashtra), practiced collective salt making, and withheld forest dues, challenging the colonial control over natural resources.
    II. Extent and Qualitative Impact:
    Geographical Spread: The movement spread to almost every province. Key actions included the Vedaranyam Salt March (C. Rajagopalachari, Tamil Nadu) and the militant Khudai Khidmatgars (Red Shirts) in the NWFP (Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan).
    Qualitative Change: The movement successfully linked diverse local socio-economic grievances (taxes, rents, forest rights) under the single, unifying banner of salt law disobedience and non-violence.
    Impact on Women: The mass participation of women was the movement's greatest social legacy, permanently raising their status in public life.

    Participation in Civil Disobedience Movement (1930–34)

    GroupForm of ParticipationKey Regions/Leaders
    Peasants No-tax campaigns , forest satyagrahaGujarat (Bardoli), U.P. (No-Rent) , Andhra
    Women Salt making, picketing liquor shops, arrests Sarojini Naidu, Kamaladevi Chattopadhyay
    Workers Strikes, clashes with police Sholapur (Parallel Admin) , Bombay, Bengal
    Merchants/Traders Boycott of foreign goods, swadeshi promotionBombay, Calcutta, Madras
    Tribals Defied forest laws, made saltMaharashtra, Central Provinces, Bihar
    NWFP Khudai Khidmatgars (Red Shirts) Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan

    Fun Facts

    In Sholapur , workers set up their own parallel administration briefly during the strikes, demonstrating revolutionary fervor.

    Kamaladevi Chattopadhyay tried to sell contraband salt at the Bombay Stock Exchange to mock British laws.

    Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan’s Khudai Khidmatgars were famous for their strict adherence to non-violence.

    Mains Key Points

    Broadest Social Base: CDM's primary success lay in its ability to become a multi-class and multi-regional movement, integrating peasants, women, and the business class through the easily digestible symbol of salt.
    Direct Challenge to State Structure: The movement directly challenged the British apparatus through systematic non-payment of taxes (revenue refusal in Gujarat/UP) and defiance of specific laws (Salt Act, Forest Act).
    Women as Moral Force: The unprecedented mass participation of women injected high moral authority into the movement, making the subsequent police repression appear particularly unjust and barbaric.
    Legacy of Decentralization: The movement's adaptability ensured decentralization where local leaders adapted the defiance to various forms of civil disobedience (No-Tax, Forest Satyagraha) according to regional grievances.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Women played a major role in CDM (e.g., Sarojini Naidu at Dharasana).
    Sholapur workers’ strike (1930) briefly established parallel administration.
    Khudai Khidmatgars (Red Shirts) were led by Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan.
    The No-Chowkidari Tax Campaign was a major feature of disobedience in Bihar and Bengal.

    British Repression, Gandhi’s Arrest & Dharasana Salt Works (1930)

    Key Point

    After the Salt March, the British responded with brutal repression. Gandhi was arrested in May 1930 before leading a raid on Dharasana Salt Works. The subsequent Dharasana Satyagraha, led by Abbas Tyabji and Sarojini Naidu, became the movement's defining moment, showcasing the moral power of non-violent defiance against colonial cruelty to the entire world.

    After the Salt March, the British responded with brutal repression. Gandhi was arrested in May 1930 before leading a raid on Dharasana Salt Works. The subsequent Dharasana Satyagraha, led by Abbas Tyabji and Sarojini Naidu, became the movement's defining moment, showcasing the moral power of non-violent defiance against colonial cruelty to the entire world.

    Detailed Notes (9 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Gandhi’s Arrest and Strategic Vacuum:
    Intensified Repression: After Dandi March, mass arrests of Congress leaders and satyagrahis were carried out. Congress offices were raided, and peaceful demonstrations were lathi-charged and fired upon.
    Gandhi’s Arrest (May 5, 1930): Gandhi was arrested before he could lead the planned raid on the Dharasana Salt Works (Gujarat).
    Strategic Impact: This arrest, rather than suppressing the movement, immediately triggered nationwide protests, hartals, and strikes, proving that the CDM was a true mass movement no longer dependent on a single leader.
    II. The Dharasana Salt Works Satyagraha:
    Non-Violent Spectacle: Leadership was initially taken over by Abbas Tyabji (who was soon arrested), and then by Sarojini Naidu.
    Methodology: Thousands of unarmed volunteers marched toward Dharasana, advancing in batches, and accepted the inevitable brutal police beating (inflicted by steel-tipped *lathis*) without retaliating. Over 300 volunteers were severely injured.
    Moral Victory: The absolute adherence to non-violence provided the Indian struggle with its highest moral authority. Sarojini Naidu advised the satyagrahis to "smile and receive the blows,".
    Webb Miller's Report: The incident was widely reported internationally by American journalist Webb Miller, whose graphic accounts were published in over 1,000 newspapers worldwide, generating global sympathy for India and severely shaming the British colonial rule.

    Key Events: Gandhi’s Arrest and Dharasana Satyagraha

    DateEventSignificance
    5 May 1930 Gandhi arrested before Dharasana raidStrategic move by British; triggered mass protests.
    May 1930 Dharasana Salt Satyagraha Led by Sarojini Naidu (after Abbas Tyabji's arrest).
    May 1930 Brutal police repression exposed Demonstrated non-violent defiance vs. colonial brutality.
    June 1930 Global reports by Webb Miller Critical for international sympathy and shaming the British Empire.

    Fun Facts

    Sarojini Naidu advised satyagrahis to 'smile and receive the blows' at Dharasana.

    Webb Miller’s report was published in over 1000 newspapers worldwide.

    The Dharasana incident influenced later non-violent movements, including Martin Luther King Jr.’s campaigns.

    Mains Key Points

    Strategic Masterstroke: Gandhi’s arrest demonstrated that the CDM was leaderless and decentralized, intensifying the movement rather than stopping it.
    Moral Authority: The Dharasana Satyagraha became iconic for showcasing the moral superiority of non-violent resistance against brutal repression.
    Internationalization: Webb Miller's global media coverage gave the Indian struggle global legitimacy, forcing the British Empire to confront international public opinion.
    Validation of Satyagraha: The incident was a key validation of Satyagraha's power to expose the colonial state's inhumanity.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Gandhi arrested on 5 May 1930 before Dharasana Salt Raid.
    Dharasana Salt Works → led by Sarojini Naidu after Abbas Tyabji’s arrest.
    American journalist Webb Miller’s reports exposed British brutality globally.
    Dharasana Satyagraha was a non-violent raid on a government salt depot.

    Gandhi-Irwin Pact (1931) and First Round Table Conference

    Key Point

    The Gandhi-Irwin Pact (March 1931) temporarily suspended the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM), acknowledging the Indian National Congress (INC) as the essential negotiating party. Gandhi agreed to attend the Second Round Table Conference (RTC) in London. The First RTC (1930–31), held without Congress participation, failed to achieve any constitutional consensus.

    The Gandhi-Irwin Pact (March 1931) temporarily suspended the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM), acknowledging the Indian National Congress (INC) as the essential negotiating party. Gandhi agreed to attend the Second Round Table Conference (RTC) in London. The First RTC (1930–31), held without Congress participation, failed to achieve any constitutional consensus.

    Detailed Notes (20 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. First Round Table Conference (Nov 1930 – Jan 1931):
    Venue and Timing: Held in London at St. James Palace while the CDM was at its peak in India.
    Participants: Attended by 89 delegates —including Princes, British political leaders, Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha, Liberals, Depressed Classes (Dr. B.R. Ambedkar), but the Congress boycotted the conference.
    Discussion: Discussed federal constitution, minority safeguards, and communal representation.
    Outcome: The conference failed because the British realized that without Congress participation, no constitutional framework would be legitimate or workable.
    II. Gandhi-Irwin Pact (March 5, 1931): The Truce:
    Significance: The pact marked the first direct negotiation between the INC leader (Gandhi) and the Viceroy (Irwin) on an equal footing, symbolizing a political truce.
    INC Terms (Concessions):
    – Congress would suspend Civil Disobedience Movement.
    – Congress would participate in the Second Round Table Conference.
    Government Terms (Concessions):
    – Government agreed to release political prisoners (except those involved in violence).
    – The Right to make salt for personal consumption in coastal villages was allowed.
    – Confiscated properties of satyagrahis were to be returned.
    – Peaceful picketing of foreign cloth and liquor shops was permitted.
    Critique: The pact was criticized by revolutionaries and leftists as a 'surrender pact' because the Government refused to commute the death sentences of Bhagat Singh and his comrades.
    III. Impact:
    Legitimacy: The pact gave political legitimacy to Congress as the main voice of Indian nationalism.
    Strategic Platform: It allowed Gandhi the platform to place India’s demand for Purna Swaraj before the world in London.
    Execution Outrage: The execution of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev, and Rajguru on March 23, 1931 (shortly after the pact), intensified national outrage, making Gandhi's attendance at the RTC highly controversial.

    First Round Table Conference (1930–31)

    AspectDetailsMains Link
    Venue St. James Palace, LondonSite of British constitutional attempt
    Participants Princes, minority groups, British leaders; no CongressFailed due to lack of INC representation
    Outcome Failed due to absence of CongressHighlighted Congress's centrality to Indian politics

    Gandhi-Irwin Pact (1931) - Five Main Provisions

    S. No.INC CommitmentGovernment Commitment
    1Suspend Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM)Release non-violent political prisoners
    2Attend Second Round Table Conference (RTC)Allow right to make salt for personal use (coastal areas)
    3Restore confiscated properties of satyagrahis
    4Withdraw ordinances and end prosecutions related to CDM
    5Permit peaceful picketing of foreign cloth and liquor shops

    Fun Facts

    Gandhi and Irwin had eight personal meetings in Delhi before signing the pact.

    Many British conservatives criticized Irwin for negotiating with Gandhi as an equal.

    The INC’s Karachi Session (1931) endorsed the pact despite massive popular anger over Bhagat Singh’s execution.

    Mains Key Points

    Congress Centrality: The failure of the First RTC highlighted the central and indispensable role of Congress in any credible constitutional settlement.
    Gandhi's Pragmatism: The pact symbolized a temporary truce (war-weariness on both sides) and demonstrated Gandhi’s pragmatism in seizing a moment to release prisoners and validate the CDM's issues.
    Legitimacy and Internationalization: The pact forced the British to negotiate, giving legitimacy to Congress and providing Gandhi a platform to place the demand for Purna Swaraj before a global audience in London.
    Critique and Conflict: The refusal to save Bhagat Singh and the compromise on the Purna Swaraj demand led to severe left-wing and youth criticism, defining the agenda for the subsequent Karachi Session.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    First Round Table Conference (1930–31) → Congress absent.
    Gandhi-Irwin Pact signed on 5 March 1931.
    The pact allowed the Right to make salt by villagers.
    Pact enabled Gandhi’s participation in Second Round Table Conference.

    Second Round Table Conference (1931): Constitutional Impasse

    Key Point

    The Second Round Table Conference (RTC) (September–December 1931) was attended by Gandhi as the sole representative of the Indian National Congress (INC) . The conference ended in failure due to irreconcilable differences over the communal question and minority representation, which the British strategically exploited to deny the demand for Purna Swaraj.

    The Second Round Table Conference (RTC) (September–December 1931) was attended by Gandhi as the sole representative of the Indian National Congress (INC) . The conference ended in failure due to irreconcilable differences over the communal question and minority representation, which the British strategically exploited to deny the demand for Purna Swaraj.

    Detailed Notes (14 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Participants and Divergent Agendas:
    Venue and Timing: Held in London at St. James Palace between September–December 1931.
    Congress Representation: M.K. Gandhi was the sole representative of Congress, asserting its claim to be the principal voice of all Indians.
    Other Participants: Included British leaders, Indian princes, Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha, Sikhs, Christians, and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar (representing the Depressed Classes).
    Main Issues: Discussions centered around the Federal structure, the degree of Provincial Autonomy, and the solution to the Communal Question.
    II. The Communal Deadlock and Gandhi's Stance:
    Demand for Fragmentation: Almost all minority representatives—the Muslim League, Sikhs, and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar—insisted on separate electorates.
    Congress Position: Gandhi fiercely opposed separate electorates, arguing they would permanently fragment the nation and hinder unity. He insisted on joint electorates with reserved seats if necessary.
    The Gandhi–Ambedkar Clash: The most contentious dispute was over separate electorates for the Depressed Classes. Gandhi argued this would perpetuate untouchability and structurally divide the Hindu community. Ambedkar remained firm, seeking dedicated political upliftment.
    Outcome: The conference ended in failure. The British government used the divisions among Indian groups to justify its reluctance to grant major constitutional concessions.
    III. Consequence and Legacy:
    Failure and Disappointment: Gandhi returned disappointed in December 1931. The British immediately resumed severe repression under the new Viceroy, Lord Willingdon.
    Resumption of CDM: The failure pushed Gandhi to relaunch the Civil Disobedience Movement in early 1932.
    RTC's True Legacy: The failure led directly to the British Prime Minister, Ramsay MacDonald, announcing the Communal Award (1932), granting separate electorates to the Depressed Classes—the direct trigger for the Poona Pact.

    Key Aspects of Second Round Table Conference

    AspectDetailsMains Link
    Congress Representation M.K. Gandhi (sole representative) Confirmed Congress's centrality as the voice of India.
    Key Clash Gandhi vs. Ambedkar (over separate electorates for Depressed Classes)Foreshadowed the Poona Pact; British exploited this division.
    British Intent Exploited communal disagreementsDenial of Purna Swaraj; led directly to the Communal Award (1932).
    Outcome Failed; no settlement reachedGandhi relaunched Civil Disobedience Movement (1932).

    Fun Facts

    Gandhi attended the London Conference dressed in his simple dhoti, shawl, and sandals, symbolizing the common Indian.

    Winston Churchill mocked Gandhi as a 'half-naked fakir' .

    The INC’s participation in the Second RTC was followed by the execution of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev, and Rajguru.

    Mains Key Points

    Communal Strategy: The British strategy of 'divide and rule' succeeded in exploiting the demands of the minority groups, particularly the clash between Gandhi and Ambedkar, to create a constitutional deadlock.
    Rejection of Purna Swaraj: The failure to achieve consensus gave the British the pretext to deny the core Congress demand for Purna Swaraj, confirming their reluctance to transfer real power.
    Moral Authority: Gandhi’s presence at the conference, despite its failure, solidified the INC's claim to represent all Indians and enhanced his moral authority globally.
    Catalyst for Communal Award: The RTC failure directly led to the Communal Award (1932), which attempted to structurally fragment the Hindu community by granting separate electorates to the Depressed Classes, forcing Gandhi’s fast.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Second Round Table Conference (1931) → Gandhi attended as sole Congress representative.
    Main clash: Gandhi vs. Ambedkar over separate electorates for Depressed Classes.
    The failure of the RTC led directly to the Communal Award (1932).

    Communal Award (1932) and Poona Pact (1932): The Crisis of Separation

    Key Point

    The Communal Award (August 1932) by British PM Ramsay MacDonald granted separate electorates to minorities, including the Depressed Classes. Gandhi opposed this, fearing the structural fragmentation of Hindu society, and began a fast unto death in Yerwada Jail. This moral pressure led to the Poona Pact (September 1932) between Ambedkar and Gandhi , which replaced separate electorates with reserved seats in joint electorates.

    The Communal Award (August 1932) by British PM Ramsay MacDonald granted separate electorates to minorities, including the Depressed Classes. Gandhi opposed this, fearing the structural fragmentation of Hindu society, and began a fast unto death in Yerwada Jail. This moral pressure led to the Poona Pact (September 1932) between Ambedkar and Gandhi , which replaced separate electorates with reserved seats in joint electorates.

    Detailed Notes (16 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. The Communal Award (August 1932): British Strategy:
    Announcement: Announced by British PM Ramsay MacDonald in August 1932.
    Key Provision: Extended separate electorates to Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, and crucially, to the Depressed Classes (Scheduled Castes).
    British Intent (Divide and Rule): The Award was seen by Congress as a strategic move to structurally fragment the Hindu community and undermine the nationalist movement by creating a permanent political division.
    Ambedkar’s Position: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar supported the Award, viewing separate electorates as the most effective means to ensure genuine political voice for the oppressed community.
    II. Gandhi’s Fast and the Poona Pact:
    Gandhi’s Fast (September 1932): Gandhi, then in Yerwada Jail (Pune), opposed the separate electorate for Dalits, arguing it would permanently divide Hindu society. On September 20, 1932, he began a fast unto death.
    Poona Pact (24 September 1932): Signed between Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and Hindu leaders (on behalf of Gandhi/Congress).
    Key Term (Electorate): Separate electorates for Depressed Classes were replaced by reserved seats in joint electorates.
    Key Term (Seats): The number of reserved seats for Depressed Classes in provincial legislatures was significantly increased from 71 (in Award) to 148.
    Other Assurances: The Pact guaranteed adequate representation in public services and special educational grants for Depressed Classes.
    III. Legacy and Analytical Significance:
    Affirmative Action: The Poona Pact laid the practical and moral foundation for India's future reservation policies by ensuring a significantly larger number of seats for the Depressed Classes.
    Moral Authority: Gandhi’s fast reinforced his moral authority as the defender of both national unity and the rights of the oppressed (Harijans).
    Ambedkar's Pragmatism: Ambedkar showed pragmatism by agreeing to the Pact under intense public pressure, securing the significant gain of more than double the reserved seats while sacrificing separate representation.
    Communal Politics: The episode confirmed that minority representation would remain the most contentious issue in India's constitutional future, accelerating identity-based political mobilization.

    Comparison: Communal Award vs. Poona Pact

    AspectCommunal Award (1932)Poona Pact (1932)Strategic Outcome
    Electorate Type Separate Electorates Reserved Seats in Joint Electorates Preserved Hindu electoral unity (Gandhi's goal).
    Seats in Provincial Legislatures 71 148 (More than double)Secured greater representation for Depressed Classes (Ambedkar's gain).
    Role of Gandhi Opposed Award; fasted unto deathSigned Pact with AmbedkarDemonstrated moral power overriding constitutional fiat.
    Affirmative Action No explicit guaranteeAdequate representation in public services assuredInstitutionalized the basis for future reservation policies.

    Fun Facts

    Gandhi’s fast generated immense national pressure; telegrams and appeals poured into Yerwada Jail.

    Ambedkar initially resisted but agreed under severe social and political pressure, stating he had to save Gandhi’s life.

    The Pact was a landmark in modern Indian history, demonstrating the power of moral protest over legal decree.

    Mains Key Points

    Communal Strategy Exposed: The Award was a clear execution of the 'divide and rule' policy aimed at the structural fragmentation of Hindu society (through Dalits), undermining the national movement.
    Moral Authority and Ahimsa: Gandhi’s fast highlighted his moral authority and political stake in the issue, using the extreme method of *Ahimsa* to overturn a constitutional fiat.
    Ambedkar’s Achievement: The Poona Pact was a political victory for Ambedkar, securing more than double the seats for the Depressed Classes, thus ensuring stronger political representation.
    Affirmative Action Foundation: The Pact served as the fundamental constitutional and moral foundation for future reservation policies in independent India.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Communal Award (1932) → announced by Ramsay MacDonald ; gave separate electorates to Depressed Classes.
    Gandhi opposed it and began a fast unto death in Yerwada Jail.
    Poona Pact (24 September 1932) signed between Gandhi & Ambedkar ; replaced separate electorates with reserved seats.
    Reserved seats for Depressed Classes increased from 71 to 148.

    Third Round Table Conference (1932) and Outcome

    Key Point

    The Third Round Table Conference (November–December 1932) was held in London with limited Indian participation. The Congress boycotted it as the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) had been revived. The conference failed to achieve consensus but its proceedings paved the way for the Government of India Act, 1935.

    The Third Round Table Conference (November–December 1932) was held in London with limited Indian participation. The Congress boycotted it as the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) had been revived. The conference failed to achieve consensus but its proceedings paved the way for the Government of India Act, 1935.

    Detailed Notes (10 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Participation and Political Isolation:
    Timing: Convened in London in November–December 1932, while the CDM was actively suppressing in India.
    Minimal Participation: Only 46 delegates attended, the lowest of all three RTCs, highlighting the movement's successful boycott.
    Composition: Attended mainly by loyalists and minority representatives: Princes, Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha, and Depressed Classes.
    INC Boycott: The Indian National Congress boycotted the session, underscoring the futility of the negotiations and the lack of representative authority of the conference.
    Proceedings: Discussions centered on the same unresolved issues: Federal structure, Provincial autonomy, and Minority representation. No consensus was possible due to the absence of the INC and continued communal disagreements.
    II. Outcome and Legacy (The GOI Act, 1935):
    Failure and Unilateral Action: The conference ended without concrete results. The British government decided to unilaterally draft a constitutional framework.
    White Paper (1933): This failure led to the publication of a White Paper (1933) detailing the government’s final constitutional proposals.
    Constitutional Milestone: The recommendations from all three Round Table Conferences ultimately informed the basis for the Government of India Act, 1935—the longest and most comprehensive constitutional document before independence.

    Comparison of Three Round Table Conferences

    ConferenceYearCongress RoleAnalytical Outcome
    First 1930–31 BoycottedFailed due to Congress's absence; proved INC's centrality.
    Second 1931 Gandhi attended as sole representativeFailed over communal representation; led to Communal Award.
    Third 1932 Boycotted Least attended; led directly to the White Paper and GOI Act, 1935.

    Fun Facts

    The Third Round Table Conference was the least attended of the three.

    Even British press considered it a failure due to the absence of the Congress.

    It directly paved the way for the Government of India Act, 1935—the longest Act passed by British Parliament for India.

    Mains Key Points

    INC’s Strength: The Third RTC demonstrated the undisputed strength and political maturity of the INC. Its ability to sustain the CDM and boycott the conference simultaneously showed that the British could not bypass it.
    British Strategy Exposed: The conferences, as a whole, confirmed the British strategy of delaying real power transfer by attempting to bypass the INC, elevating minor interests, and perpetually focusing on the communal question.
    Constitutional Legacy: Despite the political failure to reach a consensus, the debates provided the essential constitutional content. The resulting Government of India Act, 1935, though rejected by the Congress, became the most important constitutional document, heavily influencing the future structure of the Indian federation.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Third Round Table Conference held in 1932 → Congress boycotted.
    Only 46 delegates participated, mainly loyalists and minorities.
    Outcome: White Paper (1933) → basis for Government of India Act, 1935.

    Government of India Act, 1935: Limited Federation and Disguised Control

    Key Point

    The Government of India Act, 1935 , was the longest and most comprehensive Act passed by the British Parliament for India. It introduced Provincial Autonomy and proposed an All-India Federation, but nationalists criticized it as a strategy to offer responsibility without transferring real power, retaining central authority firmly under the British.

    The Government of India Act, 1935 , was the longest and most comprehensive Act passed by the British Parliament for India. It introduced Provincial Autonomy and proposed an All-India Federation, but nationalists criticized it as a strategy to offer responsibility without transferring real power, retaining central authority firmly under the British.

    Detailed Notes (15 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Key Structural Features:
    All-India Federation: Proposed a Federation of provinces and princely states. This provision did not materialize as Princes did not voluntarily join.
    Provincial Autonomy: Dyarchy at the provincial level was abolished, and provinces were given autonomy with responsible governments (ministries responsible to legislatures). However, Governors retained special powers and discretionary authority.
    Dyarchy at the Centre: Dyarchy was introduced at the central level—subjects divided into Reserved (Defense, Foreign Affairs under Viceroy) and Transferred (others).
    Federal Legislature: Provided for a bicameral legislature (Council of States & Federal Assembly).
    Federal Court and RBI: Led to the establishment of the Federal Court in Delhi (1937) and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) in 1935.
    Separate Electorates: Extended to Depressed Classes, women, and labor, institutionalizing communal and sectoral divisions.
    Other Changes: Burma separated from India; Sindh separated from Bombay; Orissa separated from Bihar. Provincial legislatures enlarged; the franchise was expanded to 10% of the population.
    II. Critical Evaluation (Nationalist View):
    Autonomy vs. Control: Provincial autonomy was limited; Governors retained veto power and could overrule ministries, ensuring imperial control.
    Central Domination: The Centre remained dominated by the Viceroy and British officials, as key subjects were Reserved.
    Federation Failure: The failure of the federation provision meant that the Act’s primary constitutional promise was never implemented.
    Communal Divide: The extension of separate electorates deepened communal and social divisions.
    Limited Franchise: Despite expansion, the 10% franchise still excluded the majority of the population.
    Verdict: Nationalists saw the Act as a strategy to delay real self-government and consolidate the 'divide and rule' policy.

    Key Features of Government of India Act, 1935

    FeatureProvisionStrategic Significance
    Provincial Autonomy Dyarchy abolished; responsible government introducedAllowed Indian ministers to form governments; Governors retained veto power.
    Central Dyarchy Introduced at the Centre: Reserved (Defense, Foreign Affairs) vs. Transferred subjectsEnsured Viceroy’s absolute control over critical central powers.
    Federal Proposal Proposed All-India Federation (Provinces + Princes)Never implemented; intended to dilute nationalist influence.
    Institutional Foundation Established Federal Court (1937) and RBI (1935)Laid the permanent foundation for modern governance institutions in India.
    Communal Division Separate electorates extended to Depressed Classes, women, laborA strategy to institutionalize communal divisions and fragment the nationalist movement.

    Fun Facts

    It was the longest act ever passed by the British Parliament until then (321 sections, 10 schedules).

    The Congress rejected the Act but decided to contest the provincial elections in 1937.

    The Reserve Bank of India started operations on 1 April 1935 under this Act.

    Mains Key Points

    Strategic Compromise: The Act marked the most comprehensive attempt at constitutional reforms before independence, offering responsibility to Indians while strategically retaining control over central defense and finance.
    Flawed Federalism: The failure of the All-India Federation (due to Princes' reluctance) and the implementation of Dyarchy at the Centre proved the British unwillingness to transfer real power at the national level.
    Divide and Rule: The extension of separate electorates deepened communalism, institutionalizing fragmentation along religious and sectoral lines.
    Institutional Legacy: It laid crucial institutional and structural foundations (RBI, Federal Court, provincial governance) that were later heavily incorporated into the Constitution of Independent India.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Government of India Act, 1935 → longest act passed by British Parliament for India.
    Introduced Provincial Autonomy and Dyarchy at the Centre.
    Established Federal Court (1937) and Reserve Bank of India (RBI) (1935).
    Burma separated from India under this Act.

    Butler Committee (1927): Relationship with Princely States

    Key Point

    The Butler Committee (also known as the Indian States Committee), appointed in 1927, was set up to investigate the relationship between the Indian Princely States and the British Crown (Paramount Power). Its recommendations were crucial for defining the constitutional future of the Princes amidst rising nationalism.

    The Butler Committee (also known as the Indian States Committee), appointed in 1927, was set up to investigate the relationship between the Indian Princely States and the British Crown (Paramount Power). Its recommendations were crucial for defining the constitutional future of the Princes amidst rising nationalism.

    Detailed Notes (11 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Mandate and Formation:
    Formation: Appointed in 1927 and chaired by Sir Harcourt Butler. The committee had no Indian representation.
    Mandate: The primary task was to clarify the economic and financial relations between the Princely States (ruled by native princes) and British India (directly administered by the British). Crucially, it was also mandated to define the nature of Paramountcy.
    II. Key Recommendations (Consolidation of Paramountcy):
    Paramountcy: The Committee emphasized that Paramountcy must remain supreme and advocated against transferring the authority of Paramountcy from the Crown to the future responsible Indian government.
    No Transfer without Consent: Its most famous recommendation stated that the relationship of the Princes was with the Crown and not with the Government of India. Therefore, the Crown should not transfer its rights and obligations to a new government in British India without the express consent of the States.
    Financial Autonomy: Recommended establishing a clear system for financial contributions and ensuring that the Princely States were adequately consulted on matters affecting their interests.
    III. Impact and Legacy:
    Imperial Tool: The recommendations served the imperial policy of 'Divide and Rule' by assuring the Princes that their future lay with the Crown, thereby isolating them from the nationalist movement led by the Congress.
    Political Isolation: The report intensified the demand by the All India States’ People’s Conference (AISPC) for political reform within the states, as the Princes were assured a protected future while their subjects remained under autocratic rule.
    Constitutional Barrier: The Butler Committee’s position on Paramountcy became a significant constitutional barrier, influencing the Round Table Conferences and the Government of India Act, 1935, where the federal proposal required the voluntary accession of the Princes.

    Butler Committee (1927) Summary

    YearChairmanMandateKey Recommendation
    1927Sir Harcourt ButlerExamine Paramountcy and financial relations with Princely States.Paramountcy must not be transferred to a future Indian government without Princes’ consent.

    Fun Facts

    The term Paramountcy was deliberately kept vague by the British to allow them maximum flexibility in dealing with the Princes.

    The AISPC (All India States’ People’s Conference) was the counter-movement that pushed for democratic rights within the autocratic Princely States.

    Mains Key Points

    The Butler Committee was a key imperial tool used to strategically isolate the Princely States from the nationalist movement by confirming their protected status under the Crown.
    It highlighted the contradiction in colonial policy: preaching democracy to British India while sustaining autocratic rule in the Princely States.
    The report was a significant precursor to the failure of the All-India Federation proposed in the 1935 Act, as the Princes used this report's findings to justify their reluctance to join.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Butler Committee was appointed in 1927.
    It dealt with Princely States and the concept of Paramountcy.
    The core recommendation was that the relationship was with the Crown, not with British India.

    Irwin Declaration (1929) and Delhi Manifesto (1929)

    Key Point

    The Irwin Declaration (October 1929), promising Dominion Status as the natural goal for India, was a political maneuver aimed at pacifying nationalist sentiment following the Simon Commission boycott. It was immediately challenged by the Delhi Manifesto (November 1929), which laid down the conditions for Congress’s cooperation with the British.

    The Irwin Declaration (October 1929), promising Dominion Status as the natural goal for India, was a political maneuver aimed at pacifying nationalist sentiment following the Simon Commission boycott. It was immediately challenged by the Delhi Manifesto (November 1929), which laid down the conditions for Congress’s cooperation with the British.

    Detailed Notes (11 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Irwin Declaration (October 31, 1929):
    Viceroy: Announced by Viceroy Lord Irwin.
    Promise: Stated that the natural and eventual goal of British policy in India was to grant Dominion Status.
    Proposal: Proposed holding a Round Table Conference (RTC) in London to discuss the future constitutional setup.
    Strategic Intent: The Declaration was timed just before the Lahore Session (1929) to placate the rising tide of Purna Swaraj demand and keep the Congress from launching a mass movement.
    II. Delhi Manifesto (November 2, 1929):
    Context: Issued by nationalist leaders (including Gandhi, Motilal Nehru, and Sapru) in response to Irwin's vague promise.
    Conditions for Cooperation: The Manifesto laid down three specific conditions for the Congress to participate in the proposed RTC:
    • The RTC should be convened to formulate a scheme for Dominion Status (not just to discuss it).
    • The Congress should be given majority representation at the conference.
    • There must be a general amnesty for all political prisoners (including those sentenced in the Meerut case).
    III. Political Outcome:
    Rejection of Conditions: Viceroy Irwin rejected the conditions laid down in the Delhi Manifesto.
    Purna Swaraj Decision: This rejection convinced Congress leadership that the British were not serious about granting Dominion Status, leading directly to the Lahore Session (December 1929) where the Congress, led by Jawaharlal Nehru, declared Purna Swaraj (Complete Independence) as its new, absolute goal.

    Irwin Declaration vs. Delhi Manifesto

    AspectIrwin Declaration (British)Delhi Manifesto (INC Response)
    Date Oct 1929Nov 1929
    Core Promise Dominion Status is the 'natural and eventual' goal.RTC must formulate a scheme for immediate Dominion Status.
    Key Demand Proposed a Round Table Conference (RTC).Demand for amnesty for political prisoners and majority Congress representation at RTC.
    Outcome Conditions rejected by Irwin.Led directly to the Purna Swaraj demand at the Lahore Session.

    Fun Facts

    The Irwin Declaration was seen by the British government as a major constitutional gesture, but the Indian response proved how far nationalist demands had advanced beyond Dominion Status.

    The Declaration and the Manifesto represented the last major exchange between the British and Congress Moderates before the shift to mass Civil Disobedience.

    Mains Key Points

    The Declaration and Manifesto set the stage for the Lahore Session, exposing the fundamental difference between the British offer (gradual Dominion Status) and the nationalist demand (immediate Purna Swaraj).
    The Manifesto's conditions, though rejected, asserted the INC's claim to be the primary negotiating body and forced the British to clarify their vague promises.
    The ultimate rejection of the conditions confirmed to the younger generation that only direct action and mass struggle could achieve their goals.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Irwin Declaration (1929) was a vague promise of Dominion Status.
    The Delhi Manifesto was the Congress’s official response to the declaration, laying down conditions for the RTC.
    The rejection of the Delhi Manifesto's conditions led to the Purna Swaraj resolution.

    Karachi Congress Session (1931): Fundamental Rights and NCM Review

    Key Point

    The Karachi Session of 1931, presided over by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, was one of the most significant INC sessions. It was held immediately after the Gandhi-Irwin Pact and the execution of Bhagat Singh and his comrades. It formally endorsed the Pact and, crucially, passed resolutions on Fundamental Rights and the National Economic Programme.

    The Karachi Session of 1931, presided over by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, was one of the most significant INC sessions. It was held immediately after the Gandhi-Irwin Pact and the execution of Bhagat Singh and his comrades. It formally endorsed the Pact and, crucially, passed resolutions on Fundamental Rights and the National Economic Programme.

    Detailed Notes (11 points)
    Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
    I. Context and Political Tension:
    Timing: Held in March 1931, just days after the execution of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev, and Rajguru.
    Political Challenge: The session faced immense tension and outrage from the youth and the left wing, who severely criticized Gandhi for failing to save the revolutionaries' lives as part of the Gandhi-Irwin Pact negotiations.
    Endorsement of Gandhi-Irwin Pact: Despite the popular anger, the Congress formally endorsed the Gandhi-Irwin Pact, recognizing the strategic necessity of the truce.
    Gandhi's Mandate: The Congress reiterated the demand for Purna Swaraj and authorized Mahatma Gandhi to represent the INC at the upcoming Second Round Table Conference.
    II. Historic Resolutions (Fundamental Rights):
    Fundamental Rights Resolution: This was the first time the INC defined the meaning of 'Purna Swaraj' in terms of the rights of the common people. The resolution, drafted largely by Jawaharlal Nehru, guaranteed:
    • Free expression, freedom of association, and freedom of conscience.
    • Universal adult franchise.
    • Equality before the law.
    • Free and compulsory primary education.
    National Economic Programme Resolution: This resolution established the socialist and secular tone of the future Indian state by proposing:
    • State ownership of key industries and transport.
    • Protection for industrial workers (living wage, limited work hours).
    • Rights for peasants (substantial reduction in rent and revenue).
    III. Significance and Legacy:
    Ideological Shift: The Karachi Session marked a clear shift in Congress policy toward a Socialist perspective, integrating the demands of the masses (peasants and workers) into the main political goal.
    Constitutional Foundation: The resolution on Fundamental Rights served as the foundational document that was later incorporated into the Constitution of Independent India (1950), demonstrating its enduring legacy.

    Karachi Session (1931) Key Outcomes

    ResolutionKey FeatureLegacy
    Gandhi-Irwin Pact Formally endorsed the pact.Confirmed Gandhi's leadership despite controversy.
    Fundamental Rights Guaranteed civil liberties, equality, and universal adult franchise.Became the basis for the Fundamental Rights in the 1950 Constitution.
    National Economic Programme Proposals for state control of industries and workers’ rights.Established the socialist and secular tone of the Congress.

    Fun Facts

    Despite the massive public pressure, Gandhi's decision to support the Gandhi-Irwin Pact was highly political, aiming to keep the Congress united for the RTC.

    The Fundamental Rights resolution was a major commitment to socialism and democracy, distinguishing the INC from the purely constitutional demands of the Moderates.

    Mains Key Points

    Ideological Maturity: The Karachi Session marked the ideological culmination of the nationalist movement, linking the political goal of Purna Swaraj with a commitment to social and economic equality (Socialism).
    Fundamental Rights Legacy: The resolution on Fundamental Rights was the INC's promise to the Indian people, ensuring that the future independent state would be a secular, democratic, and socially just republic.
    Political Legitimacy: The session managed the political fallout from Bhagat Singh's execution and the Gandhi-Irwin Pact, maintaining organizational unity and confirming Gandhi's mandate to negotiate with the British on behalf of the nation.

    Prelims Strategy Tips

    Karachi Session (1931) was presided over by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel.
    The session formally passed the resolution on Fundamental Rights and the National Economic Programme.
    Held after the execution of Bhagat Singh; endorsed the Gandhi-Irwin Pact.
    Resolution on Fundamental Rights was drafted by Jawaharlal Nehru.

    Chapter Complete!

    Ready to move to the next chapter?