Satyaki Savarkar, the grandnephew of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, testified in a Pune special MP/MLA court on Monday, June 15, that his granduncle filed 10 mercy petitions to the British government to seek a reduction in his sentence. The disclosure occurred during the cross-examination of Satyaki, who is the complainant in a criminal defamation case against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi.
Why the petitions are being discussed in court
The testimony addresses a defamation complaint filed by Satyaki against Rahul Gandhi regarding a speech delivered in London on March 5, 2023. According to the complaint, Gandhi made “wild allegations” and false claims about Savarkar’s history and writings. During the proceedings before Special Judge Amol Shinde, defense counsel Milind Pawar questioned Satyaki on the existence and nature of the 10 mercy petitions. Satyaki confirmed that these records exist within official government files and stated he did not file them himself. He testified that filing such petitions was a standard procedure for prisoners under British rule, rather than an act of exceptional or illegal behavior.
How the testimony characterizes Savarkar’s ideology
Satyaki argued that the language used in the petitions did not signify loyalty to the British regime. He told the court that the petitions were written in accordance with official protocol to request sentence reductions. When asked about the “Veer” title, Satyaki stated that his granduncle was referred to as such by the Gadar Organisation even before he was sent to the Andaman jail. He maintained that there is no contradiction between being labeled a “Veer” and filing petitions for release. Furthermore, he noted that the British government rejected all 10 petitions, expressing concern that Savarkar’s release would lead him to rejoin the revolutionary movement against British rule.
Comparison of revolutionary approaches
The testimony highlighted a contrast between Savarkar’s actions and those of other contemporary figures. Satyaki acknowledged that revolutionaries such as Rajguru, Batukeshwar Dutt, and Ashfaqulla Khan did not file mercy petitions. He also confirmed that Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt remained steadfast in their ideology, even demanding to be treated as prisoners of war rather than seeking leniency. Satyaki stated he was aware that these figures did not compromise on their principles, though he noted that filing a petition was a matter of individual preference for prisoners during that period.
What happens next in the trial
The legal process is scheduled to continue on July 1, when the cross-examination of the complainant is expected to resume. The court is currently weighing whether the statements made by Rahul Gandhi in the United Kingdom constitute criminal defamation under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code. Satyaki has requested that the court impose the maximum punishment and compensation under Section 357 of the CrPC, citing the mental agony and reputational harm he claims the speech caused his family in India.
