“My information was, Rao had connived at the demolition. He sat at puja when the kar sevaks began pulling down the mosque and rose only when the last stone had been removed. Madhu Limaye told me that during the puja, Rao's aide whispered in his ears that the masjid had been demolished. Within seconds, the puja was over.”
Kuldip Nayar in Beyond the Lines
“I rang up the prime minister's residence early in the afternoon. I was told that he was not available to talk to anyone. I asked the person who had answered my call: 'Since when is he incommunicado, or is he out of Delhi.’ He replied: 'He is in Delhi, but he has locked himself in his room and our directions are not to disturb him under any circumstances.'
Arjun Singh in A Grain of Sand in the Hourglass of Time
One tremendously shameful event in recent national history is the 1992 demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya. The man who was prime minister then, the late P.V. Narasimha Rao, was never able to unsling that albatross from around his neck. There’s of course no escaping that it happened on his watch. But eight years after his death in 2004, two books by persons who were in vantage positions during the 1990s have imputed to him far worse than that, making a Nero of him.
The first, Between the Lines, is the autobiography of Kuldip Nayar, a veteran journalist. And the second, A Grain of Sand in the Hourglass of Time, is the autobiography, recently released, of the late Arjun Singh, who was Rao’s HRD minister and for decades one of the most powerful Congressmen. Both books have set off a hubbub with their accounts of what happened in government in the days before the demolition, and especially of what Rao did—or did not do—on the day the mosque was demolished. Nayar says Rao was performing puja as the mosque came down; Arjun that he was unavailable to his own ministers.
Equally, there are those who dismiss those shocking accounts. They too had access to Rao in those days. “The late P.V. Narasimha Rao’s residence did not have a puja room, nor was he the sort to do special or even regular puja,” says P.V.R.K. Prasad, a retired IAS officer who was the late PM’s media advisor. “There was just one picture of Lord Venkateswara in his bedroom, and after his bath, PV would offer a namaskaram for about 10 seconds and his staff would light some incence sticks.”
Prasad says that on December 6, 1992, the day the masjid was battered by rampaging crowds, he had reached the PM’s residence at 11 am, when kar sevaks had already started surrounding the mosque. The PM, he says, spent the whole day supervising the situation, consulting ministers and officials about imposing President’s rule on Uttar Pradesh. He calls Nayar’s version “one of the best cock and bull stories” he’s ever heard. “Besides me, there were many witnesses to PV’s activities that day,” he says. “It’s strange that a senior journalist like Nayar has chosen to cook up such a baseless story. Was PV Lord Krishna to be in two places—the cabinet room and in a puja—at the same time?” He equally objects to the “incorrect facts” presented in Arjun’s posthumous autobiography.
Of the PM’s unavailability on December 6, 1992, Arjun’s book begins by saying: “The secular mosaic of India had been seriously damaged. In such a frame of mind, from Muktsar, I rang up the PM’s residence early in the afternoon.” It goes on to say he was told the PM was “not available to talk to anyone”, and when he probed, he was told the PM had “locked himself in his room.”
But P.C. Rao, who was law secretary when Narasimha Rao was PM and is now a judge at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, in Hamburg, dismisses Arjun’s unflattering portrayal and says Narasimha Rao did everything he could. The former law secretary also gives details of what happened on the preceding day, particularly an interaction between the former PM and Arjun. He says that during a meeting on December 5, 1992, at which then home minister S.B. Chavan was present, Arjun walked in and demanded the imposition of President’s rule on Uttar Pradesh. The PM asked him if he had any special information that the mosque was under threat, to which Arjun replied in the negative but said the BJP and other outfits associated with it—which were leading the agitation—could not be trusted.
“While PV did not get into an argument with Arjun, he did not concede to his demand as there was no conclusive information on a breakdown of the constitutional machinery in Uttar Pradesh,” says the former law secretary. “Even the IB chief and UP governor had advised the PM that moving central troops towards the mosque on December 5 would enrage the kar sevaks and encourage them to go for the structure.”
He says repeated calls were made to then UP chief minister Kalyan Singh to get the forces moving. Of the 20,000 central troops stationed in Faizabad, 8 km from the mosque, those that had moved some 2 km ahead were sent back. Narasimha Rao’s law secretary and his media advisor both say he was a hands-on PM that day, summoning the home secretary (Madhav Godbole), enquiring about troop movements, keeping track of developments in Ayodhya. Godbole and Chavan were briefing the PM over phone from North Block every 20 minutes.
According to the former law secretary, the Intelligence Bureau chief too had informed the PM that religious heads in Ayodhya had said in a meeting there was no plan to attack the mosque. “This was the information the PM, a stickler for rules and the Constitution, went by,” he says. “Besides, the Uttar Pradesh government had assured the SC the mosque would be protected at all costs. Officials and the PM went to bed that night with a sigh of relief, as we were assured all was quiet on the ground. When the horror unfolded on television screens the next day, the PM was as shocked as the rest of the nation.”
The PM held his first meeting of December 6, 1992, in the ante-room of the PMO, says the former law secretary, who attended it. Also present were Chavan, Godbole, A.N. Verma (the PM’s principal secretary) and Naresh Chandra (a special officer in the PMO, in charge of Ayodhya developments). “At no point,” says the former law secretary, “did Narasimha Rao lock himself up in a room.” He says Narasimha Rao and Arjun shared an uneasy relationship. “But PV did give Arjun due respect and always listened to him,” he says. “He never got into arguments with him.”
Asked for comments on their father’s memoir, Arjun’s sons Ajay Singh, leader of the opposition in Madhya Pradesh, and Abhimanyu Singh, who holds the copyright, say they haven’t read the book but plan to do so soon. But Abhimanyu says he doesn’t think anything “has been omitted” in the book.
Narasimha Rao quietly faded away from the political scene after his term ended in 1996, ignored by his own party. At least there are some who won’t see him painted a Nero.
By Madhavi Tata with Anuradha Raman
What Kuldip Nayar and Arjun Singh write about the late P.V. Narasimha Rao is certainly in poor taste (So Many Aftertales, Jul 23). Neither of them, crass opportunists as they are, had the guts to make any sound when things were actually happening. Quite fittingly, P.V.R.K. Prasad, the then media advisor, has blown the lid off Nayar’s box of bluff by pointing out that Rao was in his cabinet room, not puja room (there wasn’t one in his official residence!) when Babri Masjid was brought down. Many believe he was the finest Congress PM ever, successfully piloting a minority government for a full term without resorting to any shady coalition drama.
Col C.V. Venugopalan (retd), Palakkad
A prime minister locking himself up in his puja room and remaining out-of-bounds to his staff, while an event of national importance unfolds, sounds absurd, and gives credence to the suspicion that the dead leader is being targeted. It is clarified by officials that all records are available to prove that he was in constant touch with the home ministry.
Nayar and Singh’s charges against Rao are ridiculous and baseless. Boosting their sales is at the back of both old men’s minds; what is condemnable is how they spewed vitriol when the subject wasn’t there to refute their version.
K.R. Srinivasan, Secunderabad
Whatever journos or politicos say about PV after nearly two decades, we can’t ignore his contributions when the country was in deep financial crisis in the early ’90s. His bold decisions on liberalisation paved the way for our present affluence, even if it’s relative.
Kondahalli Shankar, on e-mail
The only way to exist is to co exist. This is how Narasimha Rao started his innings. A heart patient who had recently suffered a stroke, a caricature of a man, Rao was never supposed to be last that long as PM. Moreover, India was in dire straits. Patron in cheif USSR was on the verge of desolution, another Indiaesuq nation Yugoslavia had already broken down, there was a raging militancy in Kashmir, the caste reservation in India was at its peak and babri masjid wason the verge of bringing India down to its knees. Add the economic woes of India and then read the Foreign Affairs magazine article on whether India would disintegrate.
On the other side was this frail machiavellian politician running a minroity government and and in less than 2 years, India was again back to its feet. Whatever we have done in past 20 year, the base was created by Rao. After Patel, Rao was one politician whose politics was different in the sense that they were never overty socialist.
what i see here is dishonesty by two individuals. Kuldeep Nayyar has betrayed his own journalistic ethics by writing about Rao what is based on hearsay. Autobiographies need to be controversial to see but he would have better imitated the Lucknow Boy. At least being controversial on your own account is better.
Arjun Singh was a joke, is a joke and will always be a joke. Yes, Digvijay Singh is a better joke from the same state but Arjun Singh was special.
All those following the this anti Masjid movement it was clear that this time the Masjid would be destroyed except this PM!With the BJP Govt in control of UP and all the pro RSS brahmins in the beauracracy and intelligence creating records to oblitrate any evidence for the future,this was certain.
People like Narasima Rao exist in all hierarchies of Congress party and are working against the party to bring the BJP in to power and this is absolutely unknown to the Gandhi family.The insiders jobs is what has been helping the RSS in many of their wicked activites.They got away with the murder of Mahatma Gandhi thus and in many mass kilings of Muslims and the trend is continuing.Sometimes judiciary too plays with them as we have seen in the incarceration of many innocent Muslims who have been released recently after several years in jail.
Kuldip Nayyar did not know but he was informed and by whom, probably Madhu Limaye. And what was Madhu Limaye doing in PV Narsimhas house? Was he also attending the pooja? And how does he know that someone came and whispered in PVN's ears and what he actually said? Did he whisper so loud for Madhu Limaye to hear? Why no one else present in the pooja room hear this? I expected Kuldip Nayyar, the fearless and forthright journalist to have that much courage to confront Narsimha Rao when he was alive and get his version of the story.
Tail Piece : I have read and heard so many articles contributed by our distinguished and secular Hindu journalists regarding unused Babri Structure. Let us hear or read some secular Muslim historian saying something in favour of Hindus. In any case when we teach our children from their childhood the nursery rhyme Babar Ka Beta Humayun Aur Humayun Ka Beta Akbar (Pears Soap Ad), and mobile phone ad, bachcha pass bhi hoga aur time pass bhi hoga this generation in future will not know about their history beyond and other than Mughal Rule.
This man has never been given any credit, just because he was not a loyalist of the dynasty.The finance minister did an excellent job under his leadership. It was this man's leadership who could take strong decisons on liberalisations of economic policies and shrug-off the communist cloak.
Late P.V Narsimha Rao was one of the best PrimeMinister and its a shame that instead of giving him credit , he is being maligned.
The only P.M who made almost all his speeches in Hindi and not bend on appeasing any group.
It is high time that we the people do not get befooled by this propoganda and understand this man's contribution.
The only Prime Minister of Independent India who, while delivering his Independence Day Address To The Nation from THe Ramparts of Red Fort, told Pakistan without mincing words that the only outstanding issue related to Kashmir problem was for the Pakistan to announce the date by which they would vacate the POK or words to that affect. No other Prime Minister before or after him has showed this type of courage and plain speaking. Even the Atal Bihari Vajpayee showed us how timid he was. As regards the comments of Kuldip Nayyar and Arjun Singh in their respective books the only thing I can say that I felt disapponted at Kuldip Nayyars statement. He should have shown some courage and forthrightness when PV Narasimha Rao was alive. Refernces made in Arjun Singh's book did not surprise me at all. In any case that book was published after Arjun Singh died. So, what is the gurantee that it is indeed his comments and not some one elses.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT