Quit India Anniversary: Congress Recalls Jailed Leaders, Alleges RSS Opposition
August 9, 2025 marked the 83rd anniversary of the Quit India Movement, a watershed moment in India’s independence struggle. On this solemn day, the Indian National Congress (INC) paid homage to the sacrifices of countless freedom fighters, while also accusing the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) of opposing both the Quit India Movement and, later, India’s Constitution.
II. Congress Remembers Founding Leaders in Jail
A. Historic Context
On August 8, 1942, at the Bombay session of the All India Congress Committee, the Quit India resolution was passed—ushering in Gandhi’s iconic “Do or Die” call.
By the early hours of August 9, British authorities arrested key Congress leaders. Mahatma Gandhi was detained at Pune’s Aga Khan Palace (released May 6, 1944), while Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel, Maulana Azad, Govind Ballabh Pant, and others were imprisoned at Ahmednagar Fort until March 28, 1945.
Nehru, enduring his ninth jail term between 1921 and 1945, penned his masterpiece The Discovery of India during incarceration.
B. Tribute from Contemporary Leaders
Quit India anniversary 2025
On this anniversary, Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge honored those who responded to Gandhi’s call, saying: “On ‘August Kranti Diwas’, we pay our heartfelt tributes to all the freedom fighters who sacrificed their lives for the freedom of the country.” .
General Secretary Jairam Ramesh underscored that Congress’s leadership languished in jail while the nation rose—and asserted that the RSS “actively opposed the Quit India movement” and, seven years later, the Indian Constitution.
This moment of remembrance blends gratitude for sacrifice with political reflection on divergent legacies within India’s freedom struggle.
III. RSS and the Quit India Movement: A Complex Legacy
A. Official Non-Participation
Multiple historical records affirm that the RSS, under its then head M.S. Golwalkar, maintained distance from the Quit India Movement. The Bombay government noted the RSS “scrupulously kept itself within the law, and in particular, refrained from taking part in the disturbances that broke out in August 1942”.
Golwalkar criticized Congress’s approach, arguing that the organization had not prepared adequately and engaging in the movement would serve no purpose for the RSS.
In a 1936 letter, Golwalkar described mass mobilizations as “born out of fleeting moments of enthusiasm and emotion,” urging RSS workers to focus on disciplined organizational work rather than what he termed “shallow nationalism”.
B. Contrasting Accounts of RSS Participation
Some sources present a contrasting narrative. For instance, Moneycontrol notes that RSS volunteers, particularly in the Vidarbha region, actively participated under Ramakant Deshpande’s leadership. This included the “Chimur Ashti episode” and even violent clashes with the British.
Swarajya Magazine highlights that some RSS camps expressed anti-British sentiment, that notable freedom fighters like Aruna Asaf Ali, Nana Patil, Achyut Patwardhan, and others were sheltered by RSS members, and that certain volunteers, like Dada Naik, were sentenced to death following their participation.
The VSK Telangana archive similarly notes intense RSS involvement in Chimur and Ashti during the movement, leading British authorities to fear infiltration and insurrection.
IV. Synthesizing Divergent Narratives
A. Politics of Interpretation
The Congress’s current narrative emphasizes a binary portrayal: heroic imprisonment of its leaders vs. an oppositional stance by the RSS. In contrast, historical accounts illustrate that the RSS’s engagement was not monolithic—varied by region and individual choices.
B. Regional Variations and Individual Activism
The RSS as a national body opted out of the movement for ideological and strategic reasons, per official leadership. Yet, in specific regions like Vidarbha, volunteers did participate and suffered consequences, including death sentences and imprisonment.
Notably, RSS shakhas provided sanctuary to various freedom fighters after the movement’s direction faltered—underscoring the organization’s complex role.
V. Historical Memory and Political Symbolism
A. Quit India as Shared Symbol, Contested Meaning
For Congress, Quit India symbolizes self-sacrifice, mass resistance, and constitutional legacy. Celebrating jailed leaders enshrines their struggle in national memory.
For the RSS, the narrative is more ambivalent—marked by a principled distance from mass protest but punctuated by pockets of bold action and shelter.
B. Contemporary Political Resonance
In 2025, these interpretations carry political weight. Congress frames the RSS’s stance as evidence of ideological divergence, while critics argue that remembering only one dimension distorts the past.
Such selective narratives reflect broader debates on nationalism, constitutionalism, and ideological identity in modern India.
