Search e-Library

Bapat Case : F.A.H. Elliot (d.1910), an ICS officer of Bombay presidency, was appointed principal tutor to 12-year old Sayājirao to groom him into a cringing dependent. Not only did the boy develop a will of his own, consulted experienced elders like Tilak, Gokhale & others inimical to British Paramountcy, went on foreign travels to learn modern ideas & means, he initiated administrative reforms for his subjects’ benefit. The Bāpat Case (1894-5) was the first, if not the most perilous encounter created by the Octopus to result as it did with Sayājirao’s predecessor Malharrao in 1875, in Sayājirao’s deposition & exile. In June 1881, the spies of the Resident, or AGG (Agent of Gov.-Gen.), ‘discovered’ a pamphlet vilifying the Viceroy’s appointee, Diwan Mādhava Rao & imputed it to Bāpat, Samarth (Subā of Baroda), Athavale (Naib-Dewan), & Tilak, & claimed Sayājirao “was privy to it”. Indicting Bāpat & attacking Elliot was the first step to entrap him. Succeeding Residents kept trying to convict & punish Sayājirao but never succeeded. Under British rule the first posting of European ICS boy-officers was usually as Collector with unlimited power over districts often larger than England itself. Its cruellest impact on agriculture was its zamindari, ryotwari & mahalwari systems of land revenue fixation & collection, & the most debilitating was the commercialisation of agricultural products, anything felt useful as raw material for British industries was sent there, their products imported duty-free & forced on India. In 1883, after a tour of Kadi Sayājirao set up his Land (Revenue) Survey & Settlement Department under Elliot, to deal with the vexed question of barkhāli lands, lands wholly or almost free from taxation. Sri Aurobindo’s first posting was in Elliot’s Dept., then to the Revenue Dept. expressly charged “to study most fully, the details connected with the work of subordinate officers”. One of Elliot’s tasks was to device means to revive panchayati rule. In 1888, the Resident opened a dossier targeting Elliot & Sayājirao to which their well-meaning land-revenue legislation of 1889 provided an opening to inflate trivial plaints. In 1890, Sayājirao unwittingly provided the Resident a potent ally by making Manibhai Jashbhai (former aide to the Resident) Dewan who at the Resident’s bidding inserted British moles into Elliot’s Dept. to subvert it & blame Sayājirao & Elliot. One of them was A.F. Machonochie, a Machiavellian ICS officer from Bombay Presidency. Their prime target was Vāsudeva Sadāshiv Bāpat whom the Maharaja had, on Elliot’s recommendation, appointed Assistant Commissioner in 1893. Bāpat, a friend of Tilak, owed his rapid rise to that rank to hard work, intelligence & integrity. Mr Elliot had realised on taking charge of the Land Survey Dept. that Bāpat would be of real help in the disposal of claims to exemption from payment of the State dues. Bāpat’s rise had wounded Machonochie & some other English officers who sought, with the aide of some vested interests in the State, to turn departmental looseness to their own advantage. This combination against Elliot & Bāpat was backed up by a more powerful combination headed by the Resident & Manibhai Jashbhai, the Dewan. In October 1893, Sayājirao returned from his fourth foreign trip; next month fooled by the Resident-Dewan duo, he signed Elliot’s removal from the Council that officiated in his absence & authorised Col. Biddulph (Resident 1893-95) to intervene at will in his absence, & escaped to Europe. In January 1894, Sayājirao instructed Elliot that before going on leave he was to introduce elective councils in at least 100 villages, as “it will be the keystone of what I wish to develop in my State.” Immediately Biddulph got the ICS to probe into Elliot’s work. After successfully warding off that attack, Elliot left on leave. Now Manibhai brought charges of corruption, extortion, & provincialism. When it became clear in June 1894, that it was not safe for Bāpat to continue in Baroda, Tilak sent Mr Joshi, proprietor of Poona’s Chitrashāla to Baroda; with great difficulty this resourceful gentleman succeeded in snatching Bāpat away from the State. Rebuffing Tilak’s efforts at reconciliation, Manibhai suspended Bāpat retrospectively from Jan. 1894; & appointed a Commission of Inquiry. Accompanied by two attorneys provided by Tilak, Bāpat returned to stand the trial, which began in September 1894. Sir P.M. Mehta conducted the prosecution in the early stages. When he left the case in disgust, Mr Branson of Bombay Bar was briefed in his place. Sayājirao, who had heard of the goings-on in August, decided not to return until the Inquiry concluded. In spite Tilak (who had to replace of Bāpat’s attorney who had died midway) invalidating all charges, the Commission demanded a very harsh sentence. It was only on the advice of Lord Reay (q.v.) to return immediately to Baroda & handle the case that Sayājirao returned from that longest escape to Europe. And even then he merely transferred the matter to Baroda High Court & escaped to Ooty where he called Sri Aurobindo “to prepare a précis of the whole case & the judicial opinions on it”! The Court exonerated Bāpat. In reprisal, ICS authorities demoted & banished Elliot to obscure Bijāpur, & sent its thug Machonochie to Junāgadh to ruin his ‘friend’ Shyamji Krishnavarma then its Dewan; SK too ran to Tilak to save him. The shrewd Gaekwad dismissed both Bāpat & Manibhai, albeit with compensation. In a letter to Elliot, penny-pinching Sayājirao regretted the loss of two to three lakhs for not having nipped the conspiracy in the bud, but pupil Sayājirao confessed he procrastinated due to “fear of the Residency”. [Based on Sergeant’s biography of Sayājirao; Indulal Yāgnik’s Shyamji Krishnavarma…., 1950; Karandikar’s Lōkamānya Tilak, 1957; H.H. Buch’s Sayājirao III, M.S. Univ., Baroda, 1988; Fatehsingh Gaikwād’s Sayājirao…, , 1989; Lajpat Rai’s Young India – An Interpretation & a History of the Nationalist Movement from Within, Lahore, 4th Reprint, 1927]