DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

SABBAVARAM, VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE
QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT

SUBJECT

LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY

NAME OF THE FACULTY

PROF. VISWACHANDRANATH MADASU

GUNTI ADITYA
23LLB050
2ND SEMESTER
ACKNOWLEDGEMNT

"I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all those who contributed to the completion of
this project on the Quit India Movement. I am immensely thankful to my history teacher,
PROF.MADASU, for their guidance and support throughout this endeavor. Additionally, I
extend my appreciation to the authors whose insightful works provided the foundation for my
research. Last but not least, I am indebted to my family and friends for their encouragement and
understanding during the process. Without their collective assistance, this project would not have
been possible."

REGARDS,
GUNTI ADITYA.

1
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the history project titled "QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT" submitted by
ADITYA GUNTI is the original work of the author and is free from plagiarism.

The research, analysis, and presentation contained within this project are the result of the author's
independent efforts and are not derived from any unauthorized sources. All sources consulted
during the research process have been properly cited and acknowledged in accordance with
academic standards.

The author affirms that no part of this project has been copied from any other work without
appropriate attribution, and any direct quotations or paraphrased material are clearly identified
and referenced.

This certificate is issued to acknowledge the authenticity and integrity of the work presented and
to attest that it meets the academic standards of originality and ethical scholarship.

REGARDS,
GUNTI ADITYA.

2
ABSTRACT

The Quit India Movement, also known as the August Movement, was a significant milestone in
India's struggle for independence against British colonial rule. Initiated on August 8, 1942, by
Mahatma Gandhi and the Indian National Congress, this mass protest aimed to demand an
end to British domination and establish India as a sovereign nation.

This project delves into the historical context, causes, key events, and impact of the Quit India
Movement. It explores the factors leading to its inception, including British policies, Indian
nationalist sentiments, and global political dynamics during World War II. The project also
examines the role of prominent leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, and others
in mobilizing masses and articulating the demands for independence.

Through a comprehensive analysis of primary and secondary sources, this project sheds light on
the strategies employed during the movement, including nonviolent civil disobedience, protests,
and underground activities. It highlights the widespread participation of diverse socio-economic
and cultural groups, including peasants, workers, students, and women, in challenging British
authority and advocating for self-rule.

Furthermore, this project assesses the repercussions of the Quit India Movement on India's
political landscape and the eventual attainment of independence in 1947. It evaluates the
movement's legacy in shaping post-colonial India and its enduring impact on notions of freedom,
democracy, and national identity.

In conclusion, this project illuminates the Quit India Movement as a pivotal chapter in India's
quest for independence, symbolizing the collective resilience, sacrifice, and determination of its
people in the face of colonial oppression.

3
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY HISTORICAL

CONTEXT

THE LEADERS OF QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT

REASONS FOR QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT

PHASES OF QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT

GANDHIS DO OR DIE MOVEMENT AND ITS TACTICS

IMPACT OF QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT

CONCLUSION

BIBILOGRAPHY

4
INTRODUCTION

The assembling of roughly 250 members of the All-India Congress Committee (AICC) in
Bombay during the first week of August 1942 was tinged with a palpable sense of expectancy.
They predict that their appeal for a public movement aiming at eliminating the British from
power might lead to numerous arrests. Hence, the direction from the command, or the All-India
Working Committee (AIWC), incorporated within the August 8 decision,1 carried enormous
weight. It featured a statement admitting the probable difficulty in conveying instructions to the
public and invited every participant to act autonomously within the framework of general rules.

The magnitude of the arrests beyond original predictions, rendering the AIWC's directive crucial.
It suggested that despite the severe persecution, the movement would survive. However, the
directive for every individual to be their own guide was fundamentally faulty. Congress members
were adapted to collaborative action, and the lack of explicit orders, contrast to earlier
Satyagraha actions, provided a hurdle. Although the August 8 resolution pledged subsequent
instructions, the AIWC was unable to give them swiftly. Gandhi and others were caught off
guard by their swift detention. Allegedly, Gandhi rapidly imparted the concise phrase "Do or
Die" before his own arrest, emphasizing the desire to liberate India or perish in the endeavor.

The suppression of Gandhi's speech and his subsequent detention originally looked to slow the
movement's momentum, leaving it directionless. However, within a week, the movement's
course turned indisputably combative and violent across India. It involved attacks on government
installations, demonstrations in important industry, and interruption of essential services through
sabotage. European officials were targeted, and the government responded with mass arrests,
collective punishments, and coercive measures.

1
Greenough, P. R. (1999). Political Mobilization and the Underground Literature of the Quit India Movement,
1942-44. Social Scientist, 27(7/8), 11–47. https://doi.org/10.2307/3518012

5
The British authority first saw the unrest as part of a bigger conspiracy, analogous to the Indian
Rebellion of 1857. However, subsequent events challenged this view, demonstrating the
spontaneous and decentralized nature of the protests. The government's forecast of feared
violence unwittingly gave a pattern for the real conflict.2 Leopold Amery's remarks, extensively
distributed through the press, mistakenly legitimized activities that were never authorized by the
Congress leadership.

While the government's efforts to suppress the movement were substantial, the power of the
press to coordinate protest became obvious. Although the underground press arose in the months
following the original rebellion, it failed to recreate the impact of Amery's speech in rousing
mass cooperation.
3

In essence, the Quit India Movement, spurred by individual determination and fueled by the
unintended endorsement of government acts, turned into a mass revolt that challenged British
authority across India.

2
Chaube, S. K. (1985). GANDHI AND THE INDIAN FREEDOM MOVEMENT. The Indian Journal of Political Science,
46(4), 430–437. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41855197

3
Greenough, P. R. (1999). Political Mobilization and the Underground Literature of the Quit India Movement,
1942-44. Social Scientist, 27(7/8), 11–47. https://doi.org/10.2307/3518012

6
SYNOPSIS

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. Explore the context, events, and impact of the Quit India Movement in India's struggle for
independence.
2. Analyze socio-political motivations and key participants' roles.
3. Assess the movement's effects on British colonial administration and post-colonial India.
4. Evaluate its significance in global anti-colonial movements and historiographical debates.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

1. Historical context and key events.

2. Socio-political factors and leadership.
3. British colonial response.
4. Impact on India's independence and post-colonial era.
5. Legacy and relevance.
6. Comparative analysis with global anti-colonial movements.
7. Use of primary and secondary sources.
8. Limitations and challenges.
9. Suggestions for further research.

SIGNIFICANCE OS STUDY

The examination of the Quit India Movement is of great importance due to its crucial
contribution to India's independence movement, its influence on colonial history, and its lasting
impact on the formation of postcolonial societies and movements across the globe. This inquiry
offers valuable perspectives on the intricacies of resistance, the challenges posed by colonial
governance, and the transformative potential of grassroots mobilization.

7
LITERATURE REVIEW

Bipan Chandra's "India's Struggle for Independence" and "Quit India Movement: A
Study" offer comprehensive analyses of the historical context, key events, and socio-political
dynamics surrounding the Quit India Movement. Chandra's meticulous research provides
valuable insights into the motivations behind the movement and its impact on the Indian
nationalist struggle.

Arun Shourie's "Quit India Movement: The Drawn and Quartered People" delves into the
human aspect of the movement, exploring the experiences and sacrifices of ordinary Indians who
participated in the struggle for independence. Shourie's work sheds light on the personal stories
and collective resilience that characterized this pivotal moment in Indian history.

Subhas Chandra Bose's "The Indian Struggle, 1920-1942" offers a unique perspective on the
Quit India Movement, providing firsthand accounts and reflections from one of its prominent
leaders. Bose's narrative adds depth to our understanding of the movement's ideological diversity
and the challenges faced by nationalist leaders in confronting British colonial rule.

Raj Kumar's "Essays on Indian Freedom Movement" offers a collection of scholarly insights
and analyses, providing diverse perspectives on various aspects of the Quit India Movement and
its broader significance within the context of the Indian freedom struggle. Kumar's compilation
serves as a valuable resource for understanding the multifaceted dimensions of this
transformative period in Indian history.

8
RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. Whether the Quit India Movement represented a turning point in the Indian nationalist
struggle, accelerating the momentum towards independence.

2. Whether the Quit India Movement effectively mobilized diverse sections of Indian society,
including rural peasants and urban workers, in the fight against British colonial rule.

3. Whether the British colonial government's response to the Quit India Movement, characterized
by mass arrests and repression, ultimately undermined its legitimacy and hastened the process of
decolonization in India

9
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY HISTORICAL
CONTEXT

The Quit India Movement began against the backdrop of India's continuous conflict for
independence from British colonial control, which had increased in the early 20th century. By the
1940s, India had already witnessed various significant movements, including the
Non-Cooperation Movement, the Civil Disobedience Movement, and the Quit India Movement,
all aimed at challenging British domination and obtaining self-rule.

4
In 1939, the onset of World War II further increased tensions between India and Britain. While
the British government declared India's involvement in the war without consulting Indian
leaders, the Indian National Congress, led by Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, refused to
support the war effort until India's independence was assured. This refusal led to the resignation
of Congress administrations in numerous provinces, known as the "August Offer" crisis of 1940.

Amidst this chaotic political context, Sir Stafford Cripps, a British politician, arrived in India in
1942 with the Cripps Mission, proposing limited dominion status for India after the war.
However, the expedition failed to meet India's desire for rapid independence, leading to
significant dismay among Indian officials and the public.

Following the collapse of the Cripps Mission, Mahatma Gandhi produced a resolution urging for
British withdrawal and a nonviolent non-cooperation movement in the case of a Japanese
invasion. This resolution, also known as the Quit India resolution, was approved during the
Congress Working Committee (CWC) meeting in Wardha on July 14, 1942.
5

4
MITTAL, S. C. (1993). THE QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT : AN ANALYSIS OF ITS LEADERSHIP (SUMMARY). Proceedings of
the Indian History Congress, 54, 498–499. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44143017

5
(Kumar, 2003)

10
Subsequently, the Congress Working Committee convened again in Wardha in July 1942 and
entrusted Gandhi with the command of the nonviolent mass campaign. The proposition was then
to be passed by the All India Congress Committee meeting in Bombay in August, as submitted
by Jawaharlal Nehru and seconded by Sardar Patel.

On August 8, 1942, Mahatma Gandhi initiated the Quit India Movement at Gowalia Tank
Maidan in Mumbai, which later became known as August Kranti Maidan. The campaign
employed the words "Quit India" and "Bharat Chodo" (Quit India) to emphasize the demand for
British removal from India. Gandhi's ardent call to action, epitomized in the motto "Do or Die,"
motivated millions of Indians to join the struggle.
6

Despite its declared commitment to nonviolence, the Quit India Movement experienced
numerous acts of civil disobedience, rallies, strikes, and sabotage across the country. The British
responded with brutal repression, detaining thousands of Congress leaders and activists. The
movement experienced heavy repression, with the government resorting to arrests, censorship,
and violent crackdowns to suppress opposition.
7

In conclusion, the Quit India Movement comprised a key moment in India's struggle for
independence, symbolizing the perseverance, unity, and determination of the Indian people in
their quest for freedom from colonial control.

6
(Kumar, 2003)

7
MITTAL, S. C. (1993). THE QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT : AN ANALYSIS OF ITS LEADERSHIP (SUMMARY). Proceedings of
the Indian History Congress, 54, 498–499. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44143017

11
COLONIAL RULE IN INDIA

Colonial authority in India began in the 17th century with the foundation of trading outposts by
the British East India Company. Over time, the Company expanded its influence and territorial
authority, ultimately evolving from a commercial entity to a dominating power. Following the
Sepoy Mutiny of 1857, also known as the First War of Indian Independence, power over India
was handed from the Company to the British Crown, heralding the commencement of direct
British colonial administration, which lasted until 1947.
8

Under British colonial control, India faced economic exploitation, political repression, and social
prejudice. The British pursued policies that suited their economic interests, including as the
extraction of resources, imposition of severe taxes, and promotion of British made items at the
expense of Indian industries. Furthermore, Indians were subjected to discriminatory laws and
regulations, with limited prospects for political engagement or social mobility.

EMERGENCE OF NATIONALISM

The birth of Indian nationalism may be traced back to the late 19th and early 20th centuries,
spurred by several factors including socio-economic changes, cultural revivalism, and exposure
to Western concepts of democracy and nationalism. Indian intellectuals and politicians such as
Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Dadabhai Naoroji, and Bal Gangadhar Tilak played significant roles in
articulating nationalist emotions and organizing the public.
9

The Indian National Congress, founded in 1885, became the dominant political group
campaigning for Indian rights and self-governance inside the British Empire. Initially, the
Congress focussed on constitutional tactics and petitions to attain its goals, but disappointment
with British policy and incremental reforms gradually led to demands for complete
independence.

8
Rajan, M. S. (1969). The Impact of British Rule in India. Journal of Contemporary History, 4(1), 89–102.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/259793

9
Gupta, J. K. (1985). MYTHS AND REALITIES OF THE QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT. Proceedings of the Indian History
Congress, 46, 569–583. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44141403

12
THE LEADERS OF QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT

The Quit India Movement was spearheaded by prominent leaders of the Indian National
Congress, including Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Abul Kalam
Azad, and others. Mahatma Gandhi's demand for "Do or Die" embodied the spirit of the
movement, encouraging millions of Indians to join the war for freedom.
10

Jawaharlal Nehru, as the president of the Indian National Congress, played a significant role in
collecting support for the Quit India Movement and explaining its objectives. Sardar Vallabhbhai
Patel, known as the "Iron Man of India," provided organizational leadership and mobilized
grassroots support for the cause.

Together, these leaders mobilized the Indian masses to join in acts of civil disobedience, rallies,
and strikes, confronting the strength of the British Empire and building the framework for India's
eventual independence.
11

10
Gupta, J. K. (1985). MYTHS AND REALITIES OF THE QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT. Proceedings of the Indian History
Congress, 46, 569–583. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44141403

11
(Kumar, 2003)

13
REASONS FOR QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT

Global Context of World War II: The commencement of World War II in 1939 dramatically
affected the political landscape in India. As Japan, one of the Axis Powers, gained strength in
Southeast Asia and constituted a threat to British interests in the region, the Indian populace
grew increasingly suspicious of British ability to safeguard India's frontiers. The British retreat
from their territories in Southeast Asia heightened apprehensions about India's vulnerability to
Axis assaults.
12

Wartime sufferings and Economic Distress: The commencement of World War II brought
about economic sufferings and scarcity of necessary products in India. High pricing for essential
requirements worsened the misery of the Indian public, leading to widespread discontentment
with British rule. The British government's reluctance to ameliorate wartime challenges further
fuelled hostility among the Indian population.

Failure of the Cripps Mission: In 1942, the British government dispatched the Cripps Mission
to India with proposals for constitutional reforms and Indian participation in the war effort.
However, the mission's failure to deliver unambiguous pledges of quick self-governance or
independence angered Indian nationalist leaders. The absence of a clear strategy for India's future
inside the British Empire intensified tensions between the British administration and the Indian
National Congress (INC).
13

Growing Demand for Independence: The Indian National Congress, under the leadership of
Mahatma Gandhi, had long championed the cause of Indian independence. The collapse of the
Cripps Mission served as a catalyst for the INC to escalate its aspirations for self-rule. Frustrated
by the lack of progress in discussions with the British government and strengthened by popular
support, the INC called for a major civil disobedience effort to urge for immediate independence.

12
Greenberg, M. (1942). India’s Independence and the War. Pacific Affairs, 15(2), 164–187.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2751975

13
Datta, V. N. (2002). THE CRIPPS MISSION, ITS FAILURE AND SIGNIFICANCE. Proceedings of the Indian History
Congress, 63, 644–652. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44158132

14
Fear of Japanese Invasion: Mahatma Gandhi and other Indian leaders understood the
geopolitical consequences of Japan's military gains in Asia. Gandhi stated that if the British were
to grant India independence14, Japan would lose its pretext for invading the country. Therefore,
the dread of Japanese aggression functioned as both a stimulus for rapid action and a strategic
rationale in support of India's independence.15

14
Das, T. (1942). The War Comes to India. The Antioch Review, 2(3), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.2307/4608902

15
Laina, P. (2013). THE COLONIAL STATE AND GANDHIAN STRATEGY. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 74,
547–554. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44158856

15
PHASES OF QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT
The quit india movement can be studied in 3 phases

The First Phase of the Quit India Movement: Rampage by the Public

The launch of the Quit India Movement in August 1942 unleashed a wave of unprecedented
public mobilization and civil disobedience across India. This early phase, characterized by
spontaneous and widespread acts of rebellion against British authority, was a key point in India's
quest for independence.

Attacks on Authority Symbols: As the Quit India Movement developed strength, the general
populace turned to the streets to protest British hegemony. Authority symbols such as
government buildings were targeted, with demonstrators forcibly hoisting national flags as a
symbolic statement of Indian sovereignty.
16

Civil Disobedience and Sabotage: Satyagrahis, following to the principles of peaceful

resistance, willingly surrendered to arrest as a method of protest. Meanwhile, more radical
members resorted to acts of sabotage, including burning up bridges, destroying railway rails, and
severing telegraph wires. These disruptive acts intended to paralyze British administration and
communication networks.

Regional Hotspots of Resistance: The intensity of the initial phase of the Quit India Movement
varied throughout several regions of India. Notably, the eastern United Provinces and Bihar
emerged as epicenters of resistance, with a surge in acts of rebellion against British rule.

Student Participation: Students played a significant part in fuelling the impetus of the
movement. They boycotted courses, held processions, and spread illicit publications, such as the
Patrika, to disseminate anti-colonial sentiments. Additionally, students functioned as couriers for
clandestine networks, boosting communication and coordination among activists.
17

16
Vashishtha, V. K. (2012). QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT IN THE MEWAR STATE. Proceedings of the Indian History
Congress, 73, 642–646. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44156259

17
Sarkar, N. (2002). CROSS-CURRENTS DURING THE QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT IN BOMBAY. Proceedings of the Indian
History Congress, 63, 653–666. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44158133
16
Labor interruptions: The industrial centers of Ahmedabad, Bombay, Jamshedpur, Ahmednagar,
and Poona saw major labor disruptions. Workers from many sectors ditched their tools and
joined the protest, seeking an end to British rule and economic abuse.18

18
Das, S. (1995). Nationalism and Popular Consciousness: Bengal 1942. Social Scientist, 23(4/6), 58–68.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3520215

17
The Second Phase of the Quit India Movement: Underground Resistance

As the Quit India Movement advanced, a substantial number of nationalists retreated into the
underground, participating in covert and subversive acts aimed at continuing the momentum of
the war against British colonial power. This clandestine phase of the movement, characterized by
secrecy and endurance, had a key influence in maintaining the spirit of resistance and
organizational coherence.

Diverse Participation: The underground resistance attracted support from a wide variety of
nationalist parties and people across India. Socialists, members of the Forward Bloc, Gandhi
ashramites, revolutionary nationalists, and local groups from diverse regions such as Bombay,
Poona, Satara, Baroda, Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, United Provinces, Bihar,
and Delhi actively participated in subversive operations.
19

important roles: Several famous leaders emerged as major roles in the underground resistance
effort. Figures like as Rammanohar Lohia, Jayaprakash Narayan, Aruna Asaf Ali, Usha Mehta,
Biju Patnaik, Chhotubhai Puranik, Achyut Patwardhan, Sucheta Kripalani, and R.P. Goenka
played significant roles in coordinating underground networks and raising the morale of activists.

Establishment of Underground Radio: Usha Mehta's pioneering initiative in launching an

underground radio station in Bombay stands out as a critical milestone in the second phase of the
Quit India Movement. The clandestine radio broadcast functioned as a crucial communication
tool for conveying information, giving directives, and boosting morale among activists and
sympathizers.

19
HAZARY, S. C. (1988). PROTEST POLITICS OF STUDENT YOUTH IN INDIA. The Indian Journal of Political Science,
49(1), 105–120. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41855356

18
20
Maintenance of Morale and Coordination: The basic goal of the subterranean phase was to
sustain the morale of the resistance movement and ensure effective coordination among various
factions. Underground networks facilitated the distribution of armament, ammunition, and
supplies, while also provided guidance and support to activists operating in difficult conditions.

Challenges and risks: Operating underground entailed major hazards for activists, as they faced
the constant possibility of detection, arrest, and punishment from British authorities. Despite
these challenges, the enthusiasm and persistence of clandestine activities remained steady,
inspired by a shared purpose of liberating India from colonial control.
21

In summary, the second phase of the Quit India Movement witnessed the establishment of a
robust underground resistance network, involving several nationalist parties and individuals
committed to the cause of independence. Through covert actions, clandestine contacts, and acts
of resistance, these underground activists played a key part in sustaining the momentum of the
movement and keeping the torch of Indian nationalism alive in the face of overwhelming
opposition.

20
Chakrabarty, B. (1992). Defiance and Confrontation: The 1942 Quit India Movement in Midnapur. Social Scientist,
20(7/8), 75–93. https://doi.org/10.2307/3517569

21
Gupta, J. K. (1985). MYTHS AND REALITIES OF THE QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT. Proceedings of the Indian History
Congress, 46, 569–583. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44141403

19
The Third Phase of the Quit India Movement: Establishment of Parallel Governments

As the Quit India Movement evolved, a significant development emerged in the form of parallel
governments established in various regions of India. These parallel administrations, operating
outside the purview of British colonial authority, sought to assert Indian sovereignty and
governance while simultaneously challenging British rule.

Ballia: In Ballia, under the leadership of Chittu Pandey, a parallel government was established
for a brief period in August 1942. Pandey's efforts resulted in the release of numerous Congress
members who had been detained by British authorities. This temporary administration
symbolized the assertion of local autonomy and resistance against colonial repression.

Tamluk (Midnapore): The establishment of the Jatiya Sarkar in Tamluk from December 1942 to
September 1944 represented a significant instance of parallel governance. The Jatiya Sarkar
focused on providing cyclone relief, sanctioning school grants, redistributing agricultural
produce to the needy, organizing community initiatives such as Vidyut Vahinis (electricity
cooperatives), and other welfare activities aimed at enhancing local self-sufficiency and
resilience.
22

Satara: In Satara, a parallel government known as "Prati Sarkar" operated from mid-1943 to
1945. Led by leaders such as Y.B. Chavan and Nana Patil, the Prati Sarkar undertook various
initiatives to promote social and economic development in the region. This included the
establishment of village libraries, Nyayadan Mandals (justice forums), prohibition campaigns,
and the promotion of "Gandhi marriages" based on Gandhian principles of simplicity and
equality.

22
Chakrabarty, B. (1992). Defiance and Confrontation: The 1942 Quit India Movement in Midnapur. Social Scientist,
20(7/8), 75–93. https://doi.org/10.2307/3517569

20
Wide Support and Collaboration: The success and sustainability of these parallel governments
were made possible by the active support and collaboration of various segments of society.
Businessmen provided financial donations and material assistance, students served as couriers
for communication networks, villagers refused to cooperate with British authorities, and
individuals from diverse professions, including pilots, train drivers, and government officials,
clandestinely aided the resistance movement by providing crucial support and intelligence.
23

In summary, the establishment of parallel governments during the third phase of the Quit India
Movement represented a bold assertion of Indian self-governance and autonomy. These
decentralized administrations not only challenged British authority but also demonstrated the
capacity of Indian communities to govern themselves and address local needs. Despite facing
considerable challenges and risks, these parallel governments symbolized the resilience and
determination of the Indian people in their quest for independence.

23
Sarkar, S. (1982). Popular Movements and National Leadership, 1945-47. Economic and Political Weekly,
17(14/16), 677–689. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4370840

21
GANDHIS DO OR DIE MOVEMENT AND ITS TACTICS

Gandhi's "Do or Die" Call

In the history of India's battle for liberation, Mahatma Gandhi's renowned "Do or Die" statement,
issued on August 8, 1942, stands as a clarion cry to action that united millions of Indians into the
Quit India Movement. With these three simple words, Gandhi filled the movement with a sense
of urgency and dedication, pushing Indians to commit themselves entirely to the cause of
liberation from British colonial power.

24
Arrests and Repression

The British response to Gandhi's appeal for mass civil disobedience was quick and violent. In the
days following the initiation of the Quit India Movement, British authorities initiated a
crackdown on Congress leaders and sympathizers, detaining hundreds across the country. The
jails quickly filled with political convicts, and the British administration deployed harsh
measures to eliminate resistance, including censorship, arbitrary detention, and the use of force
to prevent demonstrations.

Spreading Mass Protests

Despite the arrests and repression, the Quit India Movement spread fast across India, with large
protests erupting in cities, towns, and villages. From the crowded avenues of Bombay to the
faraway villages of Bihar, Indians from all walks of life engaged in their demand for immediate
freedom. Students, laborers, farmers, and professionals joined hands in acts of civil
disobedience, strikes, and protests, opposing British authority and asserting their right to
self-rule.

24
Habib, I. (1995). Gandhi and the National Movement. Social Scientist, 23(4/6), 3–15.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3520212

22
Strategies and Tactics

The Quit India Movement adopted a multitude of approaches and tactics to challenge British rule
and advance the cause of independence. These included:

Nonviolent Civil Disobedience: Inspired by Gandhi's teaching of nonviolence, the movement

adopted civil disobedience as a technique of protest, refusing to cooperate with British
authorities and rejecting unjust laws and regulations.

25
Underground Resistance: Faced with large arrests and repression, many activists went
underground, building clandestine networks to coordinate resistance efforts, transmit
information, and preserve morale within the ranks of the movement.

Mass Mobilization: The movement mobilized millions of Indians from different origins,
surpassing barriers of class, caste, and religion. Mass assemblies, rallies, and marches functioned
as platforms for expressing nationalist objectives and gathering support for the struggle of
independence.

26
Economic Disruption: Strikes and boycotts were utilized to disrupt British administration and
undermine the colonial economy. Workers in essential industries, notably as textiles and
transportation, walked off the work, while consumers boycotted British products as a form of
economic protest.

Symbolic Acts of Defiance: Indians participated in symbolic acts of defiance, like as hoisting
the tricolor flag, boycotting British institutions, and organizing bonfires of foreign items, to
assert their national identity and reject colonial rule.

25
Low, D. A. (1966). The Government of India and the First Non-Cooperation Movement--1920-1922. The Journal of
Asian Studies, 25(2), 241–259. https://doi.org/10.2307/2051326

26
Habib, I. (1995). Gandhi and the National Movement. Social Scientist, 23(4/6), 3–15.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3520212

23
In conclusion, Gandhi's "Do or Die" cry started a mass movement of unparalleled scope and
intensity, with Indians across the subcontinent rising up in defiance of British rule. Despite
enduring arrests, harassment, and sufferings, the Quit India Movement exhibited the force of
nonviolent resistance and the endurance of the Indian people in their battle for independence and
self-determination.

Instructions of Mahatma Gandhi during the Quit India Movement

Government Employees: Gandhi's instructions to government employees aimed at encouraging

sympathy with the Indian National Congress (INC) and the Quit India Movement. Instead of
resigning from their posts, government personnel were exhorted to declare their allegiance to the
INC and the cause of Indian independence. This command was designed to maintain a presence
within the administrative apparatus while actively supporting the cause for liberation.

Soldiers: Gandhi's instructions to soldiers represented a delicate balance between loyalty to the
army and support to the Quit India Movement. Soldiers were encouraged to remain inside the
army ranks but to refrain from using force against their fellow compatriots fighting in the
struggle for independence. By supporting nonviolence inside the military ranks, Gandhi hoped to
minimize bloodshed and build unity among Indians, especially those serving in the armed
services.

27
Landlords/Zamindars: Gandhi's instructions to landlords and zamindars stressed strategic
noncooperation with the British authority. If landlords or zamindars were sympathetic to the
anti-government cause, Gandhi recommended tenants to fulfill their agreements and pay the
agreed-upon rent, thus depriving the colonial administration of revenue. Conversely, if landlords

27
Habib, I. (1995). Gandhi and the National Movement. Social Scientist, 23(4/6), 3–15.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3520212

24
or zamindars were linked with the British administration, tenants were encouraged to withhold
rent payments as a form of economic opposition.

Students: Gandhi's instructions to students acknowledged their potential role as agents of change
in the Quit India Movement. While urging students to participate in the war for independence,
Gandhi also acknowledged the importance of education. Confident students were given the
opportunity to interrupt their studies temporarily to join the movement and help to the cause of
independence.

Princes and People of Princely States: Gandhi's instructions to princes and residents of
princely states highlighted the necessity for their cooperation in the struggle against British
colonial control. Princes were advised to connect themselves with the aspirations of the Indian
people and embrace the sovereignty of the masses. Similarly, people of princely states were
encouraged to proclaim their Indian identity and declare devotion to the national cause,
particularly if their rulers were supportive of the British administration.

In essence, Gandhi's orders during the Quit India Movement were tailored to organize diverse
parts of society in a concerted effort to confront British colonial rule. By pushing strategic
noncooperation, fostering solidarity, and supporting peaceful resistance, Gandhi tried to
galvanize Indians from all walks of life in the cause of independence.28

28
Habib, I. (1995). Gandhi and the National Movement. Social Scientist, 23(4/6), 3–15.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3520212

25
IMPACT OF QUIT INDIA MOVEMENT

The Quit India Movement of 1942, led by Mahatma Gandhi, had far-reaching implications that
altered the political landscape of India and expedited the process of independence from British
colonial control.

Leadership Transition: With the incarceration of senior Congress leaders like Gandhi, Nehru,
and Patel, fresh leaders such as Jayaprakash Narayan and Ram Manohar Lohia arose to lead the
campaign. This changeover signified a generational shift in Indian politics, with newer leaders
taking up the legacy of the liberation struggle.

Empowerment of Women Leaders: The movement also gave a forum for women leaders like
Aruna Asaf Ali to rise up and perform key roles in the campaign for independence. This
empowering of women in the political sphere comprised a substantial departure from
conventional standards and contributed to the greater societal transformation in India.

Repression and bloodshed: The British administration responded to the movement with brutal
repression, resulting to the arrest of thousands of people and widespread bloodshed. Mass
floggings, lathi charges, and police gunfire led in the deaths of thousands of persons, including
women and children. The harsh suppression of the movement exposed the true character of
British colonial power and further inflamed anti-British sentiments among the Indian population.

Declaring INC Illegal: The Indian National Congress (INC) was proclaimed illegal, and its
leaders were imprisoned for the duration of the conflict. This action by the British rulers
attempted to weaken the organizational structure of the independence movement but instead
galvanized support for the cause of independence.
29

29
Greenough, P. R. (1983). Political Mobilization and the Underground Literature of the Quit India Movement,
1942-44. Modern Asian Studies, 17(3), 353–386. http://www.jstor.org/stable/312297

26
Regional Impact: The Quit India Movement had a tremendous impact throughout several areas
of India, with Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, Midnapore, and Karnataka emerging as the
primary foci of the rebellion. The widespread participation of individuals from different parts of
the country emphasized the national character of the movement and its resonance among varied
elements of Indian society.

hostility and Support: While the Quit India Movement garnered substantial support among the
Indian public, it also met hostility from certain sectors. The Muslim League, Communist Party of
India, and Hindu Mahasabha were among the parties that rejected the campaign for various
reasons, including concerns about the future political landscape of India and ideological
differences. However, despite these oppositions, the movement continued to develop momentum
and garner widespread support.

Shift in Political Dynamics: The Quit India Movement signified a fundamental shift in the
political dynamics of India, establishing the framework for the eventual attainment of
independence in 1947. The popular participation, leadership shift, and extensive repression
unleashed by the movement hastened the process of decolonization and set the ground for the
establishment of an independent Indian nation.

27
CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the Quit India Movement stands as a watershed moment in Indian history,
marking a pivotal stage in the nation's journey towards independence. It symbolizes the
empowerment of "We the People" who took ownership of the freedom struggle and demonstrated
unparalleled heroism and militancy in the face of harsh repression and adverse circumstances.

The movement galvanized ordinary individuals from all walks of life to join hands in the fight
against British colonial rule, transcending barriers of class, caste, and gender. From the bustling
streets of cities to the remote villages of rural India, the cry for freedom echoed loudly, fueled by
a collective desire for self-determination and dignity.

The sacrifices made by countless men and women during the Quit India Movement laid the
foundation for the future of Indian politics, instilling a spirit of resilience and unity that would
shape the nation's democratic ethos. Despite facing severe repression and challenges, the resolve
of the people remained unshaken, serving as a beacon of inspiration for generations to come.

As we reflect on the legacy of the Quit India Movement, we are reminded of the indomitable
spirit of the Indian people and their unwavering commitment to freedom and justice. It is a
reminder that the struggle for independence was not merely a chapter in history but a testament
to the power of collective action and the enduring quest for liberty and equality.

28
BIBILOGRAPHY

BOOKS
- "India's Struggle for Independence" by Bipan Chandra
- "Quit India Movement: A Study" by Bipan Chandra
- "Quit India Movement: The Drawn and Quartered People" by Arun Shourie
- "The Indian Struggle, 1920-1942" by Subhas Chandra Bose
- Essays on indian freedom movement by raj kumar
JOURNALS
- "The Quit India Movement: A Study" by Sumit Sarkar (Economic and Political Weekly)
- "The Quit India Movement: A Study of the Revolutionary Movement in Bengal" by Bimal
Prasad (The Indian Historical Review)
- "Gandhi's Quit India Movement: A Study of Rhetoric and Confrontation" by Arjun Ghosh
(The Journal of Asian Studies)

BIBLIOGRAPHY
National Archives of India:
[https://www.nationalarchives.gov.in/](https://www.nationalarchives.gov.in/)
- India Office Records at the British Library:
[https://www.bl.uk/collection-guides/india-office-records](https://www.bl.uk/collection-guides/in
dia-office-records)
- Indian National Congress Archives: [https://archives.inc.in/](https://archives.inc.in/)

29
Project sem 1
ORIGINALITY REPORT

15 %
SIMILARITY INDEX
12%
INTERNET SOURCES
3%
PUBLICATIONS
8%
STUDENT PAPERS

PRIMARY SOURCES

1
dokumen.pub
Internet Source 5%
2
Submitted to Damodaram Sanjivayya
National Law University
5%
Student Paper

3
dergipark.org.tr
Internet Source 1%
4
Submitted to Higher Education Commission
Pakistan
1%
Student Paper

5
Submitted to Symbiosis International
University
1%
Student Paper

6
"Islam, Judaism, and Zoroastrianism",
Springer Science and Business Media LLC,
1%
2018
Publication

7
epgp.inflibnet.ac.in
Internet Source <1 %
Submitted to Curtin University of Technology
 <1 %
Student Paper
8

9
defence.pk
Internet Source <1 %
10
Submitted to Washington University in St.
Louis
<1 %
Student Paper

11
www.scribd.com
Internet Source <1 %
12
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu
Internet Source <1 %
13
du.ac.in
Internet Source <1 %
14
A.C.S. Peacock, Richard Piran McClary.
"Turkish History and Culture in India", Brill,
<1 %
2020
Publication

15
Submitted to BRAC University
Student Paper <1 %

Exclude quotes On Exclude matches < 14 words

Exclude bibliography On