"The Pen Against the Raj: Nair's Legal Stand for Indian Rights"

C. Sankaran Nair (full name: Chettur Sankaran Nair, 1857-1934) was a prominent Indian lawyer, judge, and political leader known for his outspoken stance against British colonial rule and his advocacy for Indian civil rights.

Key Facts about C. Sankaran Nair:

• Born: July 11, 1857, in Malabar (now Kerala)
• Profession: Lawyer and judge; later a political leader
• President of Indian National Congress: In 1897, he was elected president of the Congress session held in Amaravati.
• First Indian Member of Viceroy's Council (Law): Appointed in 1915, where he pushed for reforms in education and administration.
   

"From the Courtroom to the Nation: C. Sankaran Nair's Pursuit of Justice"

The Role of Sir C. Sankaran Nair in the Aftermath of the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre

Following the Jallianwala Bagh massacre of April 13, 1919, wherein British troops under the command of Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer opened fire on an unarmed gathering in Amritsar, resulting in the death of hundreds of civilians, Sir Chettur Sankaran Nair, then serving as a Member of the Viceroy's Executive Council in charge of the Education portfolio, took a decisive and principled legal stand against the British administration.

1. Resignation as Legal Protest:

   In August 1919, Sir C. Sankaran Nair tendered his resignation from the Viceroy's Executive Council. This resignation was a formal and symbolic act of constitutional protest, executed in accordance with the legal doctrine of constructive dissent. His withdrawal from office was predicated upon the British Government's refusal to publicly denounce the massacre or take immediate punitive action against those responsible, particularly General Dyer.

   His resignation amounted to a repudiation of executive complicity and asserted that continued participation in the Council would constitute tacit approval of a grave miscarriage of justice and a violation of fundamental human rights under principles of natural justice and due process.
    

2. Demand for Judicial Accountability:

   Sir Sankaran Nair, leveraging his position and reputation, advocated for an independent judicial inquiry into the massacre. His stance directly contributed to the establishment of the Hunter Commission (1919), a formal Committee of Inquiry constituted under British law to examine the actions of the military and civil administration in Punjab.

Although the Commission's final report was criticized for being insufficiently condemnatory, it did result in General Dyer's censure and forced retirement, a partial legal victory attributed, in part, to Nair's early and forceful condemnation.

"Turning the Tables: Nair's Legal Masterstroke Against Colonial Injustice"

After General Dyer was not criminally prosecuted and was instead only censured and retired following the findings of the Hunter Commission, Sir C. Sankaran Nair did not have formal judicial standing to reopen a criminal case directly (as legal prosecution of British officials in colonial India was controlled by the British government).

However, he took an alternative legal and political route to ensure that the atrocities remained in the public and judicial discourse:

1. Public Legal Accusation in Published Work (1922):

   Sir Sankaran Nair published a book titled Gandhi and Anarchy in 1922. In it, he openly accused the British colonial administration and specifically named Sir Michael O'Dwyer (then Lieutenant Governor of Punjab during the massacre) as being morally and politically responsible for the atrocities committed at Jallianwala Bagh and during martial law.

   This act was strategic and deliberate. By putting his accusations into print, he provoked legal proceedings that would allow for the matter to be judicially re-examined, even if indirectly.
    

2. Civil Suit – O'Dwyer v. Nair (1924):

   In response, Sir Michael O'Dwyer filed a libel suit against Nair in the King's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice in London in 1924.

   Nair did not retract his statements and chose instead to defend the truth of his claims in court.

   Though the court ruled in favor of O'Dwyer (awarding him £500 in damages), the case had a significant legal impact:

   • It brought the atrocities of Jallianwala Bagh back into the legal and public spotlight, this time in a British courtroom.
   • Nair used the platform to present evidence of systematic human rights abuses, reiterating his accusation of dereliction of duty and state-sponsored violence.

   While technically a defeat in court, the trial was a moral and political victory: it turned a libel suit into a quasi-trial of the British Empire, drawing public condemnation and political pressure in the UK and abroad.
    

Conclusion:

Sir C. Sankaran Nair, unable to reopen a criminal case against General Dyer through traditional colonial legal mechanisms, employed a strategic form of legal counterattack by:

• Publishing damning legal commentary,
• Forcing judicial review via a libel suit, and
• Using the courtroom as a platform to expose colonial injustice.

In doing so, he succeeded in reviving the legal memory of Jallianwala Bagh and preserving the accountability narrative through both law and public conscience.
 

In Summary:

1. Resigned from his official position in protest.
2. Demanded action and accountability for the massacre.
3. Published a book exposing the truth and naming officials.
4. Faced a lawsuit and turned it into a platform for truth.
5. Raised public awareness in India and Britain about British injustice.

These actions made him one of the earliest and boldest voices for justice after Jallianwala Bagh.

Written By: Md.Imran Wahab, IPS, IGP, Provisioning, West Bengal
Email: imranwahab216@gmail.com, Ph no: 9836576565