The Narendra Modi government has come under fresh criticism for allegedly using state-backed institutions to promote Hindutva ideologues, after the National Council for the Promotion of Urdu Language (NCPUL), an autonomous body under the Ministry of Education, published an Urdu translation of a book glorifying Vinayak Damodar Savarkar.
The book, titled “Veer Savarkar aur Takseem Hind ka Alamiya”, is a translation of “Veer Savarkar: The Man Who Could Have Prevented Partition” by Uday Mahurkar and Chirayu Pandit, originally published in 2021. The Urdu version was launched at an event held at the Prime Minister’s Museum on Thursday.
At the launch, Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal described Savarkar as a visionary who was “deeply sensitive to national unity and integrity.” Meghwal claimed that “had Savarkar’s vision and planning been implemented, the country could have been saved from disintegration.”
The translation was done by Prof. Mazhar Asif, the Vice-Chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia. According to the event’s media release, the authors said their work aimed to “present truthful and unbiased information” and to “dispel misconceptions spread by a specific political ideology.”
Historians, however, have strongly contested this portrayal. Prof. Nadeem Rezavi, secretary of the Indian History Congress and a history faculty member at Aligarh Muslim University, called the move “shocking,” accusing the government of attempting to rewrite history.
“Savarkar was among the first to endorse the two-nation theory — much before the Muslim League adopted it in 1940,” Rezavi said. “In his 1937 address to the Hindu Mahasabha, Savarkar declared that ‘there are two nations, the Hindus and the Muslims, in India’. Such rhetoric legitimised communal division and contributed to the very climate that led to Partition.”
Rezavi also pointed out that under Savarkar’s leadership, the Hindu Mahasabha formed coalition governments with the Muslim League in Sindh and Bengal during the Quit India Movement. “Savarkar even supported Travancore’s bid for independence in 1947, as a counterweight to a secular Indian state,” he said.
“But for Savarkar’s toxic ideas, perhaps partition could have been avoided,” Rezavi added. “He did not believe in coexistence — only in Hindu dominance.”
A former NCPUL official criticised the council’s decision, saying it was a departure from its original mandate. “The NCPUL was created to promote Urdu literature and language, not to publish books on divisive political figures,” he said.
