It would be a mockery of history if we gloss over the serious differences that existed between Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, just as it would be petty to ignore the profound respect that the two shared for each other.
The divide between the two icons of Indian politics was deep enough for Sardar Patel to contemplate resignation from the ministry. But for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, which brought the two leaders together in the ensuing trying times, Sardar Patel would have probably quit the Nehru Government. But even thereafter, Nehru and his deputy clashed often. The issues of confrontation became a major source for the canard that Sardar Patel was ‘anti-Muslim’. But, despite his regard for Sardar Patel, Nehru did little to dispel the misconception. He even seemed distant from those who were considered close to Sardar Patel — Rajendra Prasad and Morarji Desai, to name just two.
Those confrontations primarily dealt with ways to tackle the communal problem that had taken horrendous shape in the run-up to and the aftermath of Partition. It is here that Sardar Patel, because of his blunt, decisive and bipartisan stand, earned the wrath of the Muslim leaguers and, sadly, even of certain elements within the Congress which he had served with such distinction. It served to distort his image.
Perhaps the best context to understand Sardar Patel's commitment to secularism and his no-nonsense approach that cared more for national interests than the slander it would fetch him from vested quarters, was his approach towards the Muslims and the Hindu refugees from Pakistan who had swamped large parts of northern India, including Delhi. Well-known historian PN Chopra, who edited the Collected Works of Sardar Patel, brought out a remarkable collection of correspondence between Sardar Patel and a galaxy of Congress leaders and others on the subject. Titled, Sardar Patel: Muslims and Refugees, the book was published in 2004 and co-edited by Prabha Chopra. It forms part of the ‘thematic volumes' on Sardar Patel that PN Chopra edited.
In a letter dated September 30, 1947, Nehru wrote to Sardar Patel, expressing his dismay over what he believed was the ‘anti-Muslim' attitude of then Delhi Chief Commissioner Randhawa and the ‘appointment of pro-RSS persons as special magistrates'. Detailing a litany of complaints regarding the communal unrest in the city, Nehru said, “The information that has reached me from many sources indicates that the trouble in Delhi was caused by certain well-organised bands, some Sikh and some Hindu… The Hindu bands seemed to owe allegiance to RSS”. He then proceeded to claim that the police under Randhawa had failed (deliberately) to act against these perpetrators of crime.
On October 12, Sardar Patel responded with a strong defence of the Commissioner and pointed out that, contrary to Nehru's perception, the latter had spoken to him in “bitter terms about what the non-Muslims were doing against Muslims and expressed it as his firm opinion that Martial law should be imposed throughout Delhi in order to bring the Hindus and Sikhs to their senses”. Sardar Patel also quoted an opinion by a leading politician that the Muslims in Delhi “held a very high opinion of Randhawa”.
It is clear that Nehru was being tutored by people who wanted to malign Sardar Patel's reputation (after all, he was in charge of law and order) but keep the communal cauldron boiling.
It is this sense of fair play and a deep understanding of the ground situation which made Sardar Patel vehemently object to Nehru's suggestion to not allot houses, vacated by Muslims who had moved elsewhere in the wake of the communal strife, to Hindu residents in and around Delhi. The Prime Minister wanted the localities to be turned into compact Muslim mohallas. But Sardar Patel believed that creating exclusive Muslim localities militated against the secular ideology of the country. Besides, it would widen the chasm between the Hindus and the Muslims and trigger more communal violence. He pointed out that such a move would create mini-Pakistans and mini-Hindustans within the country. PN Chopra writes that “somehow or the other Nehru had developed the impression that the riots in Delhi were engineered by the (Hindu) refugees from West Pakistan”.
This incident is important because it became one of the key ‘instances' that Sardar Patel's detractors used to fabricate the Iron Man's image as that of being anti-Muslim. The other was his refrain that Muslims who had opted for India could not entertain what he called ‘dual loyalties'. He told them point-blank that they could go to Pakistan if they believed it was a better option for them. PN Chopra quotes one of the country's foremost political thinkers, DV Tamhankar, to illustrate this point. Tamhankar said, “He (Patel) was not wrong. With certain honourable exceptions, we have seen riots — when India came out victorious in Pakistan in hockey and in case of their failure people distributed sweets in Muslim dominated areas; jubilation in case of Pakistan Army's advance in war and dismay to the advance of Indian army…”
But, if these instances led vested interests to malign Sardar Patel as ‘communal', those that demonstrated his abiding faith in communal harmony and the protection of the Muslim community in the country, were ignored by his detractors. PN Chopra quotes an account by Sardar Patel's private secretary V Shankar about his boss's concern over threats to the shrine of Delhi's pre-eminent Sufi saint Nizamuddin Auliya. On hearing of the threat, “the Sardar wrapped his shawl round his neck and said, ‘let us go to the saint before we incur his displeasure.' (He) spent a good 45 minutes in the precincts… and told the Police Officer of the area, on pain of dismissal, that he would hold him responsible if anything untoward happened.”
PN Chopra reproduces correspondence that further underlines Sardar Patel's bipartisanship. In response to Rajendra Prasad's letter of May 14, 1948, which drew the Sardar's attention to the fear that the “RSS have a plan of creating trouble” (in Delhi on June 15), he wrote back, “As regards the RSS, both myself and the local administration have already initiated action to deal with them.” But Sardar Patel knew that others were planning trouble too, and he identified them in his letter. “The socialists are, of course, adept at fishing in troubled waters.”
Yet another fine example of Sardar Patel's commitment to a truly secular India, is evident from his response to BM Birla's following suggestion: “Is it not time that we should consider Hindustan as a Hindu state…” The Iron Man replied, “I do not think it will be possible to consider Hindustan as a Hindu state… The state must exist for all, irrespective of caste or creed.”