Political power is often a powerful way of creating legacy by highlighting elements of history that fit the story of those in power. For critics, BJPWhoever is now in power both at the Center and in the state is using her double-engine efficacy to unilaterally whitewash the complex history of the partition of Bengal and the legacy of Syama Prasad Mukherjee in Bengal politics. For supporters, this is not reinvention but restitution, proper recognition of a chapter of Indian history that, they believe, was deliberately marginalised.This makes June 23rd this year even more of a remembrance day.The BJP’s observance of June 23 as Syama Prasad Mookerjee’s “sacrifice day”, marking his death in custody in Jammu and Kashmir in 1953, is now part of a larger political project. Three days earlier, the Bengal government had officially marked June 20 as West Bengal Day for the first time. The decision to observe Mukherjee’s birth anniversary on July 6 as a state holiday adds another date to the sequence. The proposed 125-foot statue in Kolkata, the planned memorial at his ancestral home in Jiraat and the renaming of Suhrawardy Avenue as Gopal Mukherjee Road are pieces of the same puzzle.Tribute by Prime Minister on 23rd June Narendra Modi And Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari underlined Mukherjee’s deep importance in the Centre’s ecosystem. Modi praised him, calling him “a distinguished patriot, scholar and statesman” who dedicated his life to the development of India. He invoked Mukherjee’s “strong faith, courage in public life and commitment to the national interest” and said his sacrifice remains etched in the collective memory. The official described Mukherjee as a “respectable nationalist leader”, the founder of the Jana Sangh and a man who dedicated his life to protecting the unity and integrity of India. Most importantly, he described him as the “Father of West Bengal”.Since 2023, the BJP at the Center has been celebrating June 20 as West Bengal Day. Raj Bhavan also marked it. Mamata Banerjee’s government rejected June 20 as the foundation day of Bengal and chose Poila Baisakh, the first day of the Bengali calendar, as Bangla Day, locating Bengal’s identity in culture rather than partition.From the BJP’s perspective, the celebration of 20 June is a rectification of the historical neglect of the day Bengali Hindus gained a state within India, a move the party believes was made possible because of Mukherjee’s politics.
The story behind June 20
BJP’s June 20 story cannot be understood without exploring the long history of the partition of Bengal.Bengal had already undergone a partition in 1905, when the British divided the province, officially for administrative reasons but politically in a manner that weakened Bengali nationalism. That partition was fiercely opposed by nationalist intellectuals of Bengal, including Rabindranath Tagore, and was reversed in 1911. The memory of that upset became a part of Bengal’s political pride.By 1947 the political situation had changed. The 1946 elections confirmed the dominance of the Muslim League in the Muslim-majority politics of Bengal. Husain Shaheed Suhrawardy became the last Prime Minister of undivided Bengal. The Direct Action Day violence in Calcutta in August 1946 and the subsequent violence in Noakhali broke down whatever trust was left between the communities.In April 1947, Suhrawardy, already called the “Butcher of Bengal” by critics, put forward the idea of an undivided, sovereign Bengal that would join neither India nor Pakistan. Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose’s elder brother Sarat Chandra Bose also supported the broader idea, although Netaji’s grandson Chandra Bose argues that Sarat Bose hoped that the sovereign state could later join India.For Mukherjee and the Hindu Mahasabha, this was not romantic Bengal nationalism but a trap. He believed that this would leave Hindu-majority West Bengal inside a Muslim-majority state, possibly outside India, and vulnerable to Muslim League dominance. After the violence of 1946, that fear resonated deeply among many Bengali Hindus. Mukherjee’s argument was blunt. If India has to be divided then Bengal will also have to be divided.
What really happened on June 20, 1947?
On June 20, 1947, the Bengal Legislative Assembly voted on the future of the province under the 3 June Plan or Mountbatten Plan. At the joint meeting, the members voted 126–90 that if Bengal remained united, it should join a new and separate Constituent Assembly, which would effectively belong to Pakistan. After this the matter was resolved through sectional votes. The Muslim-majority community voted 106–35 against the partition of Bengal and, if partition occurred, voted 107–34 to join the new Constituent Assembly. The non-Muslim majority voted 58–21 for partition and, in that case, for joining the Constituent Assembly of India.Under the June 3 plan, if any section voted for partition, Bengal would be divided. So June 20th became the last day. For the non-Muslim-majority class, this was a difficult, pragmatic choice, made amidst the bitter realization that a united Bengal was no longer a viable political future.
Why did Modi choose Tarakeshwar for June 20 message?
In Tarakeswar, Prime Minister Narendra Modi on June 20 gave a national overview of the BJP, linking the past with the present and the future. He accused the Congress of succumbing to “conspiratorial forces” during Partition and said an attempt was once made to make the entire Bengal a part of Pakistan. He spoke of Bengal getting a “new freshness”, as if the state was finally freed from the old shackles.
Tarakeshwar was not accidental to that frame. As well as being a popular Shaivite pilgrimage site, it holds another memory for Hindu nationalists. In April 1947, before the Bengal Assembly elections, the Bengali Hindu Mahasabha met near Tarakeshwar under the leadership of Mukherjee. The demand for a separate West Bengal that would remain with India took organized form there.At a time when Sarat Bose was campaigning for an undivided Bengal, Mukherjee called for a clear break. The Hindu Mahasabha may not have been numerically strong in the assembly, but Hindu nationalists argue that Mukherjee had enough political legitimacy to build consensus among Hindu MPs and change the terms of the debate.
Why does BJP want to keep Shyama Prasad in more focus?
Mukherjee was not only the man whom the BJP credits for the creation of West Bengal. He was also the founder of Bharatiya Jana Sangh, the ideological predecessor of the BJP. After independence, he joined Nehru’s cabinet as Minister of Industries and Supplies, later resigning, and became one of the early national faces of opposition politics.Mukherjee died in custody in Jammu and Kashmir in 1953. He had gone there to protest against the permit system and the special constitutional arrangement of that time. The slogan associated with his politics, One country cannot have two Constitutions, two heads and two flags, later became part of the BJP’s long campaign against Article 370. His death in custody turned June 23 into a day of sacrifice for the Sangh Parivar.The public assembly of Bengal has long been filled with Tagore, Vivekananda, Netaji, Nazrul, Vidyasagar and Bankim. Mukherjee was present, but rarely, as the central founder of modern West Bengal. BJP wants rapid change.
Why does changing the name of Suhrawardy Road matter?
The Suhrawardy Avenue-Gopal Mukherjee Road dispute is related to the same ideological viewpoint. Husain Shaheed Suhrawardy has been linked by critics to the Great Calcutta Murders of 1946 and allegations that his government failed to protect civilians when Calcutta burned. Gopal Chandra Mukherjee, or Gopal Path, is remembered as the man who organized resistance and protected the Hindu neighbourhood.But here, history complicates the task. Municipal-history accounts say that Suhrawardy Avenue was named after Sir Hasan Suhrawardy, the first Muslim Vice-Chancellor of Calcutta University, and not after his nephew HS Suhrawardy. That distinction matters historically. However, politically, the name Suhrawardy now evokes painful memories. When the objective is to send a clear political message, facts often travel cloaked in symbolism.
Why do opposition parties call it selective history?
The opposition believes that the BJP is building a majoritarian narrative around a complex historical moment. His argument is that the BJP is not reclaiming history but is selectively arranging it to suit its politics.CPM’s campaign to put the people’s history in the people’s court is an attempt to take the counter-narrative to the neighbourhood. His argument is that June 20 cannot be separated from the displacement, bloodshed and uprooting of millions of people.Congress has also challenged the Mukherjee-centric version. The rationale is that the BJP is reducing a major legislative process to a one-man story. Congress leaders say most of those who supported West Bengal’s place in India were from the party, with Communist members like Mukherjee and Jyoti Basu being part of the broader list.Speaking to TOI, Chandra Bose questioned what difference Mukherjee’s vote made to the larger equation. Expressing regret over the partition of Bengal, he said the credit or blame could not be given to Mukherjee alone, arguing that he was a minor player in the larger Congress-dominated ecosystem.There is also the paradox of August 14th. If Partition Horrors Remembrance Day is celebrated as Trauma Day at the national level, opponents ask, how can June 20, part of the same Partition process, be celebrated as Bengal’s birthday?
BJP’s Bengal story is now in motion
BJP’s Bengal story is woven around a narrative of civilizational pride and historical decay. It says Bengal was wounded by partition, weakened by appeasement, stripped of its nationalist memory and taught to forget its defenders. Even on Syama Prasad’s death anniversary, his biographer and BJP leader Tathagata Roy reiterated this narrative, saying that the national leader has not received due recognition. According to Roy, “the previous state government did not know he existed and they were jealous of him”.
How is Mukherjee’s memory celebrated?
The party, which critics have long accused of bringing outside ideology into the state, now has the opportunity to say that it is merely reclaiming Bengal’s own repressed history. Opposition leaders such as Chandra Bose oppose the title of “Father of West Bengal”, asking how states can have their own fathers and what impact such a claim has on the idea of India. He also questions why Mukherjee did not take adequate steps to protect Hindus left in East Pakistan after partition and instead focused on Jammu and Kashmir. Bose sadly says that if Netaji had been present in 1947, India would not have been divided.At the same time, Chandra Bose and other critics accept Mukherjee’s scholarship. This can predict the BJP’s next move to push the conversation into the academic arena. Bengal Higher Education Minister Jagannath Chattopadhyay has said that in the “new Bengal” after the BJP comes to power, no “inconvenient narrative” of history will be ignored and the contribution of Syama Prasad Mukherjee, forgotten for almost eight decades, will now be discussed. Asserting that the government would not interfere in the university’s curriculum, she said she wanted a debate on Mukherjee on the right and the left, calling such debate a sign of health in higher education.It is clear that Bengal’s past is being reconstituted. And in that realignment, Syama Prasad Mukherjee is being moved from the margins of Bengal’s official memory to the center of its new political story.
