In a Pune special MP/MLA court, Satyaki Savarkar, grandnephew of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, delivered testimony that reaffirmed controversial aspects of the Hindutva leader’s life amid a criminal defamation suit against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. As per the report of Live Law, the case stems from Rahul Gandhi‘s speech in London, which Satyaki claims defamed Vinayak Savarkar. Under cross-examination, Satyaki openly acknowledged Savarkar’s five mercy petitions to the British and his pragmatic views on the cow.
Rahul Gandhi is facing a criminal defamation case over a speech he delivered in London in March 2023, in which he allegedly made damaging remarks about Hindutva ideologue Vinayak Savarkar. In that address to the Indian diaspora, Gandhi reportedly claimed that Savarkar had written in a book about himself and several friends beating up a Muslim man and feeling pleased about it, and then asked rhetorically whether this was not a cowardly act.
Satyaki Savarkar filed the defamation complaint, arguing that no such passage exists in Savarkar’s writings and that the remarks were false, malicious and defamatory.
Mercy petitions and common practice among prisoners
Satyaki Savarkar directly confirmed the petitions during questioning. “It is true to say that Savarkar had filed mercy petitions five times while he was in the Cellular Jail,” he stated. He contextualised this by noting, “That not only Savarkar but many political prisoners have sent similar petitions to the British Government,” portraying it as a widespread survival tactic in the infamous Cellular Jail.
WWII Army Recruitment appeal explained
The testimony also covered Savarkar’s acquitted role in Mahatma Gandhi‘s murder case and his appeal to join the British Army during World War II. Satyaki pushed back on criticisms: “It is not true to say that Savarkar is accused of appealing for recruitment into the British army during World War II. That this is not an accusation, but an objection, such objections are raised without understanding Savarkar’s role.”
He elaborated on the strategic motive, “The purpose was to provide young people with military training, firearms training and experience in holding various positions in the army by joining the then Indian Army, so that after India became independent, it would have its own armed forces at its disposal to maintain its independence.”
Satyaki Savarkar hailed the outcome, “It is a result of Savarkar’s shortsightedness that India was able to win when Pakistan attacked India immediately after independence because of trained Indian soldiers.” Note: Witnesses often frame such defenses amid historical debates linking to Congress and the Gandhi family.
Stance on cow, two-nation theory and revolutionary comparisons
Satyaki clarified Savarkar’s position on the cow, “It is true to say that reference is made to Savarkar’s view that the cow is a useful animal, not a God,” rejecting any divine attribution. On the two-nation theory, he refuted origins: “It is not true to say that, according to some historians, Savarkar is accused of having proposed the two-nation concept. That Savarkar made factual comments about the two-nation dispute, but the original concept was not his but was proposed by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.”
When questioned on Savarkar’s elevated status over figures like Bhagat Singh or Batukeshwar Dutt, Satyaki responded, “Debates and differences of opinion are part of every great man. It is the job of the Government of India to bring national glory.”
He advised critics, “The objections to Savarkar’s views on cows or military recruitment have been made without fully understanding his role. I would like those who object to this to first read all of Savarkar’s views. I would also like to say once again that revolutionists should not be compared with each other.”
Satyaki distanced Savarkar from contemporary groups- To queries about him inspiring the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) or aligned parties, he said he “isn’t aware of who the RSS and similar political parties consider their ideological inspiration.” On Savarkar’s Parliament portrait, he deferred, “It is the jurisdiction of the Government of India to decide the same.”
Regarding Bharat Ratna demands, Satyaki Savarkar noted governmental prerogative, “It is the Indian Government which takes decision on this and pointed out that Indira Gandhi, her son Rajiv Gandhi and her father Jawaharlal Nehru from the same family have been given Bharat Ratna.” He closed emphatically, “The Government of India takes the decision in national pride.”
The cross-examination by Gandhi’s counsel Milind Pawar continues on June 1, 2026 keeping this flashpoint in Indian political history alive.