Every year, September 17 should remind us of one of independent India’s most decisive moments—the liberation of Hyderabad from the clutches of an autocratic Nizam and his fanatical Razakar militia. Yet for decades, the Congress twisted this historical truth, deliberately downplaying the heroism of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and the Indian Army. Instead of calling it what it was—a liberation—they sanitised it into “integration.” This wasn’t semantics; it was a cold political calculation to appease minority vote banks.
Rightly, the BJP has kept the flame alive, marking September 17 as Hyderabad Liberation Day even as successive Congress and BRS governments ignored or resisted it. This year, the occasion assumes special significance, with Union Defence Minister Rajnath Singh leading the celebrations. The enthusiasm is unmistakable, especially in Telangana, where people disillusioned by decades of Congress’s appeasement politics and BRS’s misrule are demanding clarity, justice, and dignity in how their history is remembered.
To understand why, we must revisit the turbulent backdrop. When the British Parliament passed the Indian Independence Act in July 1947, princely states were given the choice to accede to either India or Pakistan. Most rulers recognised the inevitability of joining one dominion. But the Nizam of Hyderabad, Osman Ali Khan, fancied himself above history. He declared that his kingdom would remain independent, even writing to Mountbatten to reject accession. His argument—that since India and Pakistan were divided along communal lines, Hyderabad too could stand apart—was less about principle and more about preserving his feudal grip, even as his Razakars unleashed horrific massacres on the Hindu majority.\
This was not just arrogance; it was dangerous. Hyderabad had an overwhelmingly Hindu population ruled by a Muslim dynasty, backed by the militant Razakars of Qasim Razvi and the Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen. Their campaign of terror—arson, loot, killings—particularly against Hindus, had turned Hyderabad into a cauldron of violence. The Nizam’s refusal to join India was not a neutral stand but a threat to national unity and internal peace.
Sardar Patel, India’s Iron Man, saw through this. Unlike Nehru, who hesitated and toyed with “negotiations,” Patel was clear that Hyderabad could not be allowed to remain a festering wound in the heart of India. The Indian Army launched “Operation Polo” in September 1948. In just five days, the Razakars were crushed, the Nizam’s forces disarmed, and Hyderabad finally freed. On September 17, 1948, the Nizam surrendered.
This is where the distortion begins. The Congress of Nehruvian vintage, obsessed with minority appeasement, began calling it “integration.” But integration implies consent—a voluntary coming together. Was it voluntary? Absolutely not. The Nizam resisted till the end, signing a standstill agreement to delay the inevitable. The Indian Army had to march into Hyderabad and force the surrender. That is liberation, plain and simple.
Patel himself told the Constituent Assembly on October 12, 1949, that Operation Polo’s objective was the “liberation of Hyderabad.” He never used the word “integration.” The Congress’s attempt to rewrite this is an insult to the martyrs—the peasants, freedom fighters, and soldiers—who laid down their lives to ensure Hyderabad would be part of a free, democratic India.
It was not just an elite political tussle. Ordinary people in Telangana bore the brunt of Razakar atrocities. Villages were torched, women brutalized, and Hindus targeted for resisting the Nizam’s autocracy. The peasant uprisings against feudal oppression were brutally suppressed until the Indian Army’s arrival ended the nightmare. The Nizam himself admitted later, in 1950, that the Razakars had taken over the state “by methods reminiscent of Hitlerite Germany,” spreading terror against both Muslims and Hindus who opposed them.
How then can anyone justify calling this “integration”? Hyderabad was freed from tyranny—it was a liberation in every sense of the word.
For decades, Congress governments shied away from celebrating September 17 as Liberation Day, worried it might “offend” minorities. The BRS government, too, continued this appeasement. But truth has a way of resurfacing. People of Telangana have lived long enough under governments that dilute history for political expediency. They now see through the hypocrisy.
The BJP, by observing September 17 as Liberation Day, is not rewriting history but restoring it. It is giving due respect to Patel, the Indian Army, and the countless unsung heroes who made Hyderabad’s freedom possible.
The story of Hyderabad between 1947 and 1950 is a lesson in clarity versus confusion. The Nizam wanted independence. The Razakars wanted an Islamic state. Nehru wanted to delay. Patel wanted India to be united. History is clear: Hyderabad was liberated, not integrated.
The people of Telangana, having endured years of distorted narratives, deserve this truth. As the state heads toward another round of political change, it is only fitting that the real story of Hyderabad’s liberation is celebrated with pride. Not for political mileage, but for historical justice.
Seventy-seven years later, the least we can do is call September 17 by its true name—Hyderabad Liberation Day. (The author is a senior BJP state leader)
