A comprehensive review of the Hunter Committee’s investigation into the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre, examining its findings, the defense of General Dyer, and its enduring impact on Indian nationalism.

Formation and Purpose of the Hunter Committee in Post-Jallianwala Bagh India

• In the wake of the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, the Secretary of State for India, Edwin Montagu, ordered the formation of an inquiry committee on October 14, 1919.
• The Disorders Inquiry Committee, commonly known as the Hunter Committee after its chairman, Lord William Hunter, was tasked with investigating disturbances in Bombay, Delhi, and Punjab, as well as the government's response to these events.
• The committee comprised three Indian members: Sir Chimanlal Harilal Setalvad, Vice-Chancellor of Bombay University and advocate; Pandit Jagat Narayan, lawyer and Member of the Legislative Council of the United Provinces; and Sardar Sahibzada Sultan Ahmad Khan, lawyer from Gwalior State.

Hunter Committee's Investigations and Findings on Jallianwala Bagh Tragedy

• The committee conducted meetings in Delhi and took statements from witnesses in various cities, including Delhi, Ahmedabad, Bombay, and Lahore.
• General Dyer, who defended his actions, argued that his intention was to instill fear and reduce the moral stature of the 'rebels'. He admitted to not attending to the wounded, considering it outside his duties.
• The final report, released in March 1920, unanimously condemned Dyer's actions as excessive and inhumane. It criticized the lack of prior notice, the prolonged firing, and Dyer’s intent to create a moral effect. The committee found Dyer had exceeded his authority and that there was no conspiracy in Punjab.
• The Indian members added that public notices were poorly disseminated, there were innocent individuals in the crowd, and Dyer's actions were deemed inhuman and un-British.

Aftermath of the Hunter Committee Report and Global Reactions

• Despite the condemnation, Dyer faced no penal or disciplinary actions due to the Indemnity Act, which protected officers involved. The Army Council upheld this decision.
• In England, Winston Churchill and former Prime Minister H.H. Asquith condemned the massacre, leading to Dyer's dismissal. He was recalled to England, receiving his pension, but no legal action was taken against him.
• Support for Dyer came from some British quarters, including the House of Lords and the Morning Post, which raised funds for him. He was even honored by the clergy of the Golden Temple, prompting the Gurudwara Reform movement in India.
• The Indian National Congress formed its own committee, which criticized Dyer’s actions as inhumane and unjustified the martial law in Punjab.