By Anuj Dhar

There is evidence that Bhagwanji spent the better part of 30 years in India (from 1955) trying to hide his true identity.

A network of informants (mostly from Netaji's circle of friends and associates) helped him in that, reporting to him on everything that could breach his cover.
His own personal regimen on security entailed that he met, spoke and wrote to a few people, cut himself from his past life, remained indoors most of the time and shifted places frequently to avoid notice.

These are inferences pieced together from evidence Bhagwanji's belongings have yielded, and include, among other things:
A torch pencil, generally used by military personnel for map-making at night,
Maps of houses in which, not only he, but also his associates stayed,
Documents and newspaper clipping on Netaji's 'death' probe,
His followers' letters, and
His notes on margins of books.

The inferences are also drawn from interviews with few of his trusted followers who have survived him.

A helper, Rajkumar, says Bhagwanji had ordered his associates to return the letters that he sent them along with their replies. These letters were burnt later to destroy their record.

Bhagwanji also insisted on keeping all his meetings confidential. Those who disobeyed or breached that confidentiality were ostracised, much in the same way that Imdad Hussain and Samar Guha were debarred. Hussain, his helper, was sacked for identifying Bhagwanji as Netaji, and Samar Guha, a member of Parliament, was cut off for saying publicly that Netaji was alive.

Evidence also shows that Bhagwanji's followers - much like Netaji's men - were sworn to secrecy, which explains how Bhagwanji successfully hid from the world for 30 years. Indeed, his followers such as Dr P Banerjee, Durga Prasad, Srikant, Dilip Kumar Mukherjee remained tight lipped until his death in 1985.

A few notes that Bhagwanji left behind also show that he closely followed all reports on Netaji's death mystery. Many of his remarks were found on the margins of Shah Nawaz Committee Report. Also, many papers on the Khosla Commission were found among his belongings, which suggest his interest in all matters concerning Netaji.

Among his belongings were also many newspaper clippings on the Netaji's death mystery, including clippings of senior journalist Barun Sen Gupta's 1974 series published in the Anand Bazaar Patrika under the title: 'Was Taihoku plane crash planned?'

An important letter of July 24, 1973, by a person who went with the Khosla Commission of Inquiry to the 'Taiwan crash site', also points in the direction. In the letter, the person (he does not want to be named) reports to Bhagwanji: "We got only 15 days in Taihoku (Taipei). Formosa's task is over... I cannot write everything in this letter, if you permit, I can come over for a week."

In 1963, there were rumours that the sadhu of Shoulmari was Netaji. The rumours were so strong as to compel Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru to send a Member of Parliament, Surendra Mohan Ghosh, to look into it. Some letters - including a one that reports on a conversation between a revolutionary, Vishwanth Roy, and Ashok Sen - that were found among Bhagwanji's belongings, also show he was detailed on the matter.

Whereas all these are valid indicators, if the expert had not confirmed that Bhagwanji's and Netaji's handwritings are of 'common authorship', a nomadic hermit's demand for high-secrecy would have become difficult to explain.

(Even so, it still needs to be answered what compelled Bhagwanji to remain in hiding in India - an answer that will have to await its turn and right moment).