Sanjay Gandhi’s Shadow Rule: What the Shah Commission Revealed About the Emergency Years

Fifty years ago, on the midnight of June 25, 1975, India entered one of its darkest political chapters—the Emergency. Declared by then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, it suspended civil liberties, censored the press, and imprisoned opposition leaders. But behind the scenes, beyond the formal apparatus of state, another power center emerged: a young, unelected man who held no official position—Sanjay Gandhi.

At just 28 years old, Sanjay Gandhi, the younger son of Indira Gandhi, became one of the most powerful men in India. Around him coalesced a close-knit coterie of loyalists, officials, and political aspirants, often referred to as the “Sanjay gang.” Their influence was so pervasive that many major decisions during the Emergency—from slum demolitions to forced sterilizations—bore their imprint. Years later, the Shah Commission, set up in 1977 to investigate Emergency excesses, would put on record the chilling extent of this extra-constitutional control.

As the country marks 50 years since the Emergency, it is worth revisiting who the Sanjay gang were, how they functioned, and what the Shah Commission revealed about their unprecedented grip on power.

Who Were the “Sanjay Gang”?

The Sanjay gang wasn’t a formal group with portfolios or official titles. Rather, it was a loose network of Sanjay Gandhi’s trusted aides, loyal bureaucrats, and political supporters who acted with impunity during the Emergency. The most prominent among them included:

• Bansi Lal: Then Defence Minister and a loyalist of Indira and Sanjay Gandhi, Bansi Lal allegedly provided political cover for many of Sanjay’s actions.

• Om Mehta: Minister of State for Home Affairs, often considered the "eyes and ears" of Sanjay in the government.

• Navin Chawla: A young bureaucrat, later found by the Shah Commission to have acted in ways that undermined civil service neutrality.

• Rukhsana Sultana: A close associate of Sanjay Gandhi, she became infamous for aggressively pushing forced sterilization drives, especially among the Muslim population in Delhi.

• Jagmohan: Then Vice-Chairman of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), associated with large-scale slum demolitions in the name of urban beautification.

While Indira Gandhi was the formal head of government, it was Sanjay Gandhi and his “gang” who were increasingly perceived as wielding real power, often bypassing parliamentary processes or established bureaucratic channels.

Five-Point Programme: A Tool for Control?

Sanjay Gandhi introduced a Five-Point Programme during the Emergency—aimed, in theory, at national development. It included:

1. Family planning

2. Tree planting

3. Abolition of dowry

4. Eradication of casteism

5. Promotion of literacy

While noble on paper, these points quickly became instruments of coercion. The most controversial of these was the family planning drive, which turned into a campaign of forced sterilizations. Under pressure to meet quotas, local officials and police resorted to brutal methods—detaining men, threatening rations, and bulldozing homes. Many victims were from marginalized communities who had no recourse to justice.

The Shah Commission later noted that the programme was carried out with “a zeal bordering on the fanatical,” and blamed Sanjay Gandhi and his associates for turning it into a vehicle of terror.

Shah Commission: A Rare Exercise in Accountability

After the defeat of Indira Gandhi in the 1977 elections, the newly elected Janata government set up the Shah Commission under Justice J.C. Shah to investigate the misuse of authority during the Emergency.

The commission sat for over a year and examined nearly 10,000 pages of testimonies and documents. Its findings were explosive.

The Shah Commission described the functioning of the Sanjay gang as "a government within a government.” It revealed how ministers and civil servants bypassed constitutional norms to obey the informal commands of Sanjay Gandhi or those close to him.

Among the key revelations:

• On Forced Sterilizations: The commission found that the sterilization campaign, especially in states like Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, was marred by coercion. Doctors admitted to performing hundreds of vasectomies in a single day under pressure. In one case, it noted, 53 people were operated on in a school building without anesthesia.

• On Slum Demolitions: In Delhi, entire settlements were razed in what was termed a “beautification drive.” Thousands were rendered homeless with little notice. The commission criticized the DDA’s actions and noted that Sanjay Gandhi had personally intervened in some demolitions without due process.

• On Press Censorship: The commission recorded evidence of newspapers being threatened, power supplies cut off to presses, and journalists arrested for dissent. It noted that Navin Chawla had played a key role in silencing critical voices, acting in ways “repugnant to the principles of a democratic society.”

• On Civil Liberties: The Shah Commission was especially scathing about the use of preventive detention laws like MISA (Maintenance of Internal Security Act), under which thousands of opposition leaders, activists, and students were arrested without trial. It stated that “arrests were often made to please those in power, without any regard to law or propriety.”

The report also concluded that Sanjay Gandhi, though unelected and without constitutional authority, exercised “unjustified power” and was responsible for many of the worst abuses of the Emergency period.

The Aftermath: Silence, Survival, and Political Resurrection

Despite the damning report, the Shah Commission’s findings were never acted upon in any meaningful way. When Indira Gandhi returned to power in 1980, the Commission's recommendations were shelved. Sanjay Gandhi himself died in a tragic plane crash that same year.

Many of his associates went on to have long political careers. Navin Chawla later became the Chief Election Commissioner of India. Jagmohan served as a Union Minister and Governor. The lack of accountability for Emergency-era abuses remains a blemish on India’s democratic conscience.

The Shah Commission, in its conclusion, warned: “The evidence shows that rule of law was totally negated and the functioning of the government was rendered entirely arbitrary.” That stark warning continues to resonate, especially as conversations about constitutional morality and democratic resilience are revived in today’s political discourse.

Lessons, 50 Years Later

The story of the Sanjay gang is not just a tale of political overreach. It is a reminder of how institutions can be bypassed, how ambition can override legality, and how power, when unchecked, can lead to suffering on a national scale.

As India reflects on 50 years since the Emergency, the memory of the Shah Commission report stands as a document of resistance. It offers an unflinching look at how democratic institutions were manipulated and reminds us why accountability, transparency, and constitutional fidelity must remain non-negotiable.

The Emergency might be history, but its warnings remain vividly alive.