Disclaimer: This article is a historical analysis based on documented facts and aims to explore socio-economic contexts in pre-independence India. It does not endorse or condone any actions, ideologies, or individuals discussed, including the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi.
The story of Nathuram Godse, the man who assassinated Mahatma Gandhi on January 30, 1948, is often told through the lens of politics and ideology. Yet a lesser-known detail—his possession of two life insurance policies—offers a unique perspective on the socio-economic landscape of 1948 India. In an era when life insurance was extraordinarily rare, Godse’s access to such financial tools suggests connections to a privileged elite. Even today, with only about 3% of Indians holding life insurance, this detail underscores the exclusivity of his network and raises questions about the influences behind his actions.
Life Insurance in 1948: A Rare Commodity
In 1948, India was navigating the aftermath of independence and partition, with a population of approximately 350 million. Life insurance, introduced in the 19th century by British firms like Oriental Life Insurance (est. 1818), was a niche product, accessible to an estimated 0.1% of the population—likely fewer than 350,000 people. These policyholders were typically urban professionals, colonial administrators, or affluent individuals with Western education, often from upper-caste backgrounds due to historical access to resources. The Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) was not established until 1956, leaving the market to private insurers serving a small, elite clientele.
Historical records, including Justice G.D. Khosla’s account of Godse’s appeal trial, note that Godse held two life insurance policies: one for ₹2,000 and another for ₹3,000. On January 13, 1948, he designated Narayan Apte’s wife, Champa, as the beneficiary of the first policy, and on January 14, he assigned the second to his brother’s wife. In 1948, ₹5,000 was a significant sum, equivalent to several years’ income for most Indians, making these policies a marker of financial sophistication. The timing, just weeks before Gandhi’s assassination, suggests deliberate planning, likely informed by someone familiar with financial systems.
Life insurance in 1948 required not only funds but also awareness of complex financial products, typically gained through urban networks of bankers, lawyers, or businessmen. For Godse, a middle-class newspaper editor, such access points to connections beyond his immediate circumstances.
Godse’s Network: The Hindu Mahasabha and Urban Elites
Nathuram Godse, born into a Chitpavan Brahmin family in Maharashtra, came from a community known for its historical prominence in education and administration. His father was a postal worker, and Godse himself worked as a carpenter and editor, roles that suggest modest means. However, his involvement with the Hindu Mahasabha, a Hindu nationalist organization, placed him in contact with influential figures, including Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, a prominent ideologue.
The Hindu Mahasabha drew support from urban professionals, businessmen, and upper-caste intellectuals, particularly in Maharashtra and North India. Historical accounts, such as those from the Kapur Commission (1965–66), which investigated Gandhi’s assassination, highlight the organization’s reliance on donations from affluent supporters. While specific names of Godse’s advisors are not documented, the Mahasabha’s network likely included individuals with knowledge of financial tools like life insurance, possibly lawyers or bankers who facilitated such arrangements.
Hindu Mahasabha took funding from the princely states and supported them to remain independent even after the independence of India. V. D. Savarkar particularly hailed the Hindu dominated states as the 'bedrock of Hindu power' and defended their despotic powers, referring to them as the 'citadels of organised Hindu power'. He particularly hailed the princely states such as Mysore State, Travancore, Oudh and Baroda State as 'progressive Hindu states'.
Narayan Apte, a co-conspirator and fellow Chitpavan Brahmin, provides another clue. Educated at Bombay University and married into a reportedly influential Pune family, Apte’s background suggests ties to social capital. The designation of his wife as a beneficiary indicates Godse’s intent to support key allies, possibly advised by someone within their circle familiar with insurance as a protective measure.
Life Insurance Today: A Persistent Divide
The rarity of life insurance in 1948 finds echoes in modern India. According to the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI), only about 3% of India’s 1.4 billion people—roughly 42 million—held life insurance policies as of recent estimates. Despite the growth of LIC and private insurers, low financial literacy, income disparities, and cultural preferences for informal savings limit penetration, particularly in rural areas.
This modern context highlights the exclusivity of Godse’s policies in 1948. If only 3% of Indians have insurance today, with widespread access to financial institutions, the figure in 1948, when India’s economy was far smaller, was minuscule. Godse’s ability to secure two policies underscores his access to a rarefied network, likely urban elites within the Hindu Mahasabha who bridged activism and financial knowledge.
A Historical Insight
Godse’s life insurance policies offer a window into the socio-economic divides of 1948 India. They reveal a man connected to a network of urban elites who provided not just ideological support but also practical guidance in navigating financial systems. While the exact individuals who advised Godse remain unknown, the policies themselves speak to the privilege of his circle, a stark contrast to the millions for whom such tools were unimaginable.
This article aims to illuminate a historical curiosity, not to judge or sensationalize. Godse’s actions remain a tragic chapter in India’s history, but details like his insurance policies remind us how access to resources—then and now—shapes the course of events.
Sources: Justice G.D. Khosla’s “The Murder of the Mahatma” (1963); IRDAI reports on insurance penetration; historical accounts from the Kapur Commission (1965–66); general economic data on colonial India.
