Indigo Important Questions – Class 12 English Flamingo Chapter 5

In this post we have given the Important Questions of Class 12 English Flamingo Chapter 5 Indigo (by Louis Fischer). These are useful for students preparing for their Class 12 board exams.

इस पोस्ट में कक्षा 12 अंग्रेज़ी (Flamingo) के पाठ 5 Indigo के महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न दिए गए हैं। यह उन सभी विद्यार्थियों के लिए उपयोगी है जो इस वर्ष कक्षा 12 की बोर्ड परीक्षा देने वाले हैं।

Very Short Answer Questions (1 mark)

Q1. Who was Rajkumar Shukla?

Ans: He was a poor, illiterate but determined sharecropper of Champaran who met Gandhi at the Lucknow Congress session and convinced him to visit Champaran.

Q2. Where is Champaran situated?

Ans: Champaran is a district of Bihar at the foot of the Himalayas, close to Nepal.

Q3. What was the main cash crop of Champaran, and how much land had to be put under it?

Ans: The main cash crop was indigo. Every tenant had to grow it on 15 per cent (three-twentieths) of his land.

Q4. What made the landlords seek compensation from the sharecroppers for releasing them from the 15 per cent arrangement?

Ans: The landlords came to know that Germany had developed synthetic indigo. After that, they got the sharecroppers to sign agreements to pay compensation for being freed from the 15 per cent arrangement.

Q5. How did the commissioner of Tirhut treat Gandhi?

Ans: According to Gandhi, the commissioner bullied him and told him to leave Tirhut at once.

Q6. What order did Gandhi receive at Motihari, and what did he do about it?

Ans: He was served an official notice to leave Champaran immediately. He signed the receipt and wrote on it that he would not obey the order.

Q7. What refund did Gandhi finally accept from the planters?

Ans: He accepted a 25 per cent refund, although he had asked for 50 per cent.

Q8. Which three medicines were available to the doctor in Champaran?

Ans: Castor oil, quinine and sulphur ointment.

Short Answer Questions (2 marks)

Q9. How did Rajkumar Shukla’s persistence finally bring Gandhi to Champaran?

Ans: After the Lucknow session, Shukla went wherever Gandhi went, even to his ashram near Ahmedabad, and kept asking him for weeks to “fix a date”. When Gandhi finally asked him to meet him in Calcutta, Shukla was already waiting at the agreed spot when Gandhi arrived. From there the two set out together, via Patna, for Champaran.

Q10. Why was Gandhi not allowed to draw water from the well at Rajendra Prasad’s house?

Ans: The servants knew Shukla as a poor peasant who often troubled their master about the indigo sharecroppers, so they took his companion to be another peasant. They did not let Gandhi draw water because they feared that drops from his bucket might pollute the whole well, without knowing whether he was an untouchable or not.

Q11. Why did Gandhi first go to Muzzafarpur instead of going straight to Champaran?

Ans: Gandhi wanted fuller and more reliable information about conditions in Champaran than Shukla could give. So he contacted Professor J.B. Kripalani and collected facts from the local lawyers before moving on.

Q12. How did people in small towns feel about supporters of home rule at that time?

Ans: In smaller places, Indians were afraid to show any sympathy for people who supported home rule. That is why Gandhi thought it remarkable that Professor Malkani, a government teacher, gave him shelter.

Q13. What effect did the peasants’ gathering at Motihari have on the officials?

Ans: The officials found they could not manage the crowd without Gandhi’s help, and he helped them control it. By being polite and friendly, he gave them clear proof that their power, which had been feared and never questioned, could be challenged by Indians.

Q14. Why did the lawyers who had come to advise Gandhi decide to go to jail with him?

Ans: At first the lawyers said they would go home if Gandhi was jailed. When Gandhi asked them about the injustice to the sharecroppers, they discussed it and felt that if a complete stranger was ready to go to prison for the peasants, it would be shameful desertion for them, who lived nearby and claimed to serve the peasants, to go home. So they agreed to follow him to jail.

Q15. Why did Gandhi agree to a 25 per cent refund when he had asked for 50 per cent?

Ans: Gandhi said the amount was not the main thing. What mattered was that the landlords had been made to give up part of the money and, with it, part of their prestige. The planters had acted as if they were above the law; now the peasants saw that they had rights and defenders, and they became brave.

Q16. Why did Gandhi refuse to let Charles Freer Andrews stay and help in Champaran?

Ans: Gandhi told the lawyers that wanting an Englishman on their side showed the weakness of their hearts. Their cause was just, so they had to depend on themselves and not lean on Andrews simply because he was English.

Long Answer Questions (4 marks)

Q17. Why did Gandhi regard the Champaran episode as a turning point in his life?

Ans: Gandhi modestly called his action an ordinary thing; he said he had only declared that the British could not order him about in his own country. Yet the episode was very important. It was in 1917 that he decided to press for the departure of the British. At Champaran, the peasants’ spontaneous gathering at the court began their freedom from fear of the British, and when the case was dropped, civil disobedience succeeded for the first time in modern India. The episode also showed Gandhi’s typical pattern of linking politics with the practical, daily problems of millions of ordinary people.

Q18. How did Gandhi influence the lawyers? Give examples.

Ans: At Muzzafarpur, Gandhi criticised the lawyers for taking large fees from poor sharecroppers. He told them that courts were useless for peasants who were so crushed and frightened, and that their real relief lay in freedom from fear. Later, when Rajendra Prasad, Brij Kishor Babu, Maulana Mazharul Huq and other lawyers came to him, he asked what they would do if he went to jail. They said they would return home. Gandhi then asked them about the injustice to the sharecroppers. After discussing it, the lawyers felt that going home while a stranger risked prison for the peasants would be shameful desertion, and they offered to go to jail with him. Gandhi then declared that the battle of Champaran was won.

Q19. How do we know that ordinary people also contributed to the freedom movement?

Ans: It was Rajkumar Shukla, an unlettered but determined peasant, who brought Gandhi to Champaran through months of effort. Thousands of peasants gathered around the Motihari court on their own, even though they knew nothing of Gandhi’s work in South Africa; they had only heard that a Mahatma who wished to help them was in trouble. This gathering marked the beginning of their freedom from fear of the British. Later, about ten thousand peasants gave statements to the inquiry. All this supports the chapter’s sub-theme: the contribution of unknown Indians to the freedom struggle.

Q20. Explain the indigo-sharecropping system in Champaran and the effect of synthetic indigo on it.

Ans: Most of the farmland in Champaran was made up of large estates owned by Englishmen and farmed by Indian tenants. Indigo was the chief cash crop. Through a long-term contract, every tenant had to grow indigo on 15 per cent of his land and give the whole indigo crop as rent. When the landlords learnt that Germany had developed synthetic indigo, they made the sharecroppers sign agreements to pay compensation for being freed from this arrangement. Many peasants found the arrangement irksome and signed willingly; those who resisted hired lawyers, and the landlords hired thugs. When the news of synthetic indigo reached the peasants who had signed, they wanted their money back. The text does not directly state the landlords’ motive, but asks the reader to think about what synthetic indigo would do to the price of natural indigo.

Q21. Describe the trial at Motihari and its result.

Ans: After disobeying the order to leave Champaran, Gandhi was summoned to court. The next morning Motihari was full of peasants who had gathered on their own around the court. The officials could not control them without Gandhi’s help, and he helped them. The government was confused, and the prosecutor asked the judge to postpone the trial. Gandhi objected to the delay and read a statement pleading guilty. He spoke of a “conflict of duties” and said he had obeyed the voice of conscience, and he asked for the penalty. The magistrate asked him to furnish bail for a two-hour recess; Gandhi refused, and the judge released him without bail, later saying he would give the judgment after several days. A few days later the Lieutenant-Governor ordered the case to be dropped, and civil disobedience won for the first time in modern India.

Q22. What qualities of a good leader does Gandhi show in this chapter?

Ans: Gandhi shows humility and patience by letting an illiterate peasant draw him into an unknown cause. He gathers facts himself before acting, going first to Muzzafarpur. He shows courage by openly disobeying an unjust order and pleading guilty. He leads by example; his readiness to go to jail makes the lawyers feel that going home would be shameful desertion. He is firm yet practical: he refuses Andrews’s help so that his followers become self-reliant, and he accepts 25 per cent to settle the dispute. Finally, he cares about people’s daily lives, opening schools and arranging a doctor and sanitation work.

Q23. What constructive work did Gandhi do in Champaran apart from winning the legal battle, and why?

Ans: Gandhi was never satisfied with only big political or economic solutions. He saw the social and cultural backwardness of the Champaran villages and wanted to improve it at once. He asked for teachers; Mahadev Desai, Narhari Parikh and their wives came forward, more volunteers came from Bombay, Poona and other places, and his son Devadas and wife Kasturbai also arrived. Primary schools were opened in six villages, and Kasturbai taught cleanliness and community sanitation. Since health conditions were very bad, Gandhi got a doctor to serve for six months with castor oil, quinine and sulphur ointment. Noticing the dirty clothes of the women, he asked Kasturbai to talk to them. This shows that Gandhi’s loyalty was to living human beings, not just to political ideas.

Q24. “Freedom from fear is more important than legal justice for the poor.” Do you agree? Discuss with reference to the chapter.

Ans: Yes, the chapter supports this view. Gandhi told the Muzzafarpur lawyers that courts were useless for peasants who were crushed and terrified, and that their real relief was to be free from fear. The case against Gandhi was not won through a court judgment; it was dropped by the Lieutenant-Governor, and the peasants’ gathering at Motihari is called the start of their freedom from fear of the British. After the settlement, the peasants realised they had rights and defenders, and they gained courage. Within a few years, indigo sharecropping ended. This shows that legal justice means little without freedom from fear, while fearless people can claim their own rights.

Long Answer Questions (6 marks)

Q25. Trace Gandhi’s method of working in Champaran and show how it reflects his ideas of satyagraha and non-violence.

Ans: Gandhi’s method can be seen in five stages (a study grouping, not a list in the book).

Collecting facts: He first went to Muzzafarpur to get fuller information than Shukla could give, listened to the lawyers, and then met the landlords’ secretary and the Tirhut commissioner himself.

Peaceful defiance: When ordered to leave Champaran, he signed the receipt and wrote that he would disobey. In court he pleaded guilty, explained his “conflict of duties” and his obedience to the voice of conscience, and asked for the penalty.

Mass support: Thousands of peasants gathered on their own around the court at Motihari. Gandhi stayed polite and friendly and even helped the officials control the crowd.

Negotiation: Four long interviews with the Lieutenant-Governor led to an inquiry commission. When the planters agreed in principle to refunds, he asked for 50 per cent and accepted 25 per cent, because the landlords’ loss of money and prestige mattered more than the amount.

Constructive work: He followed the victory with schools, a doctor and sanitation work.

At no stage did Gandhi use force. His strength came from truth (the facts), from openly accepting the penalty and from the peaceful support of the people. This is exactly satyagraha, holding firmly to truth through non-violent resistance, which the book’s margin question asks students to connect it with.

Q26. Give an account of Gandhi’s efforts to win justice for the Champaran sharecroppers, from his meeting with Shukla to the final settlement.

Ans: Gandhi first heard of Champaran when Rajkumar Shukla, a poor but determined sharecropper, approached him at the Lucknow Congress session in December 1916. Shukla followed him for weeks, until Gandhi agreed to meet him in Calcutta; from there they went to Patna and then on.

Gandhi went to Muzzafarpur to collect facts. He learnt that tenants had to grow indigo on 15 per cent of their land and give the crop as rent, and that the landlords, after learning of synthetic indigo, had taken compensation from the peasants for releasing them from this arrangement. The landlords’ secretary refused to give him information and the Tirhut commissioner bullied him and told him to leave.

At Motihari he was ordered to quit Champaran. He wrote that he would disobey, was summoned to court and pleaded guilty, while thousands of peasants gathered around the court. The trial was postponed, and a few days later the Lieutenant-Governor dropped the case.

After four interviews with the Lieutenant-Governor, an inquiry commission was formed with Gandhi as the only representative of the peasants. Faced with about ten thousand depositions, the planters agreed in principle to a refund. Gandhi asked for 50 per cent, and when their representative offered 25 per cent, he accepted it. The peasants now knew they had rights and defenders and became brave. Within a few years the planters left, and indigo sharecropping disappeared.

Q27. Write a character sketch of Gandhi as presented in “Indigo”.

Ans: In “Indigo”, Gandhi appears as a practical and approachable leader rather than a distant figure. He is humble enough to follow an illiterate peasant into a cause he knows nothing about, and careful enough to check the facts himself before acting. He is not frightened when the commissioner bullies him.

He is brave and honest, openly disobeying the order to leave and pleading guilty in court. The peasants who gather in thousands do so only because they have heard that a Mahatma who wants to help them is in trouble.

He is a sensible negotiator who accepts 25 per cent after asking for 50, because the landlords’ loss of money and prestige is what matters. By refusing Andrews’s help, he teaches his followers self-reliance. His work for schools, health and cleanliness shows that, for him, politics and the problems of daily life could not be separated. As Fischer puts it, his loyalty was not to abstractions but to living human beings.

Q28. “Champaran did not begin as an act of defiance. It grew out of an attempt to alleviate the distress of large numbers of poor peasants.” Explain this statement and what it shows about Gandhi’s politics.

Ans: Gandhi did not go to Bihar to start a fight with the British government. He went because a poor peasant kept begging him to look into the injustice of the indigo system. Only while he was investigating this local suffering was he served an unjust order, and only then did defiance and civil disobedience become necessary.

This order of events is important because it shows what Fischer calls the “typical Gandhi pattern”. Gandhi’s politics were always tied to the practical, everyday problems of millions of ordinary people, not to abstract theories or a wish to defy authority for its own sake. His loyalty was to living human beings. That is also why the campaign did not stop at the settlement but went on to schools, health care and sanitation, since Gandhi was never content with large political or economic solutions alone.

Passage-Based Questions

Passage 1: the paragraph describing the indigo system, in which tenants had to plant 15 per cent of their holdings with indigo, and the landlords, on learning of German synthetic indigo, obtained compensation agreements from the sharecroppers.

Q29. According to the passage, how much of their land did the tenants have to plant with indigo?

Ans: They had to plant 15 per cent, or three-twentieths, of their holdings with indigo.

Q30. According to the passage, why did the landlords obtain compensation agreements instead of continuing the old arrangement?

Ans: The landlords had learnt that Germany had developed synthetic indigo. So they got the sharecroppers to agree to pay compensation for being freed from the 15 per cent arrangement. The passage gives no other reason.

Q31. How did the peasants respond to the agreements, and why did they later want their money back?

Ans: The arrangement was irksome to the peasants, so many signed willingly; those who resisted hired lawyers, and the landlords hired thugs. Later, the news of synthetic indigo reached the illiterate peasants who had signed, and they demanded their money back. They seem to have felt that they had paid to escape an arrangement that was about to lose its value anyway.

Passage 2: the paragraph describing how the inquiry’s evidence led the planters to agree to refunds, and how Gandhi asked for only 50 per cent.

Q32. What did the planters agree to do after seeing the evidence against them?

Ans: They agreed, in principle, to give refunds to the peasants.

Q33. What did the planters expect Gandhi to demand, and what did he actually ask for?

Ans: They expected him to demand the full amount they had illegally and dishonestly taken from the sharecroppers, but he asked for only 50 per cent.

Q34. Why did Gandhi finally accept 25 per cent?

Ans: Gandhi explained that the size of the refund mattered less than the fact that the landlords had been forced to give up part of the money and part of their prestige. The planters had behaved as if they were above the law; now the peasants saw that they had rights and defenders.