Question map
Statement I : In north-western India, the Civil Disobedience Movement took a mass character under the leadership of Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan. Statement II : The Nehru Report (1928) had argued that the next immediate step for India must be Dominion Status.
Explanation
Statement I is true as Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, known as the 'Frontier Gandhi', led the Khudai Khidmatgars (Red Shirts) in the North-West Frontier Province, giving the Civil Disobedience Movement a mass character through non-violent struggle [4]. Statement II is also true; the Nehru Report (1928) was the first major Indian effort to draft a constitutional scheme and recommended 'Dominion Status' as the immediate goal for India [2]. However, Statement II is not the correct explanation for Statement I. The mass character of the movement in the north-west was a result of local mobilization by the Khudai Khidmatgars and the call for Purna Swaraj (Complete Independence) adopted at the 1929 Lahore Session, which superseded the Nehru Report's Dominion Status demand [1]. Therefore, while both statements are individually correct, there is no causal link between them.
Sources
- [3] Modern India ,Bipin Chandra, History class XII (NCERT 1982 ed.)[Old NCERT] > Chapter 15: Struggle for Swaraj > The Second Civil Disobedience Movement > p. 288
- [4] India and the Contemporary World – II. History-Class X . NCERT(Revised ed 2025) > Chapter 2: Nationalism in India > The Independence Day Pledge, 26 January 1930 > p. 41
- [1] Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. > Chapter 19: Civil Disobedience Movement and Round Table Conferences > Calcutta Session of Congress > p. 366
- [2] Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. > Chapter 18: Simon Commission and the Nehru Report > Simon Commission > p. 365