The Indian National Army (INA) or Azad Hind Fauj was an armed force formed by
Indian nationalists in 1942 in Southeast Asia during World War II.
The aim of the army was to overthrow the British Raj in colonial India, with Japanese
assistance. Initially composed of Indian prisoners of war captured by Japan in her
Malayan campaign and at Singapore, it later drew large numbers of volunteers from
Indian expatriate population in Malaya and Burma.
Initially formed in 1942 immediately after the fall of Singapore under Mohan Singh, the
first INA collapsed in December that year before it was revived under the leadership of
Subhas Chandra Bose in 1943 and proclaimed the army of Bose’s Arzi Hukumat-e- Azad
Hind (The Provisional Government of Free India). This second INA fought along with
the Imperial Japanese Army against the British and Commonwealth forces in the
campaigns in Burma, Imphal and Kohima, and later, against the successful Burma
Campaign of the Allies. The end of the war saw a large number of the troops repatriated
to India where some faced trial for treason and became a galvanising point of the Indian
Independence movement.
After Indian independence, the ex-INA members, with some exceptions, were refused
service in the Indian Army. However, a number of notable members later became
involved in public life in India and in Southeast Asia.
The legacy of the INA is controversial given its associations with Imperial Japan, the
course of Japanese occupations in Burma, Indonesia and other parts of Southeast Asia,
her alliance with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, as well as Japanese war crimes and the
alleged complicity of the troops of the INA in these. Also, its relative insignificance in
military terms, its obvious propaganda value to the Japanese, as well as wartime British
Intelligence propaganda of cowardice and stories that associated INA soldiers in
mistreatment of captured Allied troops, to some extent mires the history of the army.
However, after the war, the Red Fort trials of captured INA officers in India provoked
massive public outcries in support of their efforts to fight the Raj, eventually triggering
the Bombay mutiny in the British Indian forces. These events in the twilight of the Raj
are accepted to have played a crucial role in its hasty end.

The word Kolkata is derives from Kalikata/ Kolikata,the Bengali name of one of three villages that predated the arrival of the British, in the area where the city was eventually established; the other two villages were Sutanuti and Govindapur.

In the late 17th century, the three villages that predated Calcutta were ruled by the Nawab of Bengal under Mughal suzerainty. After the Nawab granted the East India Company a trading licence in 1690,the area was developed by the Company into an increasingly fortified trading post. Nawab Siraj ud-Daulah occupied Calcutta in 1756, and the East India Company retook it the following year. In 1793 the East India company was strong enough to abolish rule, and assumed full sovereignty of the region. Under the company rule and later under the British Raj, Calcutta served as the capital of British-held territories in India until 1911, when its perceived geographical disadvantages, combined with growing nationalism in Bengal, led to a shift of the capital to New Delhi. Calcutta was the centre for the Indian independence movement. Following independence in 1947, Kolkata, which was once the centre of Indian commerce, culture, and politics, suffered many decades of political violence and economic stagnation.

A demographically diverse city, the culture of Kolkata features idiosyncrasies that include distinctively close-knit neighbourhoods (paras) and freestyle conversations (adda). Kolkata is home to West Bengal’s film industry Tollywood, and cultural institutions, such as the Academy of Fine Arts, the Victoria Memorial, the Asiatic Society, the Indian Museum and the National Library of India. Among scientific institutions, Kolkata hosts the Agri Horticultural Society of India, the Geological Survey of India, the Botanical Survey of India, the Calcutta Mathematical Society, the Indian Science Congress Association, the Zoological Survey of India, the Institution of Engineers, the Anthropological Survey of India and the Indian Public Health Association. Four Nobel laureates and two Nobel Memorial Prize winners are associated with the city.Though home to major cricketing venues and franchises, Kolkata differs from other Indian cities by focusing on association football and other sports.

As a arts student your opportunity not limited to Masters in Arts or UPSC and other government exam. Of course they are available for you. Today I will post some more amazing career option which you might not know.

MBA/MMS

Nowadays top B school are focusing on diversities. If your acads are low then the best exam would be MHCET. Many college in Mumbai don’t conduct gd-pi. If you communication skill is poor then you must aim for these mba/mms course(they mostly offer mms) .

CFA

If you are graduate (Final year) you can give CFA 1 exam. Then you will get an internship easily. And it will help you clear interview of Personal interview happens in bschool. In summer internship in mba program CFA certificate definitely help to crack it.

Law

Law give you opportunity to understand our legal system better and indepth. Many law firm recruit law graduate.

The Indian National Army (INA) or Azad Hind Fauj was an armed force formed by
Indian nationalists in 1942 in Southeast Asia during World War II.
The aim of the army was to overthrow the British Raj in colonial India, with Japanese
assistance. Initially composed of Indian prisoners of war captured by Japan in her
Malayan campaign and at Singapore, it later drew large numbers of volunteers from
Indian expatriate population in Malaya and Burma.
Initially formed in 1942 immediately after the fall of Singapore under Mohan Singh, the
first INA collapsed in December that year before it was revived under the leadership of
Subhas Chandra Bose in 1943 and proclaimed the army of Bose’s Arzi Hukumat-e- Azad
Hind (The Provisional Government of Free India). This second INA fought along with
the Imperial Japanese Army against the British and Commonwealth forces in the
campaigns in Burma, Imphal and Kohima, and later, against the successful Burma
Campaign of the Allies. The end of the war saw a large number of the troops repatriated
to India where some faced trial for treason and became a galvanising point of the Indian
Independence movement.
After Indian independence, the ex-INA members, with some exceptions, were refused
service in the Indian Army. However, a number of notable members later became
involved in public life in India and in Southeast Asia.
The legacy of the INA is controversial given its associations with Imperial Japan, the
course of Japanese occupations in Burma, Indonesia and other parts of Southeast Asia,
her alliance with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, as well as Japanese war crimes and the
alleged complicity of the troops of the INA in these. Also, its relative insignificance in
military terms, its obvious propaganda value to the Japanese, as well as wartime British
Intelligence propaganda of cowardice and stories that associated INA soldiers in
mistreatment of captured Allied troops, to some extent mires the history of the army.
However, after the war, the Red Fort trials of captured INA officers in India provoked
massive public outcries in support of their efforts to fight the Raj, eventually triggering
the Bombay mutiny in the British Indian forces. These events in the twilight of the Raj
are accepted to have played a crucial role in its hasty end.

The Government of India Act 1919 was essentially transitional in character. Under
Section 84 of the said Act, a statutory Commission was to be appointed at the end of ten
years to determine the next stage in the realization of self-rule in India. Accordingly, the
Simon Commission was sent to the Sub-continent under the command of Sir John Simon.
All members of the commission were British. This was regarded as highly insulting to the
Indians and immediate protest was raised from all the important political parties. When
the Simon Commission arrived, the local masses welcomed it by with slogans of “Go
back Simon!”. All the major political parties of Sub-continent, except the Shafi League of
Punjab, boycotted the Simon Commission.
After the failure of Simon Commission, there was no alternative for the British
government but to ask the local people to frame a constitution for themselves. They knew
that the Congress and Muslim League were the two main parties and that they both had
serious difference of opinions. Birkenhead, Secretary of Sate for Indian Affairs, threw the
ball in the Indian politicians’ court, and asked them to draw a draft of the forthcoming Act
on which both Hindus and Muslims could agree. The Indian leaders accepted the
challenge and for this purpose, the All Parties Conference was held at Delhi in January

1928. More than a hundred delegates of almost all the parties of the Sub-continent
      assembled and participated in the conference. Unfortunately, the leaders were not able to
      come to any conclusion. The biggest hindrance was the issue of the rights of minorities.
      The second meeting of the All Parties Conference was held in March the same year, but
      the leaders still had their differences and again were not able to reach a conclusion. The
      only work done in this conference was the appointment of two subcommittees. But due to
      the mutual differences between Muslims and Hindus, the committees failed to produce
      any positive result.
      When the All Parties Conference met for the third time in Bombay on May 19 1928,
      there was hardly any prospect of an agreed constitution. It was then decided that a small
      committee should be appointed to work out the details of the constitution

Reasons for the revolt: the new revenue policy impoverished the peasants were
impoverished; the English policies of trade and commerce ruined the Indian Industries.
Hence a strong resentment developed among the artisans such as the weavers,
blacksmiths and carpenters. The English interfered with the customs and traditions of the
people by enacting laws such as prohibitions of sati, permitting widow marriages etc.
They upheld the right of inheritance of those who had forsaken their religion and had
embraced Christianity. Such laws led the orthodox people to believe that the alien
government is out to destroy the very foundations of their way of life. Hence, they too
resented the English rule.
From 1848 to 1856 Lord Dalhousie had annexed many Indian states such as Satara,
Jhansi, Nagpur and some other states by refusing to recognize the right of inheritance of
the adopted sons of those rulers. Pensions of the heirs of some deposed rulers were
discontinued. They, too, developed a strong resentment against the tyrannical British rule.
Discontent among the Indian soldiers: the majority of the Indian soldiers in the
Company’s army came from peasant families. They were deeply hurt to see their family
groaning under the insufferable burden of poverty. These soldiers were treated
contemptuously by their English Officers. Their allowances also were gradually reduced.
Because of all these reasons, acute discontent prevailed among the Indian soldiers.
Against such a background came to the fore the episode of the greased cartridges. In
1856, new long range Enfield rifles with greased cartridges was given to the soldiers.
While loading the rifles, the greased covering of the cartridges had to be bitten off. The
news that this grease contained the fat of cows and pigs infuriated the soldiers beyond
measure.
The outbreak of the uprising: The first explosion of the uprising took place on the 29th
of March 1857 in the cantonment at Barrackpore. As the military parade began, a soldier
name Mangal Pande refused to use the new cartridges and exhorted other soldiers also
not to do so. When the English Officer of the battalion tried to force the soldiers to use
the cartridges, Mangal Pande fired at him. Mangal Pande was arrested and hanged. This
news spread likes wildfire in the other military cantonments. On the 24th of April 1857,
Indian soldiers of the cavalry unit at Meerut flatly refused to use the new cartridges. They
were all thrown into prison. Because of this, the whole battalion of Indian soldiers at
Meerut rose in revolt on the 10th of May 1857. They advanced to Delhi, which was
barely 64 kilometers away. On the way, thousands of common people joined them. As
they reached Delhi, the Indian soldiers in Delhi cantonment made common cause with the
rebels. All these soldiers appealed to the Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zaafar to lead
the revolt. They proclaimed Bahadur Shah the Emperor of India.

The scope of the revolt: within no time the revolt spread to all parts of North India.
From Bihar to Rajputana, all the India soldiers in the Company’s army contonments
raised a standard of rebellion. Lakhs of common people joined them. Within a period of
four months all the territories of East Punjab, areas around Delhi, Rohilkhand,
Bundelkhand, Allahabad, Avadh, Western Bihar were engulfed by the fire of rebellion.
The British power collapsed in those areas. However, territories south of the river
Narmada were not affected by the revolt to great extent, though in Nagpur, Satara,
Kolhapur and some other aces, there were some sporadic incidents of revolt. Local like
the uprising of the Bhils in Khandesh under the leadership of Kharjasingh and the one in
the Satpuda area under Shankarshah were nipped in the bud by the English.
Leadership of the revolt: Bahadur shah, the aged Mughal Emperor, was the leader of
the revolt were Peshwa Nanasaheb, Tatya Tope, Rani Laxmibai, Begum Hazrat Mahal,
Maulavi Ahmedulla, Kunwarsingh and the Mughal general Bakht Khan. The revolt
assumed serious proportions especially in Delhi, Kanpur, Lucknow, Jhansi, and the
western parts of Bihar.
In September 1857 British captured Delhi. They arrested Bahadur Shah and killed his
sons. In the region around Kanpur, Nanasaheb Peshwa and Tatya Tope revolt led the
revolt. In West Bihar the Zamindar of Jagdishpur, Kunwarsingh, along with his sons gave
a determined fight to the English while in Rohilkhand, Maulavi Ahmedulla inspired the
people to rise against them.
The revolt is crushed: The rebels and their leaders fought the English bravely but within
a short time, the English recovered from the first shock of the unexpected revolt. Within
six months the picture began to change. The English recaptured all-important places that
they had lost to the rebels. By the end of 1858,leaders like Rani Laxmibai Kunwarsingh;
Ahmedulla fell fighting against them. Bahadur Shah was deported to Rangoon.
Nanasaheb and Begum Hazrat Mahal took refuge in Nepal. Tatya Tope, however,
continued his struggle against the English for ten long months, but ultimately he was
betrayed. The English hanged him. The end of 1858 mercilessly crushed the revolt by the
English.
Why did the revolt fail? : The revolt of 1857 was an event of great magnitude. But it
didn’t end the English power in India. On the side of the rebels, there was no centralized
leadership and hence there was no co-ordination of planning and action. The rebels didn’t
have sufficient arms. Moreover, the educated Indians and rulers of majority of the States
kept themselves aloof from the struggle. The revolt didn’t spread to South India. The
English had with them centralized leadership, a trained and disciplined army, modern
weapons and experienced commanders. They also controlled the means of transport.
Therefore, the Indians couldn’t resist them successfully.
The effects of the revolt: The revolt of 1857 had far reaching effects. It made the rulers
of Britain realize the intense disaffection of Indians against the English rule. They were
convinced that the power of the British in India wasn’t safe in the hands of the Company.
Hence, the British parliament made a law in 1858 dissolving the East India Company and
taking over the administration of India directly into their hands.

Commentators often talk of the long decline of industry in the British economy. In
simple terms this is what we mean by de-industrialization – a fall in the contribution made
by the manufacturing sector to national output, employment and income. We can
consider manufacturing as a whole, or focus on individual industries such as steel and
clothing and textiles
De-industrialization is a long-term process of structural change in an economy – leading
to a change in the composition of national output, and important alterations to the
structure of our labour market.
There is a number of different ways of measuring the extent to which our manufacturing
sector is experiencing de-industrialization:
Its impact on the Indian Economy
The economic condition of India in the 19th century started becoming worse due to
several polices of the British government. The Indian manufacturing sector was
sometimes sharply disrupted sue to the import of machine made foreign goods. While
analyzing the economic impact of British rule and consequent poverty, Indian nationalists
has quite convincingly argued that British rule has de-industrialized India. However,
recent researches in modern economic history of India after independence has challenged
this widely accepted hypothesis on many grounds. To reach at final analysis it is
imperative to go through all major views of the scholars and sources of information of
different parts of 19th century India.
Drain of wealth the systematic policy of ferring the economic resources of India to
Britain i.J erished the country. The officials of the British I government were paid out of
the Indian exchequel money went out of India. There was a heavy tax t on the Indian
people because large sums had to b annually as interest on loans contracted by the Gove~
of India. UnemploY}llent increased in India. It was first time in India’s history that the
balance of trade t unfavourable towards India.
De-industrialisation The British caused 1 Dous harm to the traditional handicraft
industry decayed beyond recovery. Heavy customs dutiE imposed on Indian goods. The
British officials! Preference for European goods. This provided an. to the demand for
European goods and contribute decline of Indian handicrafts. The availability of n made
goods in abundance at a comparatively low H greatly contributed to the decline of Indian
handicri failure of the British Government to offer any protE indigenous industry also
contributed to the de Indian handicrafts because they could not compt machine-made
goods produced in bulk, and Consequently cheaper. With the subjugation of Indian
princely 51 patronage to the handicraft industry ceased to exist.