Government of India act 1935

Published on 09 Oct 2025

The Government of India Act 1935 was a significant piece of legislation passed by the British Parliament in August 1935. The act's main goal was to reform and reorganize the constitutional framework of British India, and to provide more governance provisions for territories under direct British control.

Significance

Provincial Autonomy: Granted provinces greater autonomy by allowing Indian ministers to control all provincial departments.

Example: Provincial governments could now legislate on subjects like education, health, and agriculture.

Federal Structure: Proposed a federal structure with a central government and autonomous provincial governments.

Example: The Act intended to include princely states in a federation, although this was never fully realized.

Expanded Electorate: Increased the number of eligible voters, allowing more Indians to participate in elections.

Example: About 10% of the Indian population gained the right to vote, up from 3% in previous reforms.

Bicameral Legislature: Established bicameral legislatures in some provinces, enhancing representative governance.

Example: Provinces like Bengal and Madras had both an upper and lower house.

Drawbacks

Limited Central Authority: The central government remained under British control, limiting real power for Indian leaders.

Example: Key areas like defence, foreign affairs, and railways were controlled by the British Governor-General.

Dyarchy in the Centre: Introduced a dyarchy system at the centre, with significant powers retained by the Governor-General.

Example: The Governor-General had the power to override decisions made by Indian ministers.

Excluded Princely States: The proposed federation failed to include the princely states effectively, limiting the Act's reach.

Example: Many princely states refused to join the federation, keeping large parts of India outside the new structure.

Communal Representation: Continued and expanded separate electorates for different religious communities, deepening communal divisions.

Example: Separate electorates were extended to Sikhs, Europeans, and Anglo-Indians, reinforcing sectarian identities.

Reasons for Condemnation by Congress and Other Parties

Incomplete Transfer of Power: The Act did not grant full self-government, which was the primary demand of the Congress. Jawaharlal Nehru criticized the Act for being a "charter of slavery" because it did not end British control.
Retention of British Veto Power: The Governor-General and provincial governors retained the power to veto legislation and suspend governments, thus undermining democracy.
Communalism and Division: The continuation of separate electorates was seen as a British strategy to divide and rule. Congress leaders argued that communal representation hindered national unity and pitted communities against each other.
Limited Franchise: Despite the expanded electorate, the majority of the population still did not have the right to vote. Only a small fraction of the population, primarily the propertied and literate classes, could participate in elections.
Failure to Address Fundamental Rights: The Act did not include provisions for fundamental rights, which was a key demand of Indian leaders. The absence of guaranteed civil liberties and socio-economic rights was a significant flaw in the eyes of the Congress.