The First World War, Khilafat, and Non-Cooperation

Students participated in non-cooperation mainly by boycotting colonial educational institutions. Many left government schools and colleges, responding to the call to withdraw support from institutions controlled by the British administration. This made education part of the political boycott. Option A is correct, while selling foreign cloth, increasing taxes, or joining the British army did not represent student participation in this movement.

Lawyers were asked to withdraw from the colonial legal system as a form of non-cooperation. They therefore gave up legal practice in British-run courts, challenging the legitimacy and functioning of colonial institutions. Option A is correct. Railways, post offices, and factories were not the institutions specifically boycotted by lawyers in this part of the movement.

Economic nationalism was an important part of the Non-Cooperation Movement. People were encouraged to boycott foreign goods, especially foreign cloth, and to use swadeshi products made in India. This promoted local production and expressed opposition to colonial economic control. Option A is correct; the other choices refer to imported or British goods and contradict the boycott-and-swear-to-swadeshi approach.

The movement promoted the boycott of foreign cloth and encouraged people to use khadi and other swadeshi products. As consumers reduced their purchases of imported cloth, demand fell and imports declined. This was both a political protest and an economic challenge to colonial trade. Option A is correct; the other choices contradict the known effect of the boycott or make an unsupported claim about prices.

Khadi represented self-reliance, swadeshi, and opposition to foreign cloth, but its symbolic value did not remove the problem of affordability. Hand-spun and hand-woven cloth could cost more than cheaper mill-made fabric, which mattered greatly to poor families. Option A is correct. Khadi was not foreign, restricted to soldiers, or distributed free by the colonial government.

The boycott of government schools was a political act, but it created a practical difficulty for students. National schools and colleges were established in some places, yet suitable alternatives were not available everywhere. Consequently, students who left colonial institutions could face disruption in their education. Option A is correct; the other choices do not describe the educational limitation created by the boycott.

On 13 April 1919, troops under General Dyer fired on an unarmed gathering at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar. The massacre exposed the violent and repressive character of colonial rule and intensified public anger throughout India. Option A is correct. The Dandi March and Quit India Movement were later nationalist actions, while a swadeshi meeting was not this massacre.

The Rowlatt Act of 1919 restricted civil liberties and permitted detention without trial, provoking widespread opposition. The Jallianwala Bagh massacre soon deepened public anger against British rule. Together, these events created the political atmosphere in which Gandhi launched the Non-Cooperation Movement in 1920. Option A is correct; the other movements belonged to different contexts or later periods.

The movement became a mass movement because participation extended beyond a small political leadership. Students, teachers, lawyers, traders, peasants, workers, and many ordinary people joined different forms of boycott and protest, although their local aims could vary. This broad social participation gave the movement national reach. Option A is correct; the other choices describe neither its membership nor its method.

The governing concept is the widening of the national movement through local grievances. Peasants connected Non-Cooperation with demands against high rents, illegal cesses and begar, or forced labour, imposed by landlords and officials in different regions. Foreign cloth, government titles and naval trade were not the main peasant grievances. Thus option A correctly identifies the problems that gave the movement a local social meaning.

Swadeshi meant using and promoting goods produced in India, while the movement encouraged a boycott of imported goods, especially foreign cloth. Traders hoped that reduced imports would shift consumer demand towards Indian products and expand indigenous markets. Stronger foreign rule, sharply higher taxes and the closure of government schools were not the economic hopes associated with swadeshi. Therefore option A is correct.

The movement was political because it challenged colonial institutions, but it was also economic because people were urged to boycott foreign goods and promote swadeshi production. This affected imports, consumption and the market for Indian goods. Contesting only elections, raising British taxes or distributing foreign cloth for free does not describe the movement’s economic programme. Hence option A is correct.

Colonial institutions such as government schools, courts and councils helped the British administer and legitimise their rule. Refusing to participate in them was intended to withdraw public cooperation and question the authority of the colonial state. It did not attack peasants’ labour, Indian industrial demand or the sale of swadeshi cloth. Therefore option A correctly identifies what the boycott challenged.

A repressive law restricts civil liberties and gives the state extraordinary power over citizens. The Rowlatt Act allowed the colonial government to arrest and detain people without a normal trial, which removed important legal safeguards. Relief for peasants, reduction of all taxes and granting swaraj would expand rights rather than suppress them. Thus option A gives the precise reason the Act was called repressive.

The Khilafat issue brought many Muslims into a common political campaign, while Non-Cooperation connected this concern with the broader demand for swaraj and opposition to colonial rule. Their joint mobilisation therefore brought different communities and groups into the movement and widened its mass base. It did not end the movement or restrict participation to British people or soldiers. Hence option A is correct.

Gandhi’s central argument was that colonial rule was sustained not only by British officials and force but also by the cooperation and obedience of Indians. If people withdrew that cooperation from government institutions, courts, schools and foreign goods, the administrative system would become weaker. Mountains, sea breeze and foreign festivals had no such political role. Therefore option A expresses the basis of Non-Cooperation.

The First World War placed a heavy burden on India through increased taxes, rising prices, forced recruitment and shortages. These hardships created widespread resentment among different sections of society. The war did not immediately free India, stop every movement or end taxation; instead, its consequences formed an important background for later mass politics and Non-Cooperation. Thus option A is the most accurate conclusion.

The First World War intensified economic hardship and political dissatisfaction in India. The Khilafat issue mobilised many Muslims, while Non-Cooperation connected these concerns with the national demand for swaraj and resistance to colonial institutions. Together, these developments widened anti-colonial participation. They did not make British rule popular, lack a link with nationalism or abolish taxes. Therefore option A is the strongest conclusion.

The governing historical fact is the accepted chronology of the First World War. It began in 1914 after the political crisis in Europe and ended in 1918 with the defeat of the Central Powers and the armistice. The other periods refer to different events or later phases of Indian nationalism, not to the First World War. Therefore option A, 1914 to 1918, is correct.

During the First World War, government expenditure and demand for essential supplies increased. Shortages and wartime economic pressure pushed the prices of many goods upward, causing inflation. Ordinary people therefore had to spend more on daily necessities, while wages did not always rise equally. Hence, option A is correct. Options B and C ignore the wartime price rise, and option D is economically impossible.