Question

the revolutionaries believed in the use of violence for gaining india,s independence?
do u think that violence is permissible fr the fulfilment of noble cause such as independence of one's mothe land?

Answer 1

Yes, I do think that violence is permissible as it is quicker, more danger posing and can uproot the oppressors from their root.
We have seen it in the past in the form of French Revolution and American Revolution

Answer 2

Answer:    the notion of non-violence being central to Indian independence is flat-out wrong.  It was widespread violent uprisings, both by professional soldiers and the general population, that destroyed the foundation of British hegemony. it could be an argument that violence is actually ineffective, unless it is as widespread and popular as it was in India, and presents an existential threat to those in power. Violence is politically important for several reasons--  the dominance of violence as a form of political action, and the fact that violence is, in the end, politically transformative.   To free their motherland from the rivals, Indians must do violence so that the british will suffer the same punishments as they did to Indians since the colonization.