The Man was Subhas Bose.

An important English daily of Uttar Pradesh, Northern India Patrika, has after months of inquiry and investigations concluded that the saint was none else than Subhas Chandra Bose. The most important evidence that the paper has cited is based on the records, documents, and materials found in his residence of which an inventory was prepared cursorily by a police officer of a lower rank.... We, therefore, submit to you that the documents and other materials found in the said house should remain sealed and preserved for inquiry, and the guards posted there should continue to remain there in the national interest. We would like to be informed of the steps you propose to take in the matter.

The response from the District Magistrate(DM), however, was only silence.

Lalita Bose, daughter of Subhas Bose's elder brother Suresh, rushed in from New Delhi. Lalita took the next logical step on the advice of Sayed Kausar Hussain, whose behind-the-scene activities were going to prevent the authorities from covering up the issue. On 10 February 1986, Lalita Bose, Dr. Haleem, and Vishwa Bandhav Tewari moved the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court against the state of UP, the Chief Minister, the state's Home Secretary, and the District Magistrate of Faizabad. Their lawyer was legal luminary Robin Mitra, about whom former Chief Justice of India AS Anand would write that 'those who practiced with him at the bar, bear testimony to the fact that he was respected both by the Bench and the Bar for his advocacy, hard work, and fairness. Describing the inquiry by the Nibedon-Arora-Husain team as a great national service, the petitioners lamented that despite interest evinced by the public, this District Magistrate was merely 'sitting tight over the matter'. They stated how perfunctorily the police had made an inventory of the items left by Bhagwanji. To pre-empt the state government's plan to auction Bhagwanji's belongings, they argued that the petitioner Lalita Bose 'being the niece of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose has a right to the property, if the nameless saint is found to be Netaji'. They even suggested that Bhagwanji's books, and correspondence, could be sent to the National archives in New Delhi. The court's intervention was sought as there was 'no other alternative remedy available' due to 'the callous inaction of the opposite parties', especially the Chief Minister, who had been 'unreasonable'.

Making up for the state government's inaction, Justices SS Ahmad and GB Singh announced an interim relief on the same day. The state was called upon by the judges to file a counter-affidavit within six weeks (although it took thirteen years before the government responded). The main request was agreed to by the court - and thus the Bhagwanji matter was saved for posterity. The DM of Faizabad was ordered to oversee the preparation of an elaborate inventory, giving details of and about the items found in Bhagwanji's room at Ram Bhawan and then keep all these in his safe custody. The High Court order should have made news across the nation but it didn't. The event was overshadowed by the Ram Janmabhoomi- Babri Masjid dispute triggered by the order of the district court passed ten days earlier. It is widely held that the dispute at this time was revived by a deliberate political move of the Rajiv Gandhi government in Delhi. Suddenly an appeal on this matter was filed at the district count in Faizabad in January 1986 to unlock the temple- mosque complex. The petitioner was not a party to the dispute but the judge allowed his prayer promptly. This act came in for severe criticism under the 2010 order of the Allahabad High Court. 'There was no occasion to show such undue haste. The appeal was filed on 31st January 1986 and was allowed on the next day. i.e. 1st February 1986. At least the reason for this extreme haste is not mentioned in the judgment,' wrote Justice SU Khan.

References :

• Copy of the letter shared by Vishwa Bandhav Tewari in 2001
• 'Bose niece wants mystery solved', Hindustan Times, 24 October 1989.
• Justice Dr. AS Anand, 'Delay in justice and low rate of conviction are major flaws', Hindustan Times, 9 January 2006.
• Writ Petition No 929/86 by Lalita Bose, Dr. MA HAleem, and Vishwa Bandhav Tewari against the State of UP, the CM of UP, the Home Secretary of UP, and the District Magistrate, Faizabad.
• Judgment delivered on 30 September 2010 by Justice SU Khan, Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court, in the matter of Other Original Suits No 1, No 3, No 4, and No 5 of 1989.