Here is the answer to the question for UPSC Mains aspirants, with the key points and headings bolded:

British Response to the Growing Threat of Revolutionary Activities:

1. Repressive Measures
   • Sedition Act (1870): The British government introduced the Sedition Act, which criminalized any speech or writing that was considered seditious or aimed at inciting disaffection towards the government.
   • Defense of India Act (1915): This act gave the British government sweeping powers to arrest, detain, and censor individuals suspected of engaging in revolutionary activities.
   • Recent example: The use of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) by the Indian government to crackdown on civil society organizations and activists, which has been criticized by human rights organizations as a violation of democratic principles.
2. Counter-Intelligence Efforts
   • Special Branch: The British government established the Special Branch, a specialized intelligence agency, to monitor and infiltrate revolutionary organizations and gather information on their activities.
   • Surveillance and Informant Networks: The British government also employed extensive surveillance techniques and built up a network of informants to gather intelligence on the activities of revolutionary groups.
   • Recent example: The use of technology-based surveillance techniques by the Indian government, such as the alleged use of Pegasus spyware, to monitor the activities of activists, journalists, and political opponents, which has been criticized as a violation of privacy and civil liberties.

Impact of British Repressive Measures and Counter-Intelligence Efforts:

1. Containment of Revolutionary Activities: The British government’s repressive measures and counter-intelligence efforts were largely successful in containing the immediate threat of revolutionary activities, at least in the short term.
   Recent example: The Indian government’s continued use of repressive measures and counter-intelligence efforts to suppress dissent and criticism, which has been met with criticism from human rights organizations and the international community.
2. Radicalization of the Nationalist Movement: However, the British government’s heavy-handed response also contributed to the radicalization of the nationalist movement, as it fueled resentment and a sense of injustice among the Indian population.
   Recent example: The ongoing protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in India, which have been driven in part by a perception of the government’s authoritarian tendencies and disregard for civil liberties.
3. Erosion of Public Trust: The British government’s reliance on repressive measures and counter-intelligence efforts also contributed to the erosion of public trust in the government, as the Indian population increasingly perceived the government as being more concerned with maintaining power than addressing their legitimate grievances.
   Recent example: The Indian government’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been criticized for its lack of transparency and the perceived prioritization of political considerations over public health concerns, has contributed to a further erosion of public trust.

Overall, the British government’s response to the growing threat of revolutionary activities, while initially successful in containing the immediate threat, ultimately contributed to the radicalization of the nationalist movement and the erosion of public trust in the government, with lasting consequences for the country’s political and social dynamics.