Manilal Maganlal Doctor (28 July 1881 – 8 January 1956) was a British Indian barrister and politician, who travelled to numerous countries of the British Empire, including Fiji, Mauritius and Aden, providing legal assistance to the local ethnic Indian population.

He met Gandhi, who asked him to go to Mauritius, where he represented Indo-Mauritians in court and edited a newspaper, The Hindustani.

He later managed to practice law in Aden, Somalia and Bihar State in India but spent his final days in Bombay.

In London he became an active member of the Home Rule Society and made regular contributions to the 'Indian Sociologist'.

Gandhi was troubled by both the treatment of the Indian labourers and their lack of organisation in demanding their rights as citizens of the British Empire.

In response to his visit, he sent Manilal Doctor to Mauritius to assist the labourers in improving their social and political situation.

Given the nature of Mauritius justice at that time, "it seems certain that if they had not been properly represented at the trial there would have been a larger number found guilty, and perhaps longer sentences.

"[3] He left Mauritius for Bombay on 28 November 1910 to attend the annual Indian National Congress Meeting.

With this newspaper he wanted to highlight the importance of the Indians shared heritage and common interests, regardless of religion or status as merchant or laborer.

[5] The newspaper was fined on a number of occasions for its editorial and reporting of court cases but continued to be published even after Manilal's departure.

[6] Sometime in 1911, Manilal traveled to London where he spent considerable time with Dr. Pranjivan Mehta, a close friend of Gandhi.

It is likely that Manilal briefly traveled back to Mauritius to close his affairs before going on to Durban South Africa to consult with Gandhi.

Gandhi encouraged him to practice law in South Africa, but Manilal wanted to take part in the debate of Congress calling for the abolition of Indenture.

Gandhi was moved by this appeal and published this request in the Indian Opinion from where it came to the attention of Manilal in Mauritius.

Fijian men and women sang and danced to welcome him and he was garlanded by the daughter of a high chief.

He was initially employed as a telephone operator, but when he complained that he was not being given the promised job, he was sent to work in a cane field.

The Society approached the Colonial Office and Veeraswamy was able to buy his freedom and get employment outside the indenture system.

On the basis of India's recommendation, the Governor, in 1916, nominated Badri Maharaj to represent Indians in the Legislative Council.

This nomination was not popular with Fiji Indians and petitions were sent from throughout the colony asking the Government to reconsider its choice.

He was not religious but believed that Arya Samaj was the best sect for the casteless Indian society that was developing in Fiji.

Manilal was bitter about the incident and on 24 September 1919 the Indian Imperial Association passed a resolution condemning the government for not allowing him to build when Europeans themselves had acquired land by illegal means.

The telephone wires between Suva and Nausori was cut and there was a confrontation on Rewa Bridge between Indians and European special constables with fixed bayonets.

It was most probably a combination of reasons which included the presence of large numbers of armed security personnel and the Governments willingness to use lethal force, an earlier call by Mrs Manilal for those workers who had received wage increase to return to work, the labourers inability to stay away from paid employment for a long period because of their already poor financial situation and the warning by Badri Maharaj to the strikers (at a meeting in Nausori on 15 February) of the danger of being led by agitators.

Although Manilal had not been in Suva when the strike began and the Government did not have sufficient evidence to charge him for sedition, it used the Peace and Good Order Ordinance of 1875 to prohibit him, his wife and two other strike leaders, Harpal Maharaj and Fazil Khan from residing on Viti Levu, Ovalau or Macuata province.

[10] The Auckland District Law Society opposed his application on the basis that he was not of fit character given his role as a "prime mover" in the 1920 strike.

Gandhi noted that "An empire that requires such calculated persecution of a man, without even ntrying to prove anything against him, deserves only to be dissolved.

He continued to provide service to the people of Aden and Somaliland (1935–1940) but the revolutionary and radical zeal seemed to have left him.