It is the middle path and the equilibrium that he advocated, and not partitioning the land to solve the problem. In short Azad stood for united India, which was the only solution to the intractable problem. He failed to achieve this goal, and we are still facing the music of Partition. Azad stood for compromise as he strongly felt reconciling the irreconcilable was wisdom, and not walking off in a huff. What cannot be cured must be endured, hoping time would heal everything.
History is the vital magistrate that passes the verdict.
The Partition took place not because of Jinnah, much less of Nehru, or Patel or Gandhiji, but because of Mountbatten who wanted to teach the Indians a lesson for making the English go from the land, lock stock and barrel.