We have had several threads on this topic in the past that you could look into for answers, although they didn't all come to the same conclusion.

• In this thread, Vonalder argues that while the famine was not deliberately engineered by Churchill (editor's note: this is what some hysterical modern articles boldly exclaim), the British government bears responsibility for the failure of famine relief efforts on account of some of its policies
• In this thread, The_Western argues that the situation regarding the Bengal famine was to a greater extent exacerbated mainly by the policies of local Indian governments (who had significant power over trade and such) and the encroachment of the Japanese navy preventing relief shipments from being directly shipped to Bengal

I've also done some reading and the conclusion that I have come to is that it's complicated and I'm not confident in firmly answering it one way or another. I would probably say that yes, British policies did exacerbate the famine, but not in a malicious way that this statement sort of implies - the British did not have access to completely accurate data about the regional food production / consumption and did not fully understand its severity initially. The extent to which local governance refusing to release food stocks to each other, including to Bengal is something I see in some sources, but not mentioned at all in others. So I'm left scratching my head a lot of the time.