It appears as though the vast majority of historians agree that 3 - 4 million people died as a direct result of colonial policy. If this is so, why has the event been almost entirely forgotten in the west? Whereas the holodomer is justly seen as one of the worst genocides in human history, compared to the holocaust, and even considered worse than the holocaust by some, the famine in 1943 Bengal isn't even considered important enough to get a full paragraph in most history books on The Pacific War.
I've previously written a couple of posts on this subject for /r/AskHistorians. My initial post is here, which details the situation in 1942, and my follow up, including the evidence for the aid shipments which Britain did send, is here.
Specifically to your question, I present the evidence that the famine was not the direct result of colonial policy, nor that Britain exacerbated it in its response, but indeed, attempted to alleviate it as much as possible within the context of the World War. This is in no way the definitive word on the subject however, and I would love for other historians to engage with me here on the subject, if I've misread any of the sources, or missed anything out.