Kabira
BANNED
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,383
- Reaction score
- -20
- Country
- Location
Civil war
Which is already going on there. The next step they can take is attack mainland India, especially big cities. Go full on taliban mode.
If Article 370 is temporary, so is the accession of JK with India: Abdullah
- Thread starter Champion_Usmani
- Start date
Which is already going on there. The next step they can take is attack mainland India, especially big cities. Go full on taliban mode.
Dubious
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2012
- Messages
- 37,717
- Reaction score
- 80
- Country
- Location
About two to three generations died waiting
shahbaz baig
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2013
- Messages
- 4,433
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
I think you Dont fully understand the history except date 1947 & 1950.
Both the agreement of Instrument of Accession in 1947 & article 370 in 1950 are linked.
Article 370 was included in Indian constitution in order to fulfill the agreement/promises with maharaja hari Singh.
In short article 370 is legal part of this 1947 agreement.
Article 370 was included temporary on one condition.
and the condition is: under the Leadership of kashmiri people there should be voting either kashmiri wants to join Pakistan, India or wanna be as an independent state. Till then Jammu & Kashmir will have autonomous status. So here abduallah is right that
accession of JK with India is temporary because Kashmiris are still unable to vote accordingly to their wishes to whom they want to join.
For more simplified way to understand.
1. Instrument of Accession is MoU.
2. But Article 370 is a legal implementation of that MoU between JK & India.
@Zee-shaun for you too.
Last edited:
shahbaz baig
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2013
- Messages
- 4,433
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
You may be right. Kashmiris will have solid reason to wedge war on india because of occupation.Civil war
Right now india has legal reason for Kashmir. Just like india has lost moral ground, India would loss legal ground too after excluding article 370, which is the legal implementation of agreement with maharaja hari Singh.
MilSpec
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Messages
- 12,931
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
Wrong again, the instrument of accession that Hari Singh signed was the same as the other ~600 princely states.
***************************************************************************************
Whereas the Indian Independence Act 1947, provides that as from the fifteenth day of August, 1947, there shall be set up an Independent Dominion known as India, and that the Government of India Act, 1935 shall, with such omission, additions, adaptations and modifications as the governor-general may by order specify, be applicable to the Dominion of India.
And whereas the Government of India Act, 1935, as so adapted by the governor-general, provides that an Indian State may accede to the Dominion of India by an Instrument of Accession executed by the Ruler thereof.
Now, therefore, I Shriman Inder Mahander Rajrajeswar Maharajadhiraj Shri Hari Singhji, Jammu and Kashmir Naresh Tatha Tibbetadi Deshadhipathi, Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir State, in the exercise of my sovereignty in and over my said State do hereby execute this my Instrument of Accession and
- I hereby declare that I accede to the Dominion of India with the intent that the governor-general of India, the Dominion Legislature, the Federal Court and any other Dominion authority established for the purposes of the Dominion shall, by virtue of this my Instrument of Accession but subject always to the terms thereof, and for the purposes only of the Dominion, exercise in relation to the State of Jammu and Kashmir (hereinafter referred to as "this State") such functions as may be vested in them by or under the Government of India Act, 1935, as in force in the Dominion of India, on the 15th day of August, 1947, (which Act as so in force is hereafter referred to as "the Act").
- I hereby assume the obligation of ensuring that due effect is given to the provisions of the Act within this state so far as they are applicable therein by virtue of this my Instrument of Accession.
- I accept the matters specified in the schedule hereto as the matters with respect to which the Dominion Legislatures may make laws for this state.
- I hereby declare that I accede to the Dominion of India on the assurance that if an agreement is made between the Governor General and the ruler of this state whereby any functions in relation to the administration in this state of any law of the Dominion Legislature shall be exercised by the ruler of this state, then any such agreement shall be deem to form part of this Instrument and shall be construed and have effect accordingly.
- The terms of this my Instrument of accession shall not be varied by any amendment of the Act or of the Indian Independence Act 1947unless such amendment is accepted by me by an Instrument supplementary to this Instrument.
- Nothing in this Instrument shall empower the Dominion Legislature to make any law for this state authorizing the compulsory acquisition of land for any purpose, but I hereby undertake that should the Dominion for the purposes of a Dominion law which applies in this state deem it necessary to acquire any land, I will at their request acquire the land at their expense or if the land belongs to me transfer it to them on such terms as may be agreed, or, in default of agreement, determined by an arbitrator to be appointed by the Chief Justice Of India.
- Nothing in this Instrument shall be deemed to commit me in any way to acceptance of any future constitution of India or to fetter my discretion to enter into arrangements with the Government of India under any such future constitution.
- Nothing in this Instrument affects the continuance of my sovereignty in and over this state, or, save as provided by or under this Instrument, the exercise of any powers, authority and rights now enjoyed by me as Ruler of this state or the validity of any law at present in force in this state.
- I hereby declare that I execute this Instrument on behalf of this state and that any reference in this Instrument to me or to the ruler of the state is to be construed as including to my heirs and successors.
Hari Singh
Maharajadhiraj of Jammu and Kashmir State.
I do hereby accept this Instrument of Accession. Dated this twenty seventh day of October, nineteen hundred and forty seven.
(Mountbatten of Burma, Governor General of India).
*****************************************************************************************
Hari Singh neither demanded Article 370 nor The instrument of accession is not any special agreement that had any outstanding instruments as a precondition. It was unconditional accession with a verbal suggestion of Lord Mountbatten about the plebiscite. And no, Instrument of accession is not at all a MoU, it is an instrument document, and you are also wrong about Article 370, it is not an MoU either, it is a constitutional article, like any other constitutional article that exists. Both of these are legally binding documents whereas
Memorandum of Understanding is a formal document describing the broad outlines of an agreement that two or more parties have reached through negotiations. It is not a legally binding document but signals the intention of all parties to move forward with a contract.
Nehru made a grave mistake by calling for a ceasefire and going to the UN. There is no scope of any UN resolutions post-Pakistan's blatant aggression on Kashmir obliterating all of the scope of the UN pre-requisites.
shahbaz baig
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2013
- Messages
- 4,433
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
You are quoting me wiki pedia ? Seriously????? Let me tell you your provided BS info from wikipedia was edited just 15 days ago without any reference of authentic history book.
I emphasised on MoU just to interpret you as an example. The agreement between maharaja hari Singh & india does not have any value if there are no implementation & article 370 provide that implementation.
Your mentioned wiki post excluded many things, just like conditions, promises and wishes of the population.
are you simply saying that The Instrument of Accession (which never singed) by maharaja hari Singh and article 370 Dont have any connection?
Let me show you the truth.
Indian claims that JK Maharaja Hari Singh signed Instrument of Accession (IOA) with India on 26-10-1947 that in turn justified India airlifting its troops at Srinagar airport on 27-10-1947 to defend the State against “tribal invasion”. However, this claim of India has been doubted & rejected by many reputed historians. Indian Troops entered Kashmir on 27th October 1947 but their Patiala troops were already days before stationed in Jammu. ( Kashmir Issue, , a historical perspective, by A M Mattoo).
There are number of historical facts that assail the claim of IOA having ever been signed by MHS. In fact proforma copy of IOA was prepared by India , sent to different rulers of erstwhile India States for signatures . Most of these proforma agreements returned signed by the rulers but in the case of JK it was not signed at all . So, writes world reputed historian, Alaister Lamb, about it in these words:
(1) the Maharaja was in the process of abandoning Srinagar and removing his Government to Jammu in the comparative safety of the other side of the Banihal Pass . He departed in a spectacular motor cavalcade at dawn on 26 October; and he could hardly be expected to reach Jammu before late that evening. The Maharaja certainly signed no papers.
(2) It is curious that at the evening meeting of Defence Committee of India on 26 October , although it was decided that overt Indian intervention in Kashmir should go ahead while in fact there was at this point no signed Instrument.
(3) This absence of a completed IOA that evening of 26 October was pointed to by Mountbatten himself when Ian Stephens of the Calcutta the Statesman newspaper came to dine with him and his wife. Stephens recorded the main points which were raised by his host about the storm then brewing in Kashmir. He writes : “the Maharajah’s formal accession to India was BEING finalized”. in other words that it was still an incomplete process. The Indian troops, however, were going in to Kashmir come what may.
(4) Mountbatten delivered what to Stephens seemed an extraordinary anti-Pakistan diatribe. The real enemies in Kashmir were the Muslim League and its leader, M.A. Jinnah. They had planned the whole invasion, aided and abetted by certain British officials; and at this very moment, 26 October, Jinnah was waiting in Abbottabad ready to ride in triumph to Srinagar. Where Pakistan had plotted without scruple, India had acted with impeccable openness and honesty. Stephens was shocked at the way in which Mountbatten had become, it then seemed to him, more Hindu than the Hindus (others were to note this phenomenon over the next few days).
(5) Mountbatten appeared to have accepted without question every rumour hostile to Pakistan. The story of Jinnah at Abbottabad, which was completely without foundation (he was then in Lahore), was a good example; and subsequently it has entered the mythology of the Kashmir dispute. It is clear from this account that Mountbatten had reached a state of mind where such niceties as the actual completion of the accession process had ceased to matter. What had to be done was to get the gallant Indian troops inside Kashmir. (Birth of a Tragedy-Kashmir-1947, pages 90, 95, 96). “One may well wonder why the GOI, had it indeed been in possession of a properly signed Instrument of Accession , did not publish it as such in the 1948 White-Paper, it would certainly have been the documentary jewel in India’s Kashmiri crown. A version of this profoma was eventually produced in 1971 .The best that can be said about the IOA is that it raises grave doubts as to its authenticity. Despite much search, there is good reason to believe that the original Maharaja’s copy of this, or any other, form of Instrument of Accession has failed to turn up in the Jammu & Kashmir State Archives. There are well informed people who deny that any such document ever existed.”(Ibid at pages 102-103).
The question is very simple: Nehru filed petition/complaint in UN himself against Pak following developments of October 1947. Any person with ABC knowledge of law knows that every petitioner/complainant/plaintiff while filing it before court attaches basic documents with it to sustain its claim before the court. Since alleged IOA formed basic document on which India could have based its claim over Kashmir, why wasn’t it attached with the petition lodged by India/Nehru? The answer is that it didn’t exist at all. The printed proforma sent for signatures of MHS was not signed at all. Further, why it took India 25 years till 1971 to “display” it publicly. Why BJP for this very reason of doubtful IOA is repeatedly saying that it was a big mistake on the part of Nehru to approach UN.
Not surprising that on return from Jammu, with the Instrument of Accession in his hands, VP Menon, is said to have waved it at Alexander Symons, the British High Commissioner to India, and told him jubilantly: ” “Here it is! We have Kashmir. The bastard (MHS) signed the Act of Accession. And now that we have got it, we will never let it go. (Justice M.Y. Saraf, Kashmir Fights for Freedom, vol. II, (1947-1978) p.922, published by Ferozsons, Lahore). So the whole drama about accession was in doubt from day one. The terms of reference were clear. That is why it is not being put into public domain.
see also the book, instrument of accession, a farce claim.
Last edited:
MilSpec
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Messages
- 12,931
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
here you go.
http://jklaw.nic.in/instrument_of_accession_of_jammu_and_kashmir_state.pdf
https://thewire.in/history/public-first-time-jammu-kashmirs-instrument-accession-india
now use some common sense. You do not sign an Instrument of accession contingent upon an article which has not even been written.
shahbaz baig
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2013
- Messages
- 4,433
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
I have edited my previous comment.
Let me tell you the truth, we both did mistake and should accept our mistake for the betterment of our people. A wiki pedia which you quoted me was picked from a fake latter.
Indian claims that JK Maharaja Hari Singh signed Instrument of Accession (IOA) with India on 26-10-1947 that in turn justified India airlifting its troops at Srinagar airport on 27-10-1947 to defend the State against “tribal invasion”. However, this claim of India has been doubted & rejected by many reputed historians. Indian Troops entered Kashmir on 27th October 1947 but their Patiala troops were already days before stationed in Jammu. ( Kashmir Issue, , a historical perspective, by A M Mattoo).
There are number of historical facts that assail the claim of IOA having ever been signed by MHS. In fact proforma copy of IOA was prepared by India , sent to different rulers of erstwhile India States for signatures . Most of these proforma agreements returned signed by the rulers but in the case of JK it was not signed at all . So, writes world reputed historian, Alaister Lamb, about it in these words:
(1) the Maharaja was in the process of abandoning Srinagar and removing his Government to Jammu in the comparative safety of the other side of the Banihal Pass . He departed in a spectacular motor cavalcade at dawn on 26 October; and he could hardly be expected to reach Jammu before late that evening. The Maharaja certainly signed no papers.
(2) It is curious that at the evening meeting of Defence Committee of India on 26 October , although it was decided that overt Indian intervention in Kashmir should go ahead while in fact there was at this point no signed Instrument.
(3) This absence of a completed IOA that evening of 26 October was pointed to by Mountbatten himself when Ian Stephens of the Calcutta the Statesman newspaper came to dine with him and his wife. Stephens recorded the main points which were raised by his host about the storm then brewing in Kashmir. He writes : “the Maharajah’s formal accession to India was BEING finalized”. in other words that it was still an incomplete process. The Indian troops, however, were going in to Kashmir come what may.
(4) Mountbatten delivered what to Stephens seemed an extraordinary anti-Pakistan diatribe. The real enemies in Kashmir were the Muslim League and its leader, M.A. Jinnah. They had planned the whole invasion, aided and abetted by certain British officials; and at this very moment, 26 October, Jinnah was waiting in Abbottabad ready to ride in triumph to Srinagar. Where Pakistan had plotted without scruple, India had acted with impeccable openness and honesty. Stephens was shocked at the way in which Mountbatten had become, it then seemed to him, more Hindu than the Hindus (others were to note this phenomenon over the next few days).
(5) Mountbatten appeared to have accepted without question every rumour hostile to Pakistan. The story of Jinnah at Abbottabad, which was completely without foundation (he was then in Lahore), was a good example; and subsequently it has entered the mythology of the Kashmir dispute. It is clear from this account that Mountbatten had reached a state of mind where such niceties as the actual completion of the accession process had ceased to matter. What had to be done was to get the gallant Indian troops inside Kashmir. (Birth of a Tragedy-Kashmir-1947, pages 90, 95, 96). “One may well wonder why the GOI, had it indeed been in possession of a properly signed Instrument of Accession , did not publish it as such in the 1948 White-Paper, it would certainly have been the documentary jewel in India’s Kashmiri crown. A version of this profoma was eventually produced in 1971 .The best that can be said about the IOA is that it raises grave doubts as to its authenticity. Despite much search, there is good reason to believe that the original Maharaja’s copy of this, or any other, form of Instrument of Accession has failed to turn up in the Jammu & Kashmir State Archives. There are well informed people who deny that any such document ever existed.”(Ibid at pages 102-103).
The question is very simple: Nehru filed petition/complaint in UN himself against Pak following developments of October 1947. Any person with ABC knowledge of law knows that every petitioner/complainant/plaintiff while filing it before court attaches basic documents with it to sustain its claim before the court. Since alleged IOA formed basic document on which India could have based its claim over Kashmir, why wasn’t it attached with the petition lodged by India/Nehru? The answer is that it didn’t exist at all. The printed proforma sent for signatures of MHS was not signed at all. Further, why it took India 25 years till 1971 to “display” it publicly. Why BJP for this very reason of doubtful IOA is repeatedly saying that it was a big mistake on the part of Nehru to approach UN.
Not surprising that on return from Jammu, with the Instrument of Accession in his hands, VP Menon, is said to have waved it at Alexander Symons, the British High Commissioner to India, and told him jubilantly: ” “Here it is! We have Kashmir. The bastard (MHS) signed the Act of Accession. And now that we have got it, we will never let it go. (Justice M.Y. Saraf, Kashmir Fights for Freedom, vol. II, (1947-1978) p.922, published by Ferozsons). So the whole drama about accession was in doubt from day one. The terms of reference were clear. That is why it is not being put into public domain.
see also the book, instrument of accession, a farce claim.
Last edited:
MilSpec
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2011
- Messages
- 12,931
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
Read again:
https://thewire.in/history/public-first-time-jammu-kashmirs-instrument-accession-india[URL]https://thewire.in/history/public-first-time-jammu-kashmirs-instrument-accession-india[/URL]
the article posts the original document, discuss it authenticity etc. All of it is there for the readers to review.
shahbaz baig
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2013
- Messages
- 4,433
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
That's the latter which I said is fake because of many reason and i explained you logically why, in my lengthy comment.
You should bother to read my comment.
Last edited:
third eye
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 18,519
- Reaction score
- 13
- Country
- Location
What the dolt seems to forget is that he like all of us too are temporary
The nation & its interests remain forever
third eye
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 18,519
- Reaction score
- 13
- Country
- Location
Have you picked this up from Andrew Whiteheads article ?
The State of Patiala acceded to Indian in May 1948, what control would the GOI have on State troops till the state merged with Union ?
It was the 1st Sikhs ( now 4 Mech Inf) who were the first troops air lifted to Srinagar .
pakdefender
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2009
- Messages
- 5,671
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
Kashmir bane ga Pakistan , Toot kay rahay ga Hindustan
Kashmir is not part Hindu india
Kashmir is not part Hindu india
I mean...what is stopping you to appeal now...If you can not do anything in last 72 years, what makes you to beleive that you can do in future..
Similar threads
