Instrument of Accession of Kalat to Pakistan 27th-31st March 1948

[HRK]

 

[Joe Shearer]

View attachment 304544 View attachment 304543

I am consumed by curiousity: why did you print this? There are several very interesting possibilities.

 

[CHD]

I am consumed by curiousity: why did you print this? There are several very interesting possibilities.

And i am curious, wether india has something like this for Hyderabad? oh right , i remember india has some other thing called Operation polo

 

[Joe Shearer]

And i am curious, wether india has something like this for Hyderabad? oh right , i remember india has some other thing called Operation polo

Not that I recall. I have to look up V. P. Menon again. As far as I remember, after the police action, the administration was taken over, but I forget the details. If you are really interested, I'll get back to you.

You seem to have had some afterthoughts. Sarcasm is all right, in its place; there is nothing wrong in pointing out that Hyderabad was taken over by military action, after the Nizam refused to accede to India (accession to Pakistan being ruled out for the same reason that the Khan of Kalat was refused accession to India, contiguity). Those are facts; I don't think you will find me tip-toeing around facts .

 

[HRK]

I am consumed by curiousity: why did you print this? There are several very interesting possibilities.

Sir if you have not noticed it's a legal document drafted before the partition under Government of India Act 1935 (read Part-II chapter-I) to form of legal process for the accession of Princely States of British India to FEDRATION of India.

Both of the Dominion States India & Pakistan adopted it ... language of all the accession documents are the same; examples

1- Instrument of Accession of Jammu and Kashmir State dated 26 October, 1947 (though its authenticity is under question)

2- Instrument of Accession of Tripura state dated 13 August 1947

3- And other 560 Princely States in India

so Sir don't think too ahead of REALITIES otherwise all the possibilities are open to those states as well .....


Regards
HRK

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sir if you have not noticed it's a legal document drafted before the partition under Government of India Act 1935 (read Part-II chapter-I) to form of legal process for the accession of Princely States of British India to FEDRATION of India.

Both of the Dominion States India & Pakistan adopted it ... language of all the accession documents are the same; examples

1- Instrument of Accession of Jammu and Kashmir State dated 26 October, 1947 (though its authenticity is under question)

2- Instrument of Accession of Tripura state dated 13 August 1947

3- And other 560 Princely States in India

so Sir don't think too ahead of REALITIES otherwise all the possibilities are open to those states as well .....


Regards

HRK

1. I had noticed that, in fact, and paid no particular attention to that factoid, because that was the procedure: there was no separate deed of accession template attached to or associated with the India Independence Act.
2. You will have noticed that both Dominions were to be governed by the Government of India Act until they had drafted their respective constitutions, and that they were therefore under the Governor-General until those dates, when they got Presidents instead.
3. As you have pointed out, the deed of accession was the same for all acceding states. I am not curious, and I am not excited for that reason. It seems that you may not have noticed the curiousity.

 

[third eye]

Some interesting inputs here :


https://defence.pk/threads/the-accession-of-kalat-myth-and-reality.194265/

 

[HRK]

There are several very interesting possibilities.

It seems that you may not have noticed the curiousity

though it is said curiosity kill the cat but I want to know the reason of your curiosity ....

 

[Joe Shearer]

though it is said curiosity kill the cat but I want to know the reason of your curiosity ....

Very simply, it was this.

Although most - almost all - the rulers used the same formulaic deed of accession, each and everyone of them, with one exception, was quite quickly and summarily herded into a group of similar states, in due course, they were joined with a nearby provincial fragment, and within no time, they found themselves unified with British India. Some, HH Mysore for instance, lasted a very long time as Rajpramukh and then as Governor of their erstwhile state; the overwhelming majority soon found themselves on the shelf, with their privy purses halving on every succession, and no particular role to play in society as princes.

Their states, too, disappeared; Jaipur, Jodhpur and Mewar are just names now for the historically interested; Gwalior and Indore are just names; Baroda is known for industry; Mysore is a sleepy backwater for Bangalore; Hyderabad, of all of the states, has come back into existence, after an arduously fought battle against the former Presidency of Madras portions.

My curiousity is how Kashmir managed to retain the protection of its ruler, who gave Foreign Affairs, Defence and Communications to India, but reserved the rest for himself, and after May 1948, for his people, through the constitution-making that he ordained, and that was achieved in 1956. All the rulers, if you look above, reserved all the powers save those specifically handed over, to themselves; all lost those powers in very rapid order.

There will be those who speak about the Nehru-Abdullah New Delhi Agreement; was that the key, and was Sheikh Abdullah the catalyst of Kashmiri autonomy?

There will be others who will credit (!) Pakistan with the achievement, that if Pakistan had not insisted at all times, in all weathers, that Kashmir could not be treated as any other part of India, Kashmir, too would have gone to the same position as the other princely states.

This is what excites my curiousity: what gave it - in exclusively Indian terms - its unique position in constitutional terms within India.

though it is said curiosity kill the cat but I want to know the reason of your curiosity ....

Another matter, that I have never fathomed, is the legal justification that Pakistan cites for its administration of parts of Kashmir. The justification on this side is simple:

1. The Maharaja was sovereign and had all sovereign powers;
2. He gave away Foreign Affairs, Defence and Communications to the Dominion of India; the rest he reserved to himself;
3. These others, the rest, he put to the constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, which he summoned by royal decree (May 1048);
4. That constituent assembly retained all those residual powers, and actually provided in its constitution for J&K the mirror image of the Indian Constitution, Article 370, denying any transfer of these powers other than by explicit consent of the state assembly.

How did Pakistan deal with sovereignty? It was never transferred to them but they rule over those parts.

 

[HRK]

parts of Kashmir. The justification on this side is simple:

1. The Maharaja was sovereign and had all sovereign powers;
2. He gave away Foreign Affairs, Defence and Communications to the Dominion of India; the rest he reserved to himself;
3. These others, the rest, he put to the constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir, which he summoned by royal decree (May 1048);
4. That constituent assembly retained all those residual powers, and actually provided in its constitution for J&K the mirror image of the Indian Constitution, Article 370, denying any transfer of these powers other than by explicit consent of the state assembly.

How did Pakistan deal with sovereignty? It was never transferred to them but they rule over those parts.

It will lead the thread to the derailment therefore I would not discuss it further but like to ask to prepare a chain of events with their respective dates you will have answer to all of your questions, further if you can please the think about

1- Why India not insisted on The Only LEGAL Document regarding Kashmir which was available at that time in UNITED NATION .... ??

2- Why India till todate has not SUBMITTED this document in UN ... ??

3- Why India ACCEPTED plebiscite for Kashmir .... ??

4- Why India has GRANTED SPECIAL STATUS to KASHMIR in her CONSTITUTION ... ??

 

[Joe Shearer]

It will lead the thread to the derailment therefore I would not discuss it further but like to ask to prepare a chain of events with their respective dates you will have answer to all of your questions, further if you can please the think about

1- Why India not insisted on The Only LEGAL Document regarding Kashmir which was available at that time in UNITED NATION .... ??

2- Why India till todate has not SUBMITTED this document in UN ... ??

3- Why India ACCEPTED plebiscite for Kashmir .... ??

4- Why India has GRANTED SPECIAL STATUS to KASHMIR in her CONSTITUTION ... ??

I am not sure why you think that this discussion might derail the thread; my question was purely academic, and has no bias, as you have seen.

As for the chain of events with their respective dates, I have had that for some years now, and am quite at a loss to know what difference that makes.

Coming to your questions:

1- Why India not insisted on The Only LEGAL Document regarding Kashmir which was available at that time in UNITED NATION .... ??

The only legal document regarding Kashmir was the Deed of Accession. You will find a full copy, which is very close to the copy of the Deed of Accession of Kalat that you displayed, in Noorani, Constitutional History of Kashmir. No legal document regarding Kashmir was available with the United Nations, either then or later, other than India's complaint of aggression, to which was attached a copy of the Deed of Accession, to which the UN replied with its original resolution, and then followed up with another, substantive resolution.

2- Why India till todate has not SUBMITTED this document in UN ... ??

I am unable to understand your point.

In your first question, you insisted that the only legal document was available at that time in the United Nations, which is wholly untrue; only India had the original and only a copy was filed with the UN. So if you look at the dates, this was filed right at the outset.

3- Why India ACCEPTED plebiscite for Kashmir .... ??

You will find, in his acknowledgement of the Deed of Accession, Lord Mountbatten, Governor-General of the Dominion of India, proposing, on behalf of the Dominion, that a plebiscite should be held once the aggression was vacated.

So the answer to your question is that India accepted a plebiscite for Kashmir because India made the suggestion in the first place!!

4- Why India has GRANTED SPECIAL STATUS to KASHMIR in her CONSTITUTION ... ??[

Did you not read a single line of my previous post? I had explained things in that post in some detail.

 

[Joe Shearer]

@HRK

I want you to know that I very sincerely wish to clarify any point that you or anyone else should have and I will treat each query with respect, more respect than I might have shown in the past. If you think that discussing these matters on PDF will be disruptive, please feel free to write to me on the e-mail id in my signature.

My only stipulation is that all questions should be honestly meant, and not rhetorical, and all answers should be read without thinking that any denigration of any country is intended.

 

[HRK]

@HRK

I want you to know that I very sincerely wish to clarify any point that you or anyone else should have and I will treat each query with respect, more respect than I might have shown in the past. If you think that discussing these matters on PDF will be disruptive, please feel free to write to me on the e-mail id in my signature.

My only stipulation is that all questions should be honestly meant, and not rhetorical, and all answers should be read without thinking that any denigration of any country is intended.

Sir first of all let me clarify two things
1- I am not doubting you sincerity
2- I am open for Healthy debate

But the matter is being the moderator I am responsible to ensure the decorum of the forum should be maintained, because of this thing I can't allow a debate on Accession of Kashmir in a thread related to Instrument of Accession of Kalat

Regarding your replies to my quires I think it would be interesting thing If you can open a thread specifically about Accession of Kashmir where you can post not only the Indian POV but can answer some of quires regarding that particular matter ..... I hope this will be a Learning experience for most the member of the forum ... I further hope that you will not forget to tag me in that thread ....

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sir first of all let me clarify two things
1- I am not doubting you sincerity
2- I am open for Healthy debate

But the matter is being the moderator I am responsible to ensure the decorum of the forum should be maintained, because of this thing I can't allow a debate on Accession of Kashmir in a thread related to Instrument of Accession of Kalat

Regarding your replies to my quires I think it would be interesting thing If you can open a thread specifically about Accession of Kashmir where you can post not only the Indian POV but can answer some of quires regarding that particular matter ..... I hope this will be a Learning experience for most the member of the forum ... I further hope that you will not forget to tag me in that thread ....

You are quite right, of course, I was taking the thread in the larger sense of the vexed question of the Deeds of Accession.

What I would NOT like to do is to post the Indian point of view. Instead I would like to narrate the occurrences that took place, and, yes, answer as much as I can.

By tomorrow, and as the inspiration for that effort, the post will be addressed to you.

 

[باپ]

With the lapse of the British paramountcy in 1947, the Khanate of Balochistan became an independent sovereign state. The Khan, Mir Ahmad Yar Khan, announced independence in a public speech on 15 August 1947. Soon after the promulgation of the constitution, elections were held at the Kalat state National Party won 39 out of a total 51 seats on Lower House. The rest of the seats went to independent candidates, who supported the cause of the National Party.



On 13, December, the Khan summoned the Lower House to discuss, the official language, the Sharia (Islamic Law), and relations between the Khanate of Balochistan and Pakistan, with special reference to accession.7



In September 1947, the Prime Minister of Kalat, Nawabzada M. Aslam, and the Foreign Minister, D.Y. Fell travelled to Karachi to discuss the leased areas, under the Kalat-Pakistan Agreement of August 1947. The meetings between the officials of the two states were not fruitful, due to policy of the Pakistani Government, which insisted on an unconditional accession of the Khanate to Pakistan. On 20 September 1947, Mr. Ikramullah, the Pakistan Foreign Secretary wrote a letter to Aslam, the Prime Minister of Khanate, urging the accession of the Khanate and, meanwhile, the president of the British Balochistan Muslim League, Qazi M. Isa, met the Khan and conveyed to him a message from Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the Governor-General of Pakistan, who extended an invitation for the Khan to come to Karachi to discuss future relations between the Khanate and Pakistan. Before the Khan’s visit to Karachi in October 1947, he discussed all possible courses of action with his Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister.



The Khan went to Karachi on Jinnah’s invitation with a draft treaty which he wanted to use as a basis for negotiations with the Government of Pakistan. The draft treaty proposed by the Khan was aimed at entering into a treaty relationship with Pakistan.8



On his arrival in Karachi, the Khan was not received by the Governor General nor by the Prime Minister, because Jinnah advised him to accede the Khanate to Pakistan and stated that he could propose no better course than accession.



Nevertheless, the Khan refused the demand of Mohammad Ali Jinnah and said, “As Balochistan is a land of numerous tribes, the people there must be consulted in the affairs prior to any decision”. The Khan promised Jinnah to reply after consulting the parliament of the Khanate. On December 12, 1947, a Session of the Darul-Awam was summoned by the Khan to discuss the matter of accession. The house after a debate adopted the following resolution unanimously on December 14, 1947.



Relations with Pakistan should be established as between two sovereign states through a treaty based upon friendship and not by accessions.



On January 4, 1948 the Darul-Umra also passed the same resolution. The Prime Minister Aslam visited Karachi with a copy of the proceedings of the parliament. He met Jinnah and discussed the matter of accession. On his return to Kalat in February, he brought a letter from Jinnah, dated 2 February 1948, addressed to the Khan. In this letter, once again Jinnah repeated the demand to join Pakistan.



On February 11, 1948, Quaid-i-Azam came to Sibi, situated in former British Balochistan, where a meeting was arranged between the Khan and Jinnah on the evening of the following day. On the 13, they had a second meeting at Dadar—the winter capital of the Khanate. Another meeting fixed for the 14th, had to be cancelled due to the sudden “illness” of the Khan.



Jinnah was disappointed by the behaviour of Khan and his parliament. On March 9, 1948, it was communicated to the Khan that “His Excellency had decided to cease to deal personally with Kalat state negotiations, to decide the future relations of Pakistan and Kalat.” Col. S.B. Shah was assigned to deal with the Khanate’s affairs, with the help of Aslam, who knew the internal conflicts and rivalries among the Khan and his chief, including feudatory chiefs, Mir Bai Khan, Gichki, Nawab of Mekran (Brother-in-Law of Khan) Ghulam Qadir, Jam of Las Bela, and Mir Habibullah Nusherwani, Nawab of Kharan. They met Jinnah on 17 March 1948, and informed his that “if Pakistan was not prepared to accept their offer of accession immediately they would be compelled to take other steps for their protection against the Khan of Kalat’s aggressive actions.”

Quaid-e-Azam Receiving a Karakuli Jinnah Cap from the Balochistan National Guards, 1948

After their meeting with Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Pakistan’s Cabinet met in an emergency session discuss the request the chief of Balochistan. The cabinet decided to accept the offer in order to put pressure on the Khan for accession. On 17 March Jinnah accepted the accession.



On 18 March, the Pakistan Minister of Foreign Affairs issued a press Statement, announcing that Pakistan had accepted the accession of Mehran, Kharan, and Lesbela, with the “accession” of these areas, Kalat lost its connection with Iran and Afghanistan and was left without any outlet to the sea.



After the accession of these states. The Joint Secretary for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Col. S.B. Shah approached the Baloch chiefs Wadera Bangulzai, Sardar Shahwani, Sardar Sanjarani, and offered them an autonomous status if they accede to Pakistan. Meanwhile Sardar Raisani offered his cooperation to Col. Shah.9



Nevertheless, the Khan saw two alternatives:



To leave the palace and to take refuge in the mountains in order to fight.
To accept the demand of accession.



The first alternative was opposed by Fell, and supported by nationalists. Khan agreed with proposed of Mr. Fell and saw the “wisdom” of declaring “accession”, without the approval of the parliament. On 28 March 1948, he informed the Government of Pakistan about his decision and the Khanate became a part of Pakistan.10