Act of India 1935 PART I

By Naveed Tajammalnaveed-pic

To better understand as to why we CANNOT be a Federation as defined in Government of India Act of 1935, which also continues in our Constitution(s), with reference to the geographic entity,which makes the Federation.

By virtue of the Treaty, granted and accepted, on 29th March 1849,and ratified by the Right Honourable The Governor General on the 5th of April 1849. Dulleep Singh, Tej Singh, Deena Nath, Bhai Nidan Singh, Fakir Nuruddin,Gundur Singh and sardar Lal Singh, had signed away the Sikh Kingdom of Ranjit Singh to the East India Company.This Treaty was counter signed by Dalhousie, Elliot and Lawerence. The terms granted to Maharaja Dulleep Singh by the East India Company, on their part was Henry Meirs Elliot Esq. Foreign secretary to the Government of India and Lieut-Colonel Sir Henery Montgommery Lawerence, resident, in virtue of full powers vested in them by the Right Honourable James, Earl of Dalhousie, the Governor General appointed by the East India Company.

The Sikh sarkar, Dulleep Singh and his  members above mentioned signed away the following aspects; shall resign for himself his heirs and his successors, all right ,title, and claim to the soverignity of the Sikh State, all the property of the State, of whatever description and wheresoever found, shall be confisticated to the East India Company,in a part payment of the debt due by the State of Lahore to the British Government, and of the expenses of the war. The gem called the Kohinoor which was taken from Shuja ul Mulk by Ranjit Singh shall be surrendered by the Maharaja of the Lahore State to the Queen of England.

Dulleep Singh, was to recieve from the East India Company, for the support of himself, his relatives,and the servants of the State, a pension not, less than four and not exceeding five lakhs of the,”Company’s ruppees” per annum. That, Dulleep Singh was to be treated with respect and honour.He was to retain the title of a Maharaja, and he was to continue to recieve, during his life, such portions of the above named pension as may be alotted to himself personally,”provided he shall remain,obedient,to the British Government, and shall reside at such place as the Governor General of India may select”.

For any reader, seeking more on the Treaty,he is referred to,”Volume II,Treaties,Engagements and Sunnuds”. Compiled by C.U.Aitchison.Calcutta 1863. Technically, by this Treaty the Sikh State which was then composed of portions of Kabul Suba,Multan Suba and Lahore with the full Kashmir Suba of the Old Mughal Empire, which had lapsed to Nadir Shah in 1739 and later to Ahmed Shah Saddozai(Abdali) in 1747 on the assassination of Nadir Shah by some of his principal officers of his court who had learnt that their names were in the list of prescribed victims, it is recorded that Nadir Shah had informed one of his captains of guard of the Afghans that he entirely had lost the confidence of his household guards,and that he should the very next day,cease and imprison all officers of his guard. These men who had become aware of this,resolved to save themselves by assassination of Nadir Shah. The execution of the plot was committed to four persons among whom were Mohammad ali Khan Afsar and Saleh Beg,one of the captains of the guards,these men,taking advantage of their stations under the pretext of urgent business,rushed past the guards into the inner tents.The noise awoke Nadir Shah and he had slain two of them when a blow from Saleh Beg, deprived him of existence. Mal Colm, the author of,”History of Persia” has been quoted,in the footnotes of the book, a rework of Mal Colms, with editions of Mirza Hairat, compiled by Lieut-Colonel M.H.Court, 15 Bengal Cavalry.1888. According to Mal Colm ,”A persian manuscript in my possession relates an extraordinary and amusing ancedote of Nadir Shah,at this period, which shows how completely he understood the feelings of the most ignorant and wicked of his subjects. A native merchant travelling from Kabul,had been robbed in a plain near Nihshahpur(Iran)and so he carried his complaint to his soveriegn Nadir Shah.”Was there no one near,but the robbers?”Asked Nadir Shah,”None”was the short reply,”Were there stones or bushes,?”Asked Nadir Shah,”Yes,”Said the man,”There was one large solitary tree,under whose shade I was reposing when I was attacked”. Nadir Shah, on hearing this affected great fury and ordered two executioners to proceed instantly and flog the tree that had been described,every morning till it either restored the property that had been lost,or revealed the names of the thieves,by whom it had been taken. The mandate of a king of Persia was always a Law,that of Nadir Shah was considered as irrevocable as fate.The executioners proceeded and the tree had not suffered flagellation above a week,when all goods that had been stolen were found one morning,carefully deposited at the roots of the tree.The alarmed robbers who had heard of the extravagent cruelty that inflicted such blows upon an inanimate substance, trembled at the very thought of the horrible punishment that awaited them, if ever discovered.When the result was reported to Nadir Shah,he smiled and said,”I knew what the flogging of that tree would produce”.

So such a man like Nadir Shah had ruled over our lands for almost 8 years.In the records that relate to our past and its upheavels one also finds the mention of a Treaty signed between Shuja ul Mulk Saddozai a descendent of Ahmed Shah who on 12th March 1834 had entered into a treaty with Ranjit Singh by virtue of which he, disclaimed all titles on part of himself,his heirs ,successors and all the Saddozais to whatever territories lying on the either bank of River Indus that may have been possessed by Ranjit Singh viz Kashmir including its limits East,West,North and South together with Fort of Attock ,Chach,Hazara,Khabel,Amb with its dependencies on the left bank of River Indus and on the right bank,Peshawer with the Yousufzai territory,Khattaks,Hashtghar,Michni,Kohat and all places dependent upon Peshawer as far as the Khyber Pass,Bannu,the wazri territory,Daur,Tank,Garank,Kalabagh and Khushalghar,with their dependent districts Dera Ismael Khan and its dependencies together with Dera Ghazi Khan,Kot Mithan and their dependent territory,Sanghar,Harrald-Dajal,Hajipur,Rajanpur as well as Mankara with it’s districts and the whole of Multan Subah situated on left bank of Indus. The treaty had fifteen clauses,all binding on shuha’ul mulk,which also included sending to Ranjit Singh annually fifty five high bred horses ,eleven persian scimitars, seven persian poniards, twenty five good mules,fruits dry and fresh by the way of the Kabul River as well as pieces of Satin,Choghas of fur,persian carpets,kimkhabs wrought with gold and silver altogether numbering 101 pieces.

Regarding Shikarpur as per treaty quoted the territory of Sindh lying on the right bank of Indus Shuja ul Mulk was to abide by whatever may be settled as the right and proper in confirmity with the happy relations of friendship subsisting between the British Government and the Maharaja,through Captain Wade.

To conclude is there any, justification ,for us to continue with the clause of federation as enacted in the Act of 1935 and persisting in our Constitution(s).Pakistan was NEVER a land of federations,it has always been one state as defined by Arab geographers as Sindh wa Hindh.However for administrative purposes it can be divided on population basis in as many provinces as required.
The writer has over 30 years of investigative historical research experience.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  • By Act of 1935 PART II | Pakpotpourri2's Blog on May 17, 2015 at 2:55 pm

    […] By pakpotpourri2, on May 17, 2015 at 2:55 pm, under Uncategorized. No Comments Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « Act of India 1935 PART I […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: