The sacrifices that followed July 13, 1931
July 13 will be remembered for not only what happened on that particular day, but for the long chain of struggle and sacrifice that followed, Shahnaz Bashir writes
July 13 will be remembered for not only what happened on that particular day, but for the long chain of struggle and sacrifice that followed, Shahnaz Bashir writes
Publish Date: Jul 13 2006 12:00PM
When Muslims from Punjab began to shape Muslim public opinion in Kashmir under “Kashmir Committee” (the name hijacked by some members of Indian National Congress recently to have a civil intervention in Kashmir in favour of India) shrewd ministers of Maharaja Hari Singh organized the visit of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Tej Bahadur Sapru. They tried to dissuade Muslims of Kashmir about their struggle, campaigned in valley and asked people to cooperate with the Maharaja’s government. This resulted in pacifying some Muslim leaders for some time. And through the intervention of a liberal Muslim politician from British India Meher shah, an agreement was achieved between Muslim leaders of Kashmir and the government. The agreement is known as Temporary truce. When terms of this truce were announced to people in Jama Masjid on August 28, 1931, they were very angry. Ultimately the truce proved a farce as there was nothing for the government to implement and people wanted to end the regime that was the cause of all grievances. Subsequently the revolt began to ripen. The arrests of several Muslim leaders on 21st September 1931, the breaches of Temporary truce and conspiracies like Riots Enquiry Commission, heated Muslim rage into agitation. Complete hartal was observed. People assembled near Jamia Masjid and started protesting peacefully on September 22, 1931 but were manhandled by Maharaja’s authorities. When people objected to their atrocities, the police opened fire and three men achieved martyrdom and several were wounded. Fire was opened on another crowd on the same day, at Maisuma where two more sacrificed their lives and three, including a woman, were injured. The military of Maharaja unleashed a torturous reign on people. Anyone could be arrested on fake document and false charges and convicted and punished brutally. The accused men in these cases were subjected to pubic flogging at Exhibition ground near Amira Kadal. This was barbaric for insult it was. Men were stripped naked, lashed thirty times and then sold. The inhuman crime continued to be committed against the innocent Kashmiris. There, in South Kashmir people synchronized the protest with their counterparts in the rest of the valley. On September 23, 1931 a procession was led from Eidgah, in district Islamabad. The procession marched and passed through Janglaat Mandi to Cheeni Chowk. But when it reached Malak Nag, it was subjected to severe thrashing. People clashed with troops in argument, guns spoke in reaction and about forty people laid down their lives, 27 were injured. Of those, killed and injured, were children of less than ten years of age. On September 24, 1931 a Muslim Fakir was taken for trial at the Munsiff’s court in Shopian for his seditious (but true) slogans against the Dogra government. This created unrest in the town. People took out a procession demanding release of the detained. Fire was opened and several people were wounded. This created further trouble and people beat a police officer to death and pelted the police station. Police fired back from the windows of the station injuring dozens of people. The same day Hari Singh passed an Ordinance (September 24 1931) to check the organized rebellion of Kashmiri masses. The Ordinance was called 19-L. This Ordinance empowered troops to enforce brutal laws. There were several arrests and the important leadership of Muslims was put behind bars. People in Srinagar came on the streets first time in thousands and made their presence felt as a majority. Through this draconian Ordinance the city was handed over to the military control and civil administration was suspended. The Rajput soldiers of Maharaja took full benefit of the Ordinance Raj in coming days. They used it to take revenge of their killed member in Shopian from the people. 19-L gave troops a free hand to go about the town. Soldiers entered the houses, looted them and raped the women. Several cases of rape were reported to Middleton, Enquiry Officer of Riots Enquiry Commission. Shopkeepers were asked to open their shops, and when they did it, they were arrested for investigation. In their absence the shops were plundered. People were forced to salute the military officers in the streets of the town. On 5th of October 1931, during the celebration of his birthday, Hari Singh proclaimed and disappointed Kashmiris. He said, “I believe I am voicing the general feeling when I say that we are deeply grateful to the troops for their devotion to duty and self restraint they have shown in maintaining the public peace and authority of law during last three months.” The same method is chosen by the present day mainstream politicians in Kashmir by calling human rights violations the good deeds of the men in uniform. Good deeds indeed. On July 13, 1931 Maharaja’s government immediately made an attempt to dilute the incident of Central Jail, Srinagar. Unidentified goons were sent to Mahraj Gunj, Nowshehra and Vicharnag, to loot and molest Kashmiri Pandits and Muslims, a little earlier before processions protesting against the firing of Central Jail passed these areas. This was done to show to the world that the event of July1931 was not a struggle for freedom but an outcome of communal trouble. This was all engineered cleverly. The then Prime Minster, Wakefield was manageably dislocated from his office so that no complaint of loot could be registered in his office. The Rajput I G of police excused himself from acting to the matter and later said that he was waiting for the orders from P M O. The loot happened simultaneously at all the places at 2:30 pm and the police officer went to Mahraj Gunj at 4:45 pm, when nothing of the evidences could be had. The police stationed in Mahraj Gunj closed their doors, and when the looters had gone they came out to provoke Hindus to take revenge. On July 14, 1931, to make full use of his constructs, Hari Singh appointed, the already mentioned, Riots Enquiry Commission under Justice Barjor Dalal. The Dalal Committee did not enter Muslim complaints against the loot of July 1931 but only grievances of Hindus were submitted. The report of the Committee was released on the same, 24th day of September 1931. It caused a great shock to Muslims of J&K. On October 31, 1931 a procession was organized by Young Men’s Muslim Association (YMMA) which paraded the streets of Jammu. The Muslims of Jammu carried a copy of the Dalal Committee report on a coffin and was ultimately burnt at a place called Ghazi Camp. Then protests followed for several days and on November 3rd 1931 troops fired on people at Ghazi Camp in which two men died and fifty were seriously injured. Glancy Commission, formed on November 12, 1934 to check the grievances of people, helped Hari Singh, to consolidate his power over the state by exploiting the event, rather tragedy of July 1931 in three ways. One was that he called the acknowledgement of Muslim representatives to legitimize his autocracy by trying and taking the Muslim subjects into confidence. Second was that the equal representations of Pandits and Hindus of Jammu in the commission conformed to the legality of Hindu Dogra rule as secular. Third was that he easily managed to manipulate July 13 martyrdom by distorting the truth of its being a part of political struggle and converting it to show it as an outbreak of economic grievances. Commission reaffirmed the unmade assertion of this diagnosis. In 1933 the abhorable recommendations of Glancy Commission about the distribution of state services created furore amongst the Muslim Conference leaders. Out of 763 gazetted appointments 74 had been given to Pandit minority and only 10 to the quota of Kashmiri Muslim majority. YMMA of Jammu gave an ultimatum to the government to accept the demands of Muslims after a serious clash between the Muslims and the authorities in January 1934. Government reacted with promulgating the regulation of 19-L on January 28, 1934 and exiled seven Muslim leaders. This act spurred the Muslim masses to revolt. Hundreds were arrested and heavy fines were imposed on them. In some other areas private property was auctioned, which further stoked the fire. People were rendered indescribably miserable. Protestors at Bijbehara and Pulwama on 2nd and 6th February 1934 shouted against government. Troops opened fire at both the places. Three people were killed at Bijbehara and ten at Pulwama and dozens were injured. Many Muslims were forced to migrate from Bijbehara to the adjacent areas. The formation of Srinagar Legislative Assembly in April 1934 further expanded the effect of Hari Singh’s policies. Instead of ensuring the participation of the representatives of his subjects, it, as a powerless organization, pitted one group of legislatures against the other. The presence of members was marked by consistent walkouts. Hari Singh facilitated it as a platform for creating feuds among the members. Political conversion of Muslim assemblage into the creation of Legislative Assembly as a symbolic political participation to debate their grievances, was in fact used to dampen the Muslim voice. But both of these astute political reformations couldn’t stop what is the universal fact of a genuine resistance. The situation of post-nineteen Thirty One Kashmir is analogous to that of present. The way Maharaja called Kashmiri political struggle an economic and administrative grievance of Kashmiris is similar to what India is doing at present. This way the democratic character of India is equivalent to the autocracy of Hari Singh. The strength in the struggle is same as that of 1931. But the only disturbing fact is that many of our profound intellectual counterparts are murmuring in isolation. The voice will grow stronger and will be pitched high if we unite and come forward.
The landing of Indian army on October 27, 1947 is one of the most debated events of Kashmir’s contemporary history. For the last more than two decades, separatists have been sponsoring a strike as the army is celebrating it as the Infantry Day. Historian Ashiq Hussian pieces together bits of information to offer a completely new version of the larger story that even points fingers at the tribal invasion itself.
State narrative suggests that on October 27, 1947 India flew its troops to Kashmir to save the Valley from tribal invasion.
Then, tribesmen of Pakistan had entered the border town of Muzaffarabad on the early morning of October 22. Their masters had expected that by the same evening, they would be in the summer capital of J&K at Srinagar located barely 100 miles away. However, it took them five days to cover 70 miles of Jhelum Valley Road (JVR) to reach Baramulla on October 26.
The JVR, those days was one of the best maintained highways of Asia, so connectivity was no issue. They were delayed because their march was hampered by the opposition at Muzaffarabad itself. Later, at Uri it was Chief of Staff of Jammu and Kashmir Rifles, Brigadier Rajinder Singh Jamwal, who, with the assistance of Patiala State Forces delayed their march (p 77 of Kashmir: Birth of a Tragedy Alistair Lamb). Patiala Army had arrived in Srinagar on October 17 (p 131Kashmir A Disputed Legacy Alistair Lamb).
Patiala Army was part of Indian Army because Patiala State had acceded to India before Transfer of Power. Maharaja Yadavindra Singh of Patiala could not have sent his troops to Kashmir without Delhi’s complicity.
When on October 27, India officially sent its troops to Kashmir Prime Minister Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru claimed that the King of Kashmir had acceded to India. He promised Kashmiris that his government would conduct a plebiscite in the state on the question of whether its people wanted to be part of India or Pakistan.
Nehru knew that tribesmen would be entering Kashmir. Yes, he knew it in September only. The fact that he knew it in advance is revealed by what he wrote to States Minister Sardar Valabhai Patal on September 27, 1947 (pp 49 of Sardar Patel’s Correspondence Vol. I): “I am writing to you about Kashmir…It is obvious to me from the many reports I have received that the situation there is dangerous and deteriorating one. The Muslim League in the Punjab and NWFP are making preparations to enter Kashmir in considerable numbers. The approach of winter is going to cut off Kashmir from the rest of India. The only normal route there is via Jhelum Valley. The Jammu route can hardly be used during winter and air traffic is also suspended.”
At this point of time, September 1947, Nehru did not deem it fit to inform Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir, of the trouble that was brewing for him in West Punjab and NWFP. Instead of advising Hari Singh to take defensive measures, Nehru wrote to Sardar Patel to be ready for imperial adventure: “Therefore it is important that something should be done before these winter conditions set in. This means practically by the end of October or at least the beginning of November. Indeed air traffic will be difficult even before that.”
In the routine academic discourses, a question naturally arises: if Nehru was so desperate to help out Kashmiris against the invading tribesmen and also wanted to ascertain their wishes about their future, why did he wait for the tribal invasion to happen? He knew almost a month in advance that it was round the corner, .
Nehru did not warn Hari Singh because he wanted to corner him into acceding to India and also share power with National Conference. “It becomes important, therefore,” he wrote to Patel further, “that the Maharaja should make friends with the National Conference so that there might be this popular support against Pakistan. Indeed, it seems to me that there is no other course open to the Maharaja but this: to release Sheikh Abdullah and the National Conference leaders, to make a friendly approach to them, seek their co-operation and make them feel that this is really meant, and then to declare adhesion to the Indian Union. Once the State accedes to India, it will become very difficult for Pakistan to invade it officially or unofficially without coming into conflict with the Indian Union.”
Accession to India was not something that Hari Singh was adverse to. He also wished to accede to India but upon his own terms and conditions. He was unwilling to share power with anyone. He had already dismissed his pro-independence Kashmiri Prime Minister R C Kak; and imported from India Deputy Prime Ministers and Prime Ministers such as Janak Singh Katotch, Ram Lal Batra, and M C Mahajan. This was all to appease Indian leaders. Also he received Lt Col Kashmir Singh Katotch (son of Janak Singh) of Indian Army as Liaison Officer between Indian Army and Jammu Kashmir Rifles.
But, Nehru was unimpressed by these measures and with the prospect of mere accession. He was certain that accession without the semblance of some sort of popular support would not go well with the international community. Therefore, he was keen to see Sheikh Abdullah and his party rally for India. National Conference was J&K’s strongest political party with support base in Kashmir valley and Nehru wanted the Valley for India. He cared little for Hari Singh. In fact, Hari Singh was disposable stuff.
In order to garner Patel’s support for his course of action – (they never saw eye to eye on any issue because dealing with (princely) States was Patel’s domain as he was States Minister but Nehru encroached his territory by conducted Kashmir policy himself), Nehru tried to convince the latter that the support of National Conference for India was indispensable. “It is equally clear to me,” he goes on to write, “that this can only take place with some measure of success after there is peace between the Maharaja and the National Conference and they co-operate together to meet the situation. This is not an easy task; but it can be done chiefly because Abdullah is very anxious to keep out of Pakistan and relies upon us a great deal for advice.”
Furthermore, Nehru apprised Patel that his line of thinking and that of Kashmiri Pandits was on the same plane: “This is the belief also of various minorities in Kashmir who have no other support to lean upon.” It was a time when Sheikh Abdullah was still in prison. Nehru was in contact with him through Kashmiri Pandits like Shamsunder Lal Dhar.
But why did Sheikh Abdullah, the then most popular leader, support India? Did he believe in Gandhi’s nationalism rather than in Jinnah’s Two Nations Theory?
I believe that he did not believe in anything except his own self interest. He had been in jail at the time of Transfer of Power. Within a week of the emergence of Pakistan Governor General M A Jinnah dismissed on August 22, the elected Government of pro-Congress Red Shirts in NWFP on the ground that the creation of Pakistan, which they had opposed, meant that their mandate to rule the Province had expired.
Now, if Muslim Kashmir became part of Pakistan on the ground of demography it would have meant that Sheikh Abdullah would not be allowed to rule Kashmir given the fact that he too had opposed the creation of Pakistan and on top of that he was not an elected representative of Kashmiris. Sheikh would perhaps have swallowed the bitter pill, put on sackcloth and fell on the feet of Jinnah whom he had disgraced in Srinagar three years ago. But the award of Muslim majority Gurdaspur district to India against Partition Principle which furnished India the only road link to Kashmir Valley via Jammu Province saved him from political doom. There was absolutely no need to be an elected representative to gain ascendance to political power if he supported India. Nehru would see to it that he became Prime Minister no matter if Kashmiris liked it or not. Thus it was the award of Gurdaspur district to India which made Nehru’s Kashmir schemes to succeed.
Since the beginning of Mountbatten’s Viceroyalty, Nehru had worked diligently to get Gurdaspur awarded to India against norms. Mountbatten was personally beholden to Nehru. British Government had appointed Mountbatten as the last Viceroy of India to fulfill Nehru’s wish (p 08 of Freedom at Midnight Larry Collins) because they desired that India should remain within British Commonwealth after Transfer of Power and for that reason they wished to earn Nehru’s favour.
So from day one the obliged Mountbatten tried to appease Nehru. He did everything in his power to upset Nehru’s political adversaries especially Jinnah whom Mountbatten disliked for many reasons. Knowing that Nehru cherished a grand design on Kashmir and that he needed a road link to fulfill his dream Mountbatten worked his influence to furnish him one via Pathankot, Gurdaspur.
It was on May 11, 1947 when Mountbatten raised the issue of keeping Gurdaspur district beyond the purview of Partition principle in a top secret meeting with his staff which Nehru attended in the capacity of Vice-President of Interim Government of British India. However, he met fierce opposition from Deputy Secretary Ian Scott which constrained him to assure the members present in the meeting that he would not press his demand and would instead ask the Boundary Commission “to handover from one side to the other any area within border districts where there was clearly a majority of the opposite community (p 759, 760, and 781 of Transfer of Power Vol. X).”
It was a time when Partition of British India had not been officially decided nor had the Boundary Commission been set up but the fate of Kashmir was sealed.
In the backdrop of Mountbatten-Nehru Gurdaspur conspiracy it would be safe to presume that the decision to fly Indian troops to Kashmir on October 27, was not a sudden development consequent upon tribal incursion. The implementation of the plan had started on 11 May.
Mountbatten’s June visit to Srinagar (and November visit to Lahore); and Mahatama Gandhi’s August visit to Kashmir were different links in the same chain. Gandhi came to Kashmir in early August to conspire against pro-independence Prime Minister Rama Chandra Kak. Mountbatten visited Srinagar in June to warn the Maharaja not to declare independence (p 120 of Mission with Mountbatten A C-Johnson). Post-Indian Army’s intervention in Kashmir, Mountbatten went to Lahore to avert a Pakistani attack on Kashmir which Jinnah had ordered on October 27 – the order that was flouted by his acting Army Chief General Douglas Gracy (p 226 Mission with Mountbatten A C-Johnson). The Vicerene Edwina also contributed her share towards the success of Nehru’s Kashmir scheme.
The bell tolled for Kashmir when on Mountbatten’s bidding Cyril Radcliffe of Boundary Commission dropped Muslim majority Gurdaspur district into Nehru’s lap. Nehru, now furnished with a road link to Kashmir, turned Sheikh Abdullah to his side courtesy of Kashmiri Pandits and waited for the Pakistani tribesmen to enter Kashmir.
An interesting question is: who informed Nehru in September that tribesmen were preparing to enter Kashmir? Was it the Red Shirt Pathans of NWFP, whose government had been dismissed by Jinnah, and who were still on Congress payrolls? And who, (in addition to Manki Pir, Mamdot Pir, Qayoom Khan, and Sardar Ibrahim), instigated the tribesmen against Hari Singh’s government? These questions assume relevance given the fact that Maharaja would not have submitted to Nehru’s demands of accession so tamely and so soon; and Nehru wouldn’t have gotten any justification to capture Kashmir in the absence of one furnished by tribal invasion.
Pakistan’s’s tragic fault lied in the fact that they did not stop tribesmen from entering into Kashmir. Tribal invasion proved counter productive to Kashmir.
Now so far as Nehru’s promise of plebiscite is concerned, it was aimed at hoodwinking the world on one hand and on the other to keep open the option of capturing Hindu majority States of Junagarh and Hyderabad on the grounds of demography. This argument is strengthened by his statement of Kashmir Policy to Sardar Patel in April 1949: “The prize we are fighting for is the Valley of Kashmir (p 262 Sardar Patel’s Correspondence Vol.X)
Called as Azad Kashmir in Pakistan, the PoK (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) has been a bone of contention between the two neighboring countries since 1947. The region is referred by United Nations and other international organizations, as “Pakistani-controlled Kashmir” (or Pakistan Administered Kashmir) and it was re-named as Pakistan-Occupied Jammu-Kashmir by the Modi government. The 13,297 square kilometers region which has an estimated population of about four million has added fuel to the burning enmity between India and Pakistan.
India has never given up its claim on the region, though Pakistan has the administration control over PoK. Through decades all the efforts of resolving the issue has seen failure over and over again. Neither people from Pakistan, India or the world know the true story behind PoK and why the issue cannot be resolved peacefully.Let us have a look at 17 lesser known facts about Pakistan Occupied Kashmir which has kept the fire burning since 1947.
Jammu and Kashmir never came under the direct British rule during their colonization of the Indian subcontinent. It remained under the rule of Maharaja Hari Singh.
It is lesser known fact that Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, a Kashmiri Pundit was stopped at the Kohala Bridge in 1946, and refused entry into the state. He and his companions were arrested by Maharaja Hari Singh when they entered the state anyway.
At the time of Partition, Jammu and Kashmir was given the status of an independent state. It had option of either joining India or Pakistan at its will. MaharajaHari Singh decided to keep Kashmir and independent state.
Though India celebrated its independence on August 15, 1947, Maharajah Hari Singh agreed to accede to the Dominion of India only on 26th October 1947. By the time the invasion of Kashmir by the pathan tribesmen supported by Pakistan had gone beyond control.
Initially the invasion into the independent state of Jammu and Kashmir came from the Pathan Tribesmen, who plundered and looted their way up to Srinagar. Pakistan denied its role in this invasion though the evidence suggested something else.
Maharaja Hari Singh sent a letter to Lord Mountbatten asking for his help when the Pathan’s were at his doorstep. Lord Mountbatten threw in a remark “It is my Government’s wish that as soon as law and order have been restored in Jammu and Kashmir and her soil cleared of the invader the question of the State’s accession should be settled by a reference to the people” which led to the unending dispute between India and Pakistan.
Accession Day is a holiday celebrated in Jammu and Kashmir, commemorating 26 October 1947, when Maharaja Hari Singh signed of the Instrument of Accession to India. Festivities on the Indian side of the state include holding rallies, bursting of firecrackers, singing India’s national anthem, and raising the flag of India.
The Accession Day is considered as a black day by the Kashmiri separatists, who do not approve of the Indian Army’s presence in their land.
To this day, there is ongoing dispute regarding the exact date when Maharaja Hari Singh signed the accession document. Though it is accepted that it was signed on 26thOctober, Prem Shankar Jha, Indian historian says it was signed on 25th October whereas the British researcher, Andrew Whitehead claims the accurate date to be 27th October. Nothing about the Kashmir comes without dispute attached to it.
The state claims to have a self-governing legislative assembly though it is known fact that it is under the control of Pakistan. The present president of the state is Sardar Muhammad Yaqoob Khan and Chaudhry Abdul Majid is its current Prime Minister.
While India has been claiming the region to be its territory, Pakistan conveniently signed Sino-Pakistan Agreement and ceded over hundreds of square kilometers of land in Northern Kashmir and Ladakh to China in 1963.
Many political researchers consider the move of Nehru government to approach the U.N for settling the matter is what left the dispute unresolved.
Neither the Pakistani nor Indian Government dare go soft on the Kashmir dispute, because that would mean a political suicide for the party. Though the territory has no economical value for either country, it has now become the symbol of national identities for both the countries.
Apart from the Indo-Pakistan war of 1971, all the other disputes between India and Pakistan are either directly or indirectly related to the PoK issue.
The five month war (April 1965- September 1965) between India and Pakistan in 1965 witnessed the largest tank battle to place since the World War II. There were thousands of casualties for both the nations, though India had gained upper hand by the time ceasefire was declared with the intervention of USA and USSR. A western official assessing the consequences of this conflict quoted, ‘Now it’s apparent to everybody that India is going to emerge as an Asian power in its own right’ which throws light on the result.
Though U.N had ordered ceasefire between India and Pakistan in 1948, the plebiscite demanded by the U.N. could not move forward because they left many issues unresolved. It only increased the friction between India and Pakistan.
Since both India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, there are chances of nuclear war breaking out between the two nations over the PoK conflict. In such milieu everyone is going to be a loser. The disturbing stalemate situation hence continues with no visible sign of an end.
On 13th July 1931, thousands of people thronged the central jail Srinagar to … He was killed by Dogra …
One 19th April 1931, the Dogra DIG Chowdry Ram Chand stopped Imam … The people carried the dead …
The 1931 protest led to the Quit Kashmir movement against the Maharajah in 1946 …. On 20 January, an estimated 100 people are killed when a large group of …
Jul 13, 2011 – tags: Kashmir, Kashmir 1931 uprising, Kashmir azadi … The deadbecame martyrs and their sacrifice was to be commemorated ever after for a …
This created further trouble and people beat a police officer to death and pelted … The Ordinance was called 19-L. This Ordinance empowered troops to enforce … the already mentioned, Riots Enquiry Commission under Justice Barjor Dalal.
Jul 14, 2015 – The state’s non-Muslim population suffers the humiliation of ‘commemorating’ … The dead rioters were hailed as martyrs by their cohorts. … Times described the instances of July 13, 1931, in his book The Warning From Kashmir: …. On 18th & 19th Jan 1932, a large mob of Muslims encircled the Kotli city.
Jul 13, 2013 – 1931 Kashmir Riots: 13th July 1931 saw an expression of extreme form of communalism from the … The small prison guard fired and a few protestors died. ….. He writes, “The people of Kashmir and their political organizations barring Kashmiri ….19. HISTORY OF KASHMIR PANDITs by Sh Jia lal Kilam 20.
Jul 22, 2013 – On June 21, 1931, the Young Man’s Muslim Association (YMMA) led by … arson, murder, and extreme violence against the ethnic minority Kashmiri Pandits. …. another person had a better record (said to be a Kashmiri Pandit). …. 19. History ofKashmir Pandits by Jia Lal Kilam. 20. Cultural heritage of …
Jul 13, 2010 – Run a Google search for July 13, 1931 and Kashmir and you will be hard … them, not to mention riot, loot and kill people who just don’t feel like doing the same. … So it was at the arrest of this one person on July 13 that Kashmiris felt … 60 years hence you will probably find that January 19, 1990 was also …
21 June 1931, Formation of J&K Muslim Conference by Mir Waiz Yousuf Shah, … 19June 1953, Formation of pro-Pak Kashmir Political Conference (now defunct) by …. 13 January 1989, Unprecedented Hindu-Sikh riots in Jammu city on the … 13 July 1989,Killing of 3 CRPF personnel in Srinagar in the first organised attack …
Kashmiri people’s support in the 1980s after being repelled by them in the … Afghan rule in the 18th and 19th centuries, in which tens of thousands of them were … In 1931a fierce propaganda campaign against the Maharajah’s rule was initiated …… Sunni-Shia conflicts, and thousands have been killed by each other in riots …