Farooq doesn’t have a Lakshman Rekha, rather…

Is Farooq Abdullah afraid of losing relevance in J & K?

Is Farooq Abdullah afraid of losing relevance in J & K?
Is Farooq Abdullah afraid of losing relevance in J & K?

He Has Only One “Lakshya” On The Issue

[dropcap color=”#008040″ boxed=”yes” boxed_radius=”8px” class=”” id=””]K[/dropcap]shatriya wondered whether Farooq Abdullah crossed the “Lakshman Rekha” when he spoke as contemptuously as did on Pak Occupied Kashmir (POK) in the Valley the other day. (Did Farooq Abdullah cross the Lakshman Rekha by raking up PoK?). The fact is that the man has no such “rekha” at all on the India-Kashmir relations. He only has one “lakshya” (objective) on the issue.

There is more evidence of how Farooq Abdullah has negligible or no interest in integrating his State, Jammu & Kashmir, with the rest of India.

We will come to the latter a little later.

First, let’s look a Farooq Abdullah’s attitude towards the India-J&K relations as a whole.

One of the despicable comments he made to a TV reporter who asked about the Indian Parliamentary Resolution regarding taking over Pak-Occupied territory. Abdullah said, “What have they done about it? Do you think it is your Baap ki property that you can take it? Is it your ancestral property?” This disrespectful, goonda type reaction showed up not only Abdullah’s revolting mindset but also his ignorance about Section 4 of the Jammu & Kashmir State Constitution which was approved by the democratically elected State Constituent Assembly headed by his own father, Sheikh Abdullah, and which came into effect on 17th November 1956. That Section 4 says as follows in respect of the “Territory of the State”:

The territory of the State shall comprise all the territories which on the fifteenth day of August, 1947, were under the sovereignty or suzerainty of the Ruler of the State.”

Considering that POK was shown in the Instrument of Accession document signed by Hari Singh, Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir on 26th October 1947, and accepted the next day by Lord Mountbatten, the then Governor General of India, Farooq Abdullah must be considered as being at his obnoxious best in dubbing POK as “Kisi Baap ki property.”

There is more evidence of how Farooq Abdullah has negligible or no interest in integrating his State, Jammu & Kashmir, with the rest of India.

Take the issue of giving extremely preferential treatment to “Permanent Residents” defined in Section 6 of the J&K State Constitution. That definition is so restrictive that anyone having domicile in any other part of India can never be given the privilege of being a Permanent Resident” of J&K State. These privileges include the benefit of voting in the J&K Legislative Assembly, contesting all kind of polls held in J&K, State scholarships of all kinds, ownership of immovable property etc.

All these privileges of a Permanent Resident are denied to anyone else in the rest of India who do not conform to the elaborate definition of that term.”

That is why even the estimated one lakh families who came away from POK and settled in J&K State after the Partition of 1947 are denied the right to vote in the J&K State Assembly elections! Most ironically, in a perverse version of democracy, these families have been recognized as citizens of India by the government of India and therefore been given all the rights emerging from citizenship including voting in the Lok Sabha polls. And Farooq Abdullah, who was Chief Minister of J&K State for 20 years, did not take a single step to correct that humiliation and democratic injustice. How then does anyone expect that 80-year-old man to draw any Lakshman “rekha” anywhere in his obsessed Kashmiri mindset?

Let’s finally come to Farooq Abdullah’s “lakshya”, the ultimate goal in his life.

[dropcap color=”#008040″ boxed=”yes” boxed_radius=”8px” class=”” id=””]I[/dropcap]n the midst of the BJP-led NDA government at Delhi, Farooq Abdullah’s State government came up with the demand for pre-1953 autonomy for J&K State. The demand was that J&K Government be restored that constitutional relationship which existed before the then Chief Minister, Sheikh Abdullah, was dismissed by the Maharaja of J&K (because of inflammatory rumours that the Sheikh, in collusion with the USA, was trying to create a State for himself). That was on 8th August 1953. Despite the Delhi Agreement of 1952 between the Sheikh’s team and the Nehru’s government of India being favourable to J&K’s point of view on several issues regarding several concessions being given to J&K government, no further action was being taken because of alleged secret negotiations being undertaken by the Sheikh for Kashmir’s Independence. The replacement of the Sheikh with Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad accelerated the action to bring the Delhi Agreement into reality. This had ultimately resulted in the President of India’s Order, (Application to Jammu & Kashmir) of May 14, 1954 under Article 370. This Order under Article 370 enlarged the powers of the Indian Union and most of the provisions of the Indian Constitution of 26th November 1949 were made applicable to J&K State, without really interfering with the internal autonomy of the State.

With its pre-1953 autonomy demand remaining a dream ever since, the father-and-son Abdullahs have seemed an angry and frustrated lot.

Farooq Abdullah, along with his son, Omar, were unhappy with the way the Union was increasing its sphere of influence in J&K and wanted to go back to the first and original Presidential Order (Application to Jammu & Kashmir) of January 26, 1950 under which the J&K State had a free run of various sensitive actions such as fundamental rights, currency and Supreme Court jurisdiction. (For details please go to this author’s article at J&K: Pre-1953 and its implications).

With its pre-1953 autonomy demand remaining a dream ever since, the father-and-son Abdullahs have seemed an angry and frustrated lot. While the father has been aggressive and vitriolic on occasions, the son has been more astute and diplomatic, though he too appears to be losing his cool. Both of them are having to bear their unfulfilled dream of ruling like Maharajas over a State which they have often treated as “Hamare Baap ki property.”

This is not really surprising considering what the erudite Prof. Mohan Lal Koul writes about his shady antecedents with JK Liberation Front in the second paragraph of Chapter !5 in his book “Kashmir: Past and Present —Unravelling the Mystique” (http://ikashmir.net/pastpresent/chapter15.html)

How, dear Ram, can such a man have a “Lakshman Rekha” to keep?

Arvind Lavakare has been a freelance writer since 1957. He has written and spoken on sports on radio and TV. He currently writes on political issues regularly. His writings include a book on Article 370 of the Indian Constitution.

His freelancing career began in "The Times of India" with a sports article published when he was a month shy of 20 years of age. He was also a regular political affairs columnist first for rediff.com for five years or so and then shifted to sify.com. He also wrote extensively for niticentral.com "till it stopped publication."
Arvind Lavakare


  1. My reference to one lakh “families” was on the basis of a quick mental recall of a PTI report published in Mumbai’s “Free Press Journal” newspaper dated 18th April 2004. Re-checking it physically showed that my reference should have been to one lakh “refugees” and not to “families”. The error is regretted.
    As far as the right of these refugees to vote in the J&K State Assemblyis concerned, I have gone by Section 140 of the J&K State Constitution (“Election to the Legislative Assembly…”) which says “every person who is a Permanent Resident of the State …shall be entitled to be registered as a voter at any such election.” In effect, those refugees who have been denied the Permanent Resident status, are NOT entitled to vote in the State Assembly elections. I’m not aware of any Constitutional amendment to this Section 140. In fact, in that “Free Press Journal” report cited earlier, a refugee, Bachan Lal, has been quoted as saying, “”All (refugees) continue as unwanted people devoid of basic rights including education, voting in assembly elections, civic bodies, admission in professional colleges and right to own land and houses.” I’m not aware any amendment to the rules made to this deprivation under Article 35A of the Indian Constitution applicable exclusively to J&K State. Perhaps, Daya Sagar, a journalist based in J&K, will enlighten us readers on this.

  2. Kashmir valley is not the state of jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh or Hindustan.

    The so called ‘ Kashmir’ Problem is created by Sunni Mulsims in the 7 districts of the small Kashmir Valley

    This is an artificial problem, created first by the Nehru Gandhi family/congress and some Sunni muslims, dying to lord it over the whole state.

    Time to end this fiasco and AK 420 kejriwal/pappu style of nautanki.

  3. Mr. Arvind Lavkare’s article ” faroookh does not have LakshmanRekha ” has triggered following thoughts in my mind … (1) Karl Marx has said ..” Proletariats have nothing to lose but their chains ” (2) Our Demonitser PM roars ..” I am a Fakir I have nothing to lose but my Jhola ” ( His detractor baboon asks… What about re. 10 lakh suit and hundreds of foreign jaunts ?? )
    I wish to invite our History maker PM -sIr – you effected Surgical strikes , You made Demonitisation happen which will change the History to BC ( before currency ) and AD ( after Demonitisation ) …Now READ THE ARTICLE OF Mr. ARVIND LAVKARE …where he quotes section 4 of J n K state Constitution which came into effect on 17 November 1956 which declared POK as integral part of Indian State ….Dear Mr. PM here is giving you legal and moral rectitude to CHANGE THE GEOGRAPHY …of the country ..a la 1971 …./
    Your advisors gave you the vision of inviting Balochs…TAKE our Mr. Lavkare in your NAVRATNAs of Parrikars and 7 others . you will be in the league of Emperor Ashok ../ Sardar Patel …/ Indira G of 1971 ..

  4. Good, people in other Indian states have interest in J&K affairs. But had the interest been taken in an unbiased manner it would have surely done some good. Hope soon the approach would change. Number of families who came from POK ( right nomenclature should be POJK) in ‘1947’ and settled in J&K was not around one Lakh ( although at no time any general registration has been done by GOI /J&K Government to know the actual number of families displaced in 1947 from POJK and settled in other areas of J&K as well as other Indian states , still as per data based on applications received for ex-gratia from some categories of the displaced families of POJK and disclosed by J&K Government / GOI in 2014 through 2016 the number that settled in J&K was around 26316 families and total number including those settled in other Indian states was 31619 families). More so it is wrong to say that they are denied the right to vote in the J&K State Assembly elections, where as fact is that they have right to vote in both J&K Assembly elections as well as Lok Sabha elections. ! … ….. 5300 families that were displaced in 1947 from POJK and as per information with J&K Government / GOI are staying in India outside J&K have been denied special monetary assistance approved by even the Union Cabinet on 30 November 2016. ………………… dayasagr45@yahoo.com


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here