Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T10:30:23.374Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Implementing Partition: Proceedings of the Punjab Partition Committee, July–August, 1947

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2021

YAQOOB KHAN BANGASH Open the ORCID record for YAQOOB KHAN BANGASH [Opens in a new window]
YAQOOB KHAN BANGASH*
Affiliation:
Information Technology University Email: yaqoob.bangash@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article focuses on the workings of the Punjab Partition Committee in the crucial months of July and August 1947. In bringing new material to the historiography of partition, this article challenges the widely held assumption that the Punjab Partition Committee did not deliver. It argues that one must assess and value the large degree of cooperation and agreement between Punjab political leaders on the Committee, despite the charged political and communal atmosphere of the summer of 1947. Furthermore, it argues that the Committee created a limited sense of order during the disarray that prevailed in the run-up to the Transfer of Power. This order was brought about by the cooperation and work of the ‘middle tier’—the bureaucrats and other officials who are often missing from partition literature. The article shows the hard, bureaucratic—yet human—side of partition during these deliberations: at the same time as these people were carrying out partition, they were also suffering its effects. Finally, the Committee's negotiations show how the soon-to-be-established provinces and dominions were setting up their respective states through the procurement of assets and resources.

Type
Research Article
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 55 , Issue 6 , November 2021 , pp. 1883 - 1925
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I wish to thank the British Academy for its Visiting Fellowship in 2018–19, which I took up at Royal Holloway, University of London, and where I conducted the bulk of my research and writing. I thank Professors Sarah Ansari and Francis Robinson for all their help during the Fellowship. I am also grateful to Dr Pippa Virdee for providing valuable feedback on several versions of this article.

References

1 For details on the Radcliffe Boundary Commission, see Chester, Lucy, Borders and Conflict in South Asia: The Radcliffe Boundary Commission and the Partition of Punjab (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2009)Google Scholar.

2 Rai, Satya M., Partition of the Punjab (London: Asia Publishing House, 1965)Google Scholar; Kamran, Tahir, ‘The Unfolding Crisis in Punjab, March–August 1947: Key Turning Points and British Responses’, Journal of Punjab Studies, 14.2 (Fall 2007), pp. 187–210Google Scholar.

3 Sengupta, Anwesha, ‘Breaking Up: Dividing Assets between India and Pakistan in Times of Partition’, Indian Economic and Social History Review, 51.4 (October–December 2014), pp. 529–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 See Ahmed, Ishtiaq, The Punjab: Bloodied, Partitioned and Cleansed (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2014), p. 537Google Scholar.

5 For the development of partition historiography, see Talbot, Ian and Singh, Gurharpal, The Partition of India (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009)Google Scholar, Chapter 1.

6 See Ankit, Rakesh, ‘G. A. Naqvi: From Indian Police (UP), 1926 to Pakistani Citizen (Sindh), 1947’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 28.2 (April 2018), pp. 295–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Coombs, Catherine, ‘Partition Narratives: Displaced Trauma and Culpability among British Civil Servants in 1940s Punjab’, Modern Asian Studies, 45.1 (January 2011), p. 202CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 For details of the 1946 provincial elections and the Khizar ministry, see Talbot, Ian, Khizr Tiwana: The Punjab Unionist Party and the Partition of India (Richmond: Curzon, 1996)Google Scholar.

9 Jenkins to Wavell, 6 March 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, India Office Records, British Library (hereafter IOR).

10 Jenkins to Mountbatten, 6 June 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

11 Ibid.

12 Ibid.

13 Mamdot to Jenkins, 8 June 1947, R/3/1/177, IOR.

14 Ibid.

15 Ibid.

16 Jenkins to Mamdot, 9 June 1947, R/3/1/177, IOR

17 Ibid.

18 Ibid.

19 Mamdot to Jenkins, 10 June 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

20 Ibid.

21 Ibid

22 Ibid.

23 Jenkins to Mountbatten, 11 June 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

24 Ibid.

25 Note by Jenkins, 12 June 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR

26 See Note by Jenkins, 12 June 1947, R/3/1/177, IOR.

27 Liaquat to Mountbatten, 11 June 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

28 Telegram from Mountbatten to Jenkins, 12 June 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

29 Ibid.

30 Ibid.

31 Jenkins to Mountbatten, 13 June 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

32 Ibid.

33 Ibid.

34 Ibid.

35 Fortnightly Report No. 383, Jenkins to Mountbatten, 15 June 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

36 The Times of India, 9 June 1947, p. 5.

37 Ibid.

38 Paisa Akhbar, 24 June 1947, p. 3. (Translation, author's own.)

39 Ibid.

40 Ibid.

41 Paisa Akhbar, 3 July 1947, p. 3. (Translation, author's own.)

42 Ibid.

43 Jenkins to Mountbatten, 16 June 1947, enclosure note, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

44 Ibid.

45 Ibid.

46 Ibid.

47 Ibid.

48 Ibid.

49 Ibid.

50 Mamdot, Swaran Singh and Sachar to Jenkins, 17 June 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

51 Ibid.

52 Abbott to Abell, 17 June 1947, enclosure note, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

53 Jenkins to Mountbatten, 25 June 1947, R/3/1/176, IOR.

54 Jenkins to Mountbatten, 30 June 1947, R/3/1/178, IOR.

55 Ibid.

56 Government of the Punjab, Agendas of the Meetings of the Punjab Partition Committee (Lahore: Government Printing, West Punjab, 1947) (hereafter AMPPC), p. 25.

57 Ibid.

58 For more on the ICS, see, for example, Mason, Philip, The Men Who Ruled India (London: W. W. Norton, 1985)Google Scholar.

59 AMPPC, p. 26. ‘Non-gazetted’ staff were those below officer rank who enjoyed fewer perks; ‘gazetted’ staff were the higher officials.

60 Ibid.

61 Ibid., pp. 26–27.

62 See ibid., p. 27.

63 For a discussion on the transfer of ICS officers to Pakistan, see Braibanti, Ralph, ‘Public Bureaucracy and Judiciary in Pakistan’, in LaPalombara, Joseph (ed.), Bureaucracy and Political Development (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963), pp. 362–383Google Scholar.

64 AMPCC, p. 51.

65 See S. M. Burke, A Life of Fulfilment (privately published, 1988). The record of the 1951 Census of India records P. M. Ismail as the secretary of local self-government and in charge of the Printing Press: Census of India 1951, Vol. VIII, Part 1-A (Simla: Army Press, 1953), Vol. XIII.

66 Rai, E. M. Mangat, Commitment My Style: Career in the Indian Civil Service (New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House, 1973), p. 115Google Scholar.

67 Ibid. Mangat Rai never actually explained why he made this choice in his autobiography, but in his later writing he said that he had ‘no doubt’, despite his initial hesitation.

68 Ibid.

69 The choice made by an Indian Christian to opt for Pakistan could also give credibility to the argument posited by many scholars that Pakistan was not supposed to be an Islamic state but rather a secular, democratic country. However, it could just as well be argued that at its inception it was not clear what kind of a country Pakistan was going to be. For a larger discussion on this issue, see, for example, Bangash, Yaqoob Khan, ‘Jinnah's Pakistan: Debating the Nature of the State, 1947–49’, in Pande, Aparna (ed.), Routledge Handbook for Contemporary Pakistan (Abingdon: Routledge, 2018)Google Scholar; Jalal, Ayesha, The Sole Spokesman: Jinnah, the Muslim League and the Demand for Pakistan (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 2000)Google Scholar; and Merchant, Liaquat H., ‘Jinnah—Two Perspectives: Secular or Islamic and Protector General of the Minorities’, in Merchant, Liaquat H. and Al-Mujahid, Sharif (eds), The Jinnah Anthology (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 2009)Google Scholar.

70 AMPPC, p. 51.

71 Interestingly, Azim Husain does not explain any reason for his choice of India in his autobiographical notes which were deposited in the British Library in the 1970s. See M. Azim Husain Papers, Mss Eur F180/68, 20–22, IOR.

72 Mentioned in Raghavan, T. C. A., The People Next Door: The Curious History of India's Relations with Pakistan (London: Hurst, 2019), p. 24Google Scholar.

73 AMPPC, p. 52.

74 Quoted in Laila Tyabji, ‘How the Tricolour and the Lion Emblem Really Came to Be’, The Wire, 14 August 2018: https://thewire.in/history/india-national-flag-emblem-suraiya-badruddin-tyabji, [accessed 11 January 2021].

75 See ibid. Also Royale, Trevor, The Last Days of the Raj (London: Michael Joseph, 1989), p. 172Google Scholar; Malik, Gunwant, Susan's Tiger: Essays of an Indian Sikh Diplomat (London: WritersPrintShop, 2010), p. 108Google Scholar.

76 AMPPC, p. 52.

77 Ibid.

78 Ibid., p. 66.

79 Ibid., p. 67.

80 Ibid., p. 68.

81 Ibid., p. 150. He later changed his mind and opted for East Punjab on 9 August, ibid., p. 211.

82 Beyond what is noted in partition records, we do not know much about the ultimate fate of these provincial service men unfortunately.

83 Cox, Edmund C., Police and Crime in India (London: Stanley Paul and Co., 1911), p. 7Google Scholar.

84 See, for example, Arnold, David, ‘Police Power and the Demise of British Power in India, 1930–1947’, in Anderson, David M. and Killingray, David, Policing and Decolonisation: Politics, Nationalism and the Police, 1917–1965 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1992)Google Scholar.

85 AMPPC, Letter from Sir John Bennett to Steering Committee, 10 July 1947, p. 61.

86 Ibid.

87 Ibid.

88 See AMPPC, Note by Sachdev and Yaqub Shah, 16 July 1947, p. 61.

89 Ibid.

90 Ibid.

91 Ibid., p. 76.

92 For details, see Noorani, A. G., The Trail of Bhagat Singh: Politics of Justice (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1996), Chapter 3Google Scholar.

93 AMPPC, p. 76.

94 See AMPPC, Letter from Superintendent of Police Ambala to Deputy Secretary, Partition Office, Government of India, 10 July 1947, p. 78.

95 Ibid.

96 AMPPC, p. 108.

97 Ibid.

98 Ibid.

99 Ibid.

100 Minutes of the Meetings of the Punjab Partition Committee (hereafter MMPPC), p. 53, Punjab Archives Chandigarh. (The texts of the Agenda document and the Minutes file differ in detail, and so both have been utilized.)

101 Ibid., p. 54.

102 Fortnightly Report No. 704, Jenkins to Mountbatten, 13 August 1947, R/3/1/178, IOR.

103 Ibid.

104 Ibid.

105 Ibid.

106 For details of partition horrors in Punjab, see Ahmed, The Punjab.

107 See AMPPC, p. 63. The disciplinary action included the withholding of increments, suspension, proceedings taken through the Public Service Commission, and immediate reversion.

108 Ibid.

109 MMPPC, p. 43.

110 AMPPC, p. 66.

111 Ibid., p. 100.

112 Dawn, 24 July 1947, p. 2.

113 Ibid.

114 Chatterji, Joya, ‘Secularisation and Partition Emergencies’, Economic and Political Weekly, 48.50 (December 2013), p. 49Google Scholar.

115 Governors Appreciation, 11 July 1947, Mss Eur F200/127, IOR.

116 Ibid.

117 Draft Covering Note for the Central Partition Council (no date), Mss Eur F200/123, IOR.

118 Ibid.

119 Ibid.

120 Ibid.

121 Ibid.

122 Ibid.

123 Ibid.

124 Proceedings of Partition Council, 17 July 1947, Mss Eur F200/123, IOR.

125 Ibid.

126 Ibid.

127 Viceroy's Meeting with Punjab Partition Council, 20 July 1947, Viceroy's 22nd Miscellaneous Meeting, Mss Eur F200/123, IOR.

128 Ibid.

129 Ibid.

130 Ibid.

131 Ibid.

132 Ibid.

133 Proceedings of the Partition Council, 22 July 1947, Mss Eur F200/123, IOR.

134 Jenkins to Mountbatten, 6 August 1947, Mss Eur F200/123, IOR.

135 MMPPC, p. 89.

136 Ibid., p. 90.

137 See H. M. Patel's Interview Transcript, No. 90, Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi, quoted in Sengupta, ‘Breaking Up’: ‘it has been argued in this interview that the environment of cooperation and mutual trust was disrupted by the outburst of communal violence in Punjab after partition’.

138 See Government of East Punjab, Note Containing Information about Third Party Claim Committee and Intervals of Meetings of the Implementation Committee (Chandigarh: Partition Branch), quoted in Rai, Partition of the Punjab, p. 60. See also The Times of India, 13 February 1953, p. 8, which notes that the joint committees of both Punjabs continued to meet to resolve outstanding issues, and that even at the height of tensions, electricity was being supplied by East Punjab to West Punjab.

139 See Sir Patrick Spens, ‘The Arbitral Tribunal in India 1947–48’, in Transactions of the Grotius Society, Vol. 36: Problems of Public and Private International Law, Transactions for the Year 1950 (1950), p. 67.

140 For the decisions of the Arbitral Tribunal, see Singh, Kirpal (ed.), Select Documents on Partition of Punjab—1947, India and Pakistan (Delhi: National Bookshop, 1991), pp. 584–610Google Scholar.

141 See Government of East Punjab, Constitution of the Punjab Partition—Implementation Committees, Their Functions and Other Information Relating Thereto (Chandigarh, 1958).

142 Spens, ‘The Arbitral Tribunal in India 1947–48’, p. 67.

143 For example, see Kamran, ‘The Unfolding Crisis in the Punjab’, pp. 198–200.

144 Fortnightly Report No. 698, Jenkins to Mountbatten, 30 July 1947, R/3/1/178, IOR.

145 Ibid.

146 Fortnightly Report No. 704, Jenkins to Mountbatten, 13 August 1947, R/3/1/178, IOR.

147 See Abel's note on a conversation with Jenkins, 12 July 1947, F200/123, IOR.

148 Sir Penderel Moon was an ICS officer who resigned from service in 1944. He served as the revenue minister in Bahawalpur state in 1947 (which later joined Pakistan), and then became, successively, the chief commissioner of Himachal Pradesh and adviser to the Planning Commission in independent India. Moon, Penderel, Divide and Quit (London: Chatto and Windus, 1961), p. 115Google Scholar.

149 Aiyer, Swarna, ‘“August Anarchy”: The Partition Massacres in Punjab, 1947’, South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, 18:s1, 1995, p. 35Google Scholar.

150 Of course, a number of them did have political leanings, but they were largely muted during this period.

151 Talbot and Singh, The Partition of India, p. 41.

152 Ayesha Jalal, ‘Nation, Reason and Religion: Punjab's Role in the Partition of India’, Economic and Political Weekly, 8 August 1998, p. 2187.

153 Ibid.

154 Fortnightly Report No. 383, Jenkins to Mountbatten, 15 June 1947, Mss Eur F200/122, IOR.

155 Dewey, Clive, Anglo-Indian Attitudes: The Mind of the Indian Civil Service (London: Hambeldon Press, 1993), p. 201Google Scholar.

156 Ibid.

157 Sengupta, ‘Breaking Up’, p. 546.

158 See Agenda, 8 August 1947, AMPPC, pp. 199–201. The total stock at the Mayo and Lady Willingdon hospitals in Lahore was just under 800 mgs of radium.

159 As senior officials in the new states, the civil servants in the ICS and the police discussed above (and others) certainly played a critical role in the manner in which the new countries were set up, and their imprint on both India and Pakistan is clear. For example, Chaudhari Mohammad Ali, the Muslim League nominee in the central Partition Council, rose to become the prime minister of Pakistan in 1955, while former ICS officers held top posts in both India and Pakistan into the 1990s. See Arun Bhatnagar, ‘Hall of Fame: The ICS Served Pakistan Well’, Dawn, 4 September 2011.

160 Raghavan, Pallavi, Animosity at Bay: An Alternative History of the India-Pakistan Relationship, 1947–1952 (London: Hurst, 2020), p. 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

161 This dilemma was masterfully illustrated by author Saadat Hasan Manto in his short story ‘Toba Tek Singh’, in which the protagonist Bhishan Singh is terribly confused as to where his home district of Toba Tek Singh lay following partition. The story poignantly goes: ‘Now he began asking where Toba Tek Singh was to go. But nobody seemed to know where it was. Those who tried to explain themselves got bogged down in another enigma: Sialkot, which used to be in India, now was in Pakistan. At this rate, it seemed as if Lahore, which was now in Pakistan, would slide over to India. Perhaps the whole of India might become Pakistan. It was all so confusing! And who could say if both India and Pakistan might not entirely disappear from the face of the earth one day?’ For a full translation of the Urdu story in English, see http://www.sacw.net/partition/tobateksingh.html, [accessed 11 January 2021].

162 For more on this, see Coombs, ‘Partition Narratives’, pp. 201–224.

163 Other scholars, like Yasmin Khan, have also noted how several officials, especially from the lower ranks, were uncertain about their choice. See Khan, Yasmin, The Great Partition: The Making of India and Pakistan (London: Yale University Press, 2017), pp. 119–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

164 Talbot and Singh, The Partition of India, p. 57.

165 See, for example, ibid., Chapter 2.