The partition-related violence adds to what is undoubtedly one of the most violent centuries, characterised by conflict, genocide and persecution at a truly global level. The birth of India and Pakistan was therefore completely overshadowed with communal violence, particularly in Punjab. Since independence, India has continued to experience numerous violent episodes of communal violence and so it seems remarkable to find places like Malerkotla that defy this prevailing perception. This is even more remarkable given that in 1947, when the province of Punjab was being carved up to create the new states of India and Pakistan, Malerkotla remained a safe haven for people while the rest of the surrounding districts were engulfed in some of the most horrific violence recorded. Among this picture of chaos, indiscriminate violence and brutality, there is another history of partition, that of the harmony and friendship shown by communities towards each other. This is often overlooked by the studies of partition, which tend to focus on the destruction and disruption caused by the partitioning of the Punjab province. Much more has been written about Malerkotla in recent years, as a model of tolerance, inter-communal relations, inter-religious harmony and so on. The town is a powerful reminder of what is possible if the prevailing political and social forces desire peace and harmony.

Malerkotla's experience in 1947 also sheds light on a number of wider issues and complexities behind the breakdown in law and order. Within Partition Studies little is written about the absence of violence in 1947, partly because it questions the received histories of the East Punjab Muslims’ sacrifices in the achievement of a Pakistan homeland, and within ‘Sikh’ East Punjab discourse it is an unfortunate reminder of a different and more tolerant plural history. By focusing on the violent nature of communalised histories, both nations can be justified in promoting and maintaining the current stance which continues to endorse division rather than reconciliation. Yet, if for a moment more accounts of cross-communal collaboration were recognised more widely, it would challenge the often jingoist state discourse.