January 15, 2011 — drsubrotoroy
On Pakistan and the Theory & Practice of the Islamic State: An Excerpt from the Munir Report of 1954
From REPORT of THE COURT OF INQUIRY constituted under PUNJAB ACT II OF 1954 to enquire into the PUNJAB DISTURBANCES OF 1953 “Munir Report”
“ISLAMIC STATE
It has been repeatedly said before us that implicit in the demand for Pakistan was the demand for an Islamic State. Some speeches of important leaders who were striving for Pakistan undoubtedly lend themselves to this construction. These leaders while referring to an Islamic State or to a State governed by Islamic laws perhaps had in their minds the pattern of a legal structure based on or mixed up with Islamic dogma, personal law, ethics and institutions. No one who has given serious thought to the introduction of a religious State in Pakistan has failed to notice the tremendous difficulties with which any such scheme must be confronted. Even Dr. Muhammad Iqbal, who must be considered to be the first thinker who conceived of the possibility of a consolidated North Western Indian Muslim State, in the course of his presidential address to the Muslim League in 1930 said:
“Nor should the Hindus fear that the creation of autonomous Muslim States will mean the introduction of a kind of religious rule in such States. The principle that each group is entitled to free development on its own lines is not inspired by any feeling of narrow communalism”.
When we come to deal with the question of responsibility we shall have the occasion to point out that the most important of the parties who are now clamouring for the enforcement of the three demands on religious grounds were all against the idea of an Islamic State. Even Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi of Jama’at-i-Islami was of the view that the form of Government in the new Muslim State, if it ever came into existence, could only be secular.
Before the Partition, the first public picture of Pakistan that the Quaid-i-Azam gave to the world was in the course of an interview in New Delhi with Mr. Doon Campbell, Reuter’s Correspondent. The Quaid-i-Azam said that the new State would be a modern democratic State, with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of their religion, caste or creed. When Pakistan formally appeared on the map, the Quaid-i-Azam in his memorable speech of 11th August 1947 to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, while stating the principle on which the new State was to be founded, said:—
“All the same, in this division it was impossible to avoid the question of minorities being in one Dominion or the other. Now that was unavoidable. There is no other solution. Now what shall we do? Now, if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and specially of the masses and the poor. If you will work in co-operation, forgetting the past, burying the hatchet, you are bound to succeed. If you change your past and work together in a spirit that every one of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges and obligations., there will be no end to the progress you will make. “I cannot emphasise it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities—the Hindu community and the Muslim community— because even as regards Muslims you have Pathana, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnavas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on—will vanish. Indeed if you ask me this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain its freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free peoples long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time but for this (Applause). Therefore, we must learn a lesson from this. You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed— that has nothing to do with the business of the State (Hear, hear). As you know, history shows that in England conditions sometime ago were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some States in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State (Loud applause). The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the Government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist: what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen, of Great Britain and they are all members of the nation. “Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State”.
The Quaid-i-Azam was the founder of Pakistan and the occasion on which he thus spoke was the first landmark in the history of Pakistan. The speech was intended both for his own people including non-Muslims and the world, and its object was to define as clearly as possible the ideal to the attainment of which the new State was to devote all its energies. There are repeated references in this speech to the bitterness of the past and an appeal to forget and change the past and to bury the hatchet. The future subject of the State is to be a citizen with equal rights, privileges and obligations, irrespective of colour, caste, creed or community. The word ‘nation’ is used more than once and religion is stated to have nothing to do with the business of the State and to be merely a matter of personal faith for the individual.
We asked the ulama whether this conception of a State was acceptable to them and everyone of them replied in an unhesitating negative, including the Ahrar and erstwhile Congressites with whom before the Partition this conception was almost a part of their faith.
If Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi’s evidence correctly represents the view of Jama’at-i-Islami, a State based on this idea is the creature of the devil, and he is confirmed in this by several writings of his chief, Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, the founder of the jama’at. None of the ulama can tolerate a State which is based on nationalism and all that it implies; with them millat and all that it connotes can alone be the determining factor in State activity.
The Quaid-i-Azam’s conception of a modern national State, it is alleged, became obsolete with the passing of the Objectives Resolution on 12th March 1949; but it has been freely admitted that this Resolution, though grandiloquent in words, phrases and clauses, is nothing but a hoax and that not only does it not contain even a semblance of the embryo of an Islamic State but its provisions, particularly those relating to fundamental rights, are directly opposed to the principles of an Islamic State.
FOUNDATIONS OF ISLAMIC STATE
What is then the Islamic State of which everybody talks but nobody thinks? Before we seek to discover an answer to this question, we must have a clear conception of the scope and function of the State.
The ulama were divided in their opinions when they were asked to cite some precedent of an Islamic State in Muslim history. Thus, though Hafiz Kifayat Husain, the Shia divine, held out as his ideal the form of Government during the Holy Prophet’s time, Maulana Daud Ghaznavi also included in his precedent the days of the Islamic Republic, of Umar bin Abdul Aziz, Salah-ud-Din Ayyubi of Damascus, Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni, Muhammad Tughlaq and Aurangzeb and the present regime in Saudi Arabia. Most of them, however, relied on the form of Government during the Islamic Republic from 632 to 661 A. D., a period of less than thirty years, though some of them also added the very short period of Umar bin Abdul Aziz.
Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni stated that the details of the ideal State would be worked out by the ulama while Master Taj-ud-Din Ansari’s confused notion of an Islamic State may be gathered from the following portion of his interrogation :—
“Q.—Were you also in the Khilafat movement ?
A.—Yes.
Q.—When did the Khilafat movement stop in India ?
A.—In 1923. This was after the Turks had declared their country to be a secular State.
Q.—If you are told that the Khilafat movement continued long after the Turks had abolished Khilafat, will that be correct?
A.—As far as I remember, the Khilafat movement finished with the abolition of the Khilafat by the Turks.
Q.—You are reported to have been a member of the Khilafat movement and having made speeches. Is it correct ?
A.—It could not be correct.
Q.—Was the Congress interested in Khilafat ?
A.— Yes.
Q.—Was Khilafat with you a matter of religious conviction or just a political movement ?
A.— It was purely a religious movement.
Q.— Did the Khilafat movement have the support of Mr Gandhi ?
A.—Yes.
Q.— What was the object of the Khilafat movement ?
A.— The Britisher was injuring the Khilafat institution in Turkey and the Musalman was aggrieved by this attitude of the Britisher.
Q.— Was not the object of the movement to resuscitate the Khilafat among the Musalmans ?
A.—No.
Q.— Is Khilafat with you a necessary part of Muslim form of Government ?
A.—Yes.
Q.— Are you, therefore, in favour of having a Khilafat in Pakistan ?
A.—Yes.
Q.— Can there be more than one Khalifa of the Muslims ?
A.— No.
Q.— Will the Khalifa of Pakistan be the Khalifa of all the Muslims of the world ?
A.— He should be but cannot be.”
Throughout the three thousand years over which political thought extends, and such thought in its early stages cannot be separated from religion, two questions have invariably presented themselves for consideration : —
(1) what are the precise functions of the State ? and
(2) who shall control the State ?
If the true scope of the activities of the State is the welfare, temporal or spiritual or both of the individual, then the first question directly gives rise to the bigger question:
What is the object of human life and the ultimate destiny of man? On this, widely divergent views have prevailed, not at different times but at one and the same time. The pygmies of equatorial West Africa still believe that their God Komba has sent them into the forest to hunt and dance and sing. The Epicureans meant very much the same when they said that the object of human life is to drink and eat and be merry, for death denies such pleasures. The utilitarians base their institutions on the assumption that the object of human life is to experience pleasant sensations of mind and body, irrespective of what is to come hereafter. The Stoics believed in curbing and reducing all physical desires, and Diogenes found a tub good enough to live in. German philosophers think that the individual lives for the State and that therefore the object of life is service of the State in all that it might decide to undertake and achieve. Ancient Hindu philosophers believed in the logic of the fist with its natural consequence, the law of natural selection and the struggle for survival. The Semitic theory of State, whether Jewish, Christian or Islamic, has always held that the object of human life is to prepare ourselves for the next life and that, therefore, prayer and good works are the only object of life. Greek philosophers beginning with Socrates thought that the object of human life was to engage in philosophical meditation with a view to discovering the great truths that lie in nature and that the business of the others is to feed the philosophers engaged in that undertaking.
Islam emphasises the doctrine that life in this world is not the only life given to man but that eternal life begins after the present existence comes to an end, and that the status of a human being in the next world will depend upon his beliefs and actions in this world. As the present life is not an end in itself but merely a means to an end, not only the individual but also the State, as opposed to the secular theory which bases all political and economic institutions on a disregard of their consequences on the next life, should strive for human conduct which ensures for a person better status in the next world.
According to this theory Islam is the religion which seeks to attain that object. Therefore the question immediately arises : What is Islam and who is a momin or a Muslim ? We put this question to the ulama and we shall presently refer to their answers to this question. But we cannot refrain from saying here that it was a matter of infinite regret to us that the ulama whose first duty should be to have settled views on this subject, were hopelessly disagreed among themselves.
Apart from how these learned divines have expressed themselves, we conceive of Islam as a system that covers, as every systematic religion must, the following five topics :—
(1) the dogma, namely, the essentials of belief ;
(2) the cult, namely, religious rites and observances which a person must
perform ;
(3) ethics, i. e. rules of moral conduct ;
(4) institutions, social, economic and political ; and
(5) law proper.
The essential basis of the rules on all these subjects is revelation and not reason, though both may coincide. This coincidence, however, is accidental because human reasoning may be faulty and ultimate reason is known only to God, Who sends His message to humanity through His chosen messengers for the direction and guidance of the people. One must, therefore, accept the dogma, observe the cult, follow the ethics, obey the law and establish institutions which God has revealed, though their reason may not be apparent—nay even if they be opposed to human reason. Since an error by God is an impossibility, anything that God has revealed, whether its subject be something occult or preternatural, history, finance, law, worship or something which according to human thought admits of scientific treatment as for instance, birth of man, evolution, cosmology, or astronomy, has got to be accepted as absolute truth. The test of reason is not the acid test and a denial of this amounts to a denial of the supreme wisdom and designs of Allah—it is kufr. Now God has revealed Himself from time to time to His favoured people of whom our Holy Prophet was the last. That revelation is contained in the Qur’an and covers the five topics mentioned above. The true business of a person who believes in Islam is therefore to understand, believe in and act upon that revelation. The people whom God chooses as medium for the transmission of His messages are rasuls (messengers) or nabis (prophets). Since every action or saying of a prophet is, in the case of our own Holy Prophet it certainly was, prompted by Allah, it has the same degree of inerrancy as the formal revelation itself, because prophets are ma’sum, incapable of doing or saying something which is opposed to Divine wishes. These sayings and actions are sunna having the same infallibility as the Qur’an. The record of this sunna is hadith which is to be found in several books which were compiled by Muslim scholars after long, laborious and careful research extending over several generations.
The word hadith means a record of actions or sayings of the Prophet and his companions. At first the sahaba. i. e. people who had lived in the society of the Prophet, were the best authority for a knowledge of the sunna. Later people had to be content with the communications of the tabi’un, i. e. successors, people of the first generation after the Holy Prophet who had received their information from the sahaba, and then in the following generations with the accounts of the so-called successors of the successors (tabi’ul-tabi’un), i.e. people of the second generation after the Holy Prophet, who had concerted with the successors. Marfu’ is a tradition which contains a statement about the Prophet ; mawquf, a tradition that refers only to the sayings or doings of the sahaba ; and maqtu’ a tradition which does not at most go further back than the first generation after the Holy Prophet and deals only with sayings or doings of tabi’un. In some of the ahadith the actual word of God is to be found. Any such tradition is designated Hadith-i-Qudsi or Ilahi as distinguished from an ordinary Hadith-i-Nabvi.
A very large portion of sayings ascribed to the Prophet deals with the ahkam (legal professions), religious obligations, halal and haram (what is allowed and forbidden), with ritual purity, laws regarding food and criminal and civil law. Further they deal with dogma, retribution at the Last Judgment, hell and paradise, angels, creation, revelations, the earlier prophets. Many traditions also contain edifying sayings and moral teachings by the Holy Prophet. The importance of ahadith was realised from the very beginning and they were not only committed to memory but in some cases were reduced to writing. The work of compilation of hadith began in the third century after the Hijra and the Sihah Sitta were all compiled in that century. These are the musannifs of —
(1) Al-Bukhari, died 256/870,
(2) Muslim, died 261/875,
(3) Abu Dawud, died 275/888,
(4) Al-Tirmizi, died 279/892,
(5) All Nasa’i, died 303/915, and
(6) Ibn-i-Maja, died 273/886.
According to modern laws of evidence, including our own, the ahadith are inadmissible evidence of sunna because each of them contains several links of hearsay, but as authority on law they are admissible pro prio vigore. The merit of these collections lies not so much in the fact that (as is often wrongly stated) their authors decided for the first time which of the numerous traditions in circulation were genuine and which false but rather in the fact that they brought together everything that was recognised as genuine in orthodox circles in those days.
The Shias judge hadith from their own stand-point and only consider such traditions reliable as are based on the authority of Ali and his adherents. They have, therefore, their own works on the subject and hold the following five works in particularly high esteem—
(1) Al-Kafi of Muhammad b. Yaqub Al-Kulini, died 328/939,
(2) Man La Yastahdiruhu’ul-Fakih of Muhammad b. Ali b. Babuya Al-Kummi,
died 381/991,
(3) Tahdib Al-Ahkam,
(4) Al-Istibsar Fi-Ma’khtalafa Fihi’l-Akhbar (extract from the preceding) of
Muhammad Altusi, died 459/1067, and
(5) Nahj Al-Balagha (alleged sayings of Ali) of Ali b. Tahir Al-Sharif Al-Murtaza, died 436/1044 (or of his brother Radi Al-Din Al-Baghdadi.)
After the ritual, the dogma and the most important political and social institutions had taken definite shape in the second and third centuries, there arose a certain communis opinio regarding the reliability of most transmitters of tradition and the value of their statement. The main principles of doctrine had already been established in the writings of Malik b. Anas, Al-Shafi’i and other scholars regarded as authoritative in different circles and mainly on the authority of traditional sayings of the Holy Prophet. In the long run no one dared to doubt the truth of these traditions and this almost conclusive presumption of truth has since continued to be attached to the ahadith compiled in the Sihah Sitta.
We have so far arrived at this result that any rule on any subject that may be derived from the Qur’an or the sunna of the Holy Prophet is binding on every Musalman. But since the only evidence of sunna is the hadith, the words sunna and hadith have become mixed up with, and indistinguishable from, each other with the result that the expression Qur’an and hadith is not infrequently employed where the intention is to refer to Qur’an and sunna.
At this stage another principle, equally basic, comes into operation, and that is that Islam is the final religion revealed by God, complete and exhaustive in all respects, and that God will not abrogate, detract from or add to this religion (din) any more than He will send a fresh messenger. The din having been perfected (Akmalto lakum dinokum, Sura V, verse 3), there remains no need for any new code repealing, modifying or amplifying the original code; nor for any fresh messenger or message. In this sense, therefore, prophethood ceased with the Holy Prophet and revelation stopped for ever. This is the doctrine of the cessation of wahi-i-nubuwwat.
If the proposition that Muslim dogma, ethics and institutions, etc., are all based on the doctrine of inerrancy, whether such inerrancy lies in the Qur’an, the sunna, ijma’ or ijtihad-i-mutlaq, is fully comprehended, the various deductions that follow from it will be easily understandable. As the ultimate test of truth, whether the matter be one of a ritual or political or social or economic nature, is revelation and revelation has to be gathered from the Qur’an, and the sunna carries almost the same degree of inerrancy as revelation and the only evidence of sunna is hadith, the first duty of those who desire to establish an Islamic State will be to discover the precise rule applicable to the existing circumstances whether that rule is to be found in the Qur’an or hadith. Obviously the persons most suited for the purpose would be those who have made the Qur’an and hadith their lifelong study, namely, among the Sunnies, the ulama, and among the Shias, the mujtahids who are the spokesmen of the hidden Imam, the ruler de jure divino. The function of these divines would be to engage themselves in discovering rules applicable to particular situations and they will be engaged in a task similar to that in which Greek philosophers were engaged, with only this difference that whereas the latter thought that all truth lay in nature which had merely to be discovered by individual effort, the ulama and the mujtahids will have to get at the truth that lies in the holy Book and the books of hadith.
The ulama Board which was recommended by the Basic Principles Committee was a logical recognition of this principle, and the true objection against that Board should indeed have been that the Board was too inadequate a mechanism to implement the principle which had brought that body into existence.
Ijma’ means concurrence of the mujtahids of the people, i.e., of those who have a right, in virtue of knowledge, to form a judgment of their own, after the death of the Holy Prophet. The authority of ijma’ rests on the principle of a divine protection against error and is founded on a basal tradition of the Holy Prophet, “My people will never agree in error”, reported in Ibn Maja, By this procedure points which had been in dispute were fixed, and when fixed, they became an essential part of the faith and disbelief in them an act of unbelief (kufr). The essential point to remember about ijma’ is that it represents the agreement of the mujtahids and that the agreement of the masses is especially excluded.
Thus ijma’ has not only fixed unsettled points but has changed settled doctrines of the greatest importance.
The distinction between ijma’ and ijtihad is that whereas the former is collective, the latter is individual. Ijtihad means the exerting of one’s self to the utmost degree to form an opinion in a case or as to a rule of law. This is done by applying analogy to the Qur’an and the sunna. Ijtihad did not originally involve inerrancy, its result being always zann or fallible opinion. Only combined ijtihad led to ijma, and was inerrant. But this broad ijtihad soon passed into special ijtihad of those who had a peculiar right to form judgments. When later doctors looked back to the founding of the four legal schools, they assigned to their founders an ijtihad of the first rank (ijtihad-i-mutlaq). But from time to time individuals appeared who returned to the earliest meaning of ijtihad and claimed for themselves the right to form their own opinion from first principles. One of these was the Hanbalite Ibn Taimiya (died 728). Another was Suyuti (died 911) in whom the claim to ijtihad unites with one to be the mujaddid or renewer of religion in his century. At every time there must exist at least one mujtahid, was his contention, just as in every century there must come a mujaddid.
In Shia Islam there are still absolute mujtahids because they are regarded as the spokesmen of the hidden Imam. Thus collective ijtihad leads to ijma’, and the basis of ijma’ is divine protection against error—inerrancy.
ESSENTIALS OF ISLAMIC STATE
Since the basis of Islamic law is the principle of inerrancy of revelation and of the Holy Prophet, the law to be found in the Qur’an and the sunna is above all man-made laws, and in case of conflict between the two, the latter, irrespective of its nature, must yield to the former. Thus, provided there be a rule in the Qur’an or the sunna on a matter which according to our conceptions falls within the region of Constitutional Law or International Law, the rule must be given effect to unless that rule itself permits a departure from it. Thus no distinction exists in Islamic law between Constitutional Law and other law, the whole law to be found in the Qur’an and the sunna being a part of the law of the land for Muslim subjects of the State. Similarly if there be a rule in the Qur’an or the sunna relating to the State’s relations with other States or to the relations of Muslim subjects of the State with other States or the subjects of those States, the rule will have the same superiority of sanction as any other law to be found in the Qur’an or the sunna.
Therefore if Pakistan is or is intended to be converted into an Islamic State in the true sense of the word, its Constitution must contain the following five provisions:—
(1) that all laws to be found in the Qur’an or the sunna shall be deemed to be a part of the law of the land for Muslims and shall be enforced accordingly;
(2) that unless the Constitution itself is framed by ijma’-i-ummat, namely, by the agreement of the ulama and mujtahids of acknowledged status, any provision in the Constitution which is repugnant to the Qur’an or sunna shall to the extent of the repugnancy be void;
(3) that unless the existing laws of Pakistan are adapted by ijma’-i-ummat of the kind mentioned above, any provision in the existing law which is contrary to the Qur’an or sunna shall to the extent of the repugnancy be void;
(4) that any provision in any future law which is repugnant to Qur’an or sunna shall be void;
(5) that no rule of International Law and no provision in any convention or treaty to which Pakistan is a party, which is contrary to the Qur’an or the sunna shall be binding on any Muslim in Pakistan.
SOVEREIGNTY AND DEMOCRACY IN ISLAMIC STATE
That the form of Government in Pakistan, if that form is to comply with the principles of Islam, will not be democratic is conceded by the ulama. We have already explained the doctrine of sovereignty of the Qur’an and the sunna. The Objectives Resolution rightly recognised this position when it recited that all sovereignty rests with God Almighty alone. But the authors of that Resolution misused the words ‘sovereign’ and ‘democracy’ when they recited that the Constitution to be framed was for a sovereign State in which principles of democracy as enunciated by Islam shall be fully observed.
It may be that in the context in which they were used, these words could not be misunderstood by those who are well versed in Islamic principles, but both these words were borrowed from western political philosophy and in that sense they were both wrongly used in the Resolution. When it is said that a country is sovereign, the implication is that its people or any other group of persons in it are entitled to conduct the affairs of that country in any way they like and untrammelled by any considerations except those of expediency and policy. An Islamic State, however, cannot in this sense be sovereign, because it will not be competent to abrogate, repeal or do away with any law in the Qur’an or the sunna. Absolute restriction on the legislative power of a State is a restriction on the sovereignty of the people of that State and if the origin of this restriction lies elsewhere than in the will of the people, then to the extent of that restriction the sovereignty of the State and its people is necessarily taken away. In an Islamic State, sovereignty, in its essentially juristic sense, can only rest with Allah. In the same way, democracy means the rule of the demos, namely, the people, directly by them as in ancient Greece and Rome, or indirectly through chosen representatives as in modern democracies. If the power of the people in the framing of the Constitution or in the framing of the laws or in the sphere of executive action is subject to certain immutable rules, it cannot be said that they can pass any law that they like, or, in the exercise of executive functions, do whatever they like. Indeed if the legislature in an Islamic State is a sort of ijma’, the masses are expressly disqualified from taking part in it because ijma’-i-ummat in Islamic jurisprudence is restricted to ulama and mujtahids of acknowledged status and does not at all extend, as in democracy, to the populace.
OTHER INCIDENTS OF ISLAMIC STATE ACCORDING TO ULAMA
In the preceding pages we have attempted to state as clearly as we could the principles on which a religious State must be built if it is to be called an Islamic State. We now proceed to state some incidents of such State, with particular reference to the ulamas’ conception of it.
LEGISLATURE AND LEGISLATION
Legislature in its present sense is unknown to the Islamic system. The religiopolitical system which is called din-i-Islam is a complete system which contains in itself the mechanism for discovering and applying law to any situation that may arise. During the Islamic Republic there was no legislature in its modern sense and for every situation or emergency that arose law could be discovered and applied by the ulama. The law had been made and was not to be made, the only function of those entrusted with the administration of law being to discover the law for the purposes of the particular case, though when enunciated and applied it formed a precedent for others to follow. It is wholly incorrect, as has been suggested from certain quarters, that in a country like Pakistan, which consists of different communities, Muslim and non-Muslim, and where representation is allowed to non-Muslims with a right to vote on every subject that comes up, the legislature is a form of ijma’ or ijtihad, the reason being that ijtihad is not collective but only individual, and though ijma’ is collective, there is no place in it for those who are not experts in the knowledge of the law. This principle at once rules out the infidels (kuffar) whether they be people of Scriptures (ahl-i-kitab) or idolators (mushrikeen).
Since Islam is a perfect religion containing laws, express or derivable by ijma’ or ijtihad, governing the whole field of human activity, there is in it no sanction for what may, in the modern sense, be called legislation.
Questioned on this point Maulana Abul Hasanat, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan says :—
“Q.—Is the institution of legislature as distinguished from the institution of a person or body of persons entrusted with the interpretation of law, an integral part of an Islamic State?
A.—No. Our law is complete and merely requires interpretation by those who are experts in it. According to my belief no question can arise the law relating to which cannot be discovered from the Qur’an or the hadith.
Q.—Who were Sahib-ul-hall-i-wal-aqd
A.—They were the distinguished ulama of the time. These persons attained their status by reason of the knowledge of the law. They were not in any way analogous or similar to the legislature in modern democracy.”
The same view was expressed by Amir-i-Shari’at Sayyad Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari in one of his speeches reported in the ‘Azad’ of 22nd April, 1947, in the course of which he said that our din is complete and perfect and that it amounts to kufr to make more laws.
Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, however, is of the opinion that legislation in the true sense is possible in an Islamic State on matters which are not covered by the Qur’an, the sunna, or previous ijma’ and he has attempted to explain his point by reference to the institution of a body of persons whom the Holy Prophet, and after him the khulafa consulted on all matters relating to affairs of State. The question is one of some difficulty and great importance because any institution of legislature will have to be reconciled with the claim put forward by Maulana Abul Hasanat and some other religious divines that Islam is a perfect and exhaustive code wide enough to furnish an answer to any question that may arise relating to any human activity, and that it does not know of any “unoccupied field” to be filled by fresh legislation. There is no doubt that Islam enjoins consultation and that not only the Holy Prophet but also the first four caliphs and even their successors resorted to consultation with the leading men of the time, who for their knowledge of the law and piety could well be relied upon.
In the inquiry not much has been disclosed about the Majlis-i-Shura except what is contained in Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi’s written statement which he supplied to the Court at its request. That there was a body of men who were consulted is true, but whether this was a standing body and whether its advice had any legal or binding force, seems somewhat doubtful. These men were certainly not elected in the modern way, though their representative character cannot be disputed. Their advice was certainly asked ad hoc, but that they were competent to make law as the modern legislatures make laws is certainly not correct. The decisions taken by them undoubtedly served as precedents and were in the nature of ijma’, which is not legislation but the application of an existing law to a particular case. When consulted in affairs of State, their functions were truly in the nature of an advice given by a modern cabinet but such advice is not law but only a decision.
Nor can the legislature in a modern State correspond to ijma’ because as we have already pointed out, the legislature legislates while the ulama of Majlis-i-Shura who were called upon to determine what should be the decision on a particular point which was not covered by the Qur’an and the sunna, merely sought to discover and apply the law and not to promulgate the law, though the decision when taken had to be taken not only for the purposes of the particular case but for subsequent occasions as a binding precedent.
An intriguing situation might arise if the Constitution Act provided that any provision of it, if it was inconsistent with the Qur’an or the sunna, would be void, and the intra vires of a law made by the legislature were questioned before the Supreme Court on the ground that the institution of legislature itself was contrary to the Qur’an and the sunna.
POSITION OF NON-MUSLIMS
The ground on which the removal of Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan and other Ahmadis occupying key positions in the State is demanded is that the Ahmadis are non-Muslims and that therefore like zimmies in an Islamic State they are not eligible for appointment to higher offices in the State. This aspect of the demands has directly raised a question about the position of non-Muslims in Pakistan if we are to have an Islamic Constitution.
According to the leading ulama the position of non-Muslims in the Islamic State of Pakistan will be that of zimmies and they will not be full citizens of Pakistan because they will not have the same rights as Muslims They will have no voice in the making of the law, no right to administer the law and no right to hold public offices.
A full statement of this position will be found in the evidence of Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyad Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, Maulana Ahmad Ali, Mian Tufail Muhammad and Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni. Maulana Abul Hasanat on being questioned on the subject stated as follows :—
“Q.—If we were to have an Islamic State in Pakistan, what will be the position of the kuffar (non-Muslims)? Will they have a voice in the making of laws, the right of administering the law and the right to hold public offices?
A.—Their position will be that of zimmies. They will have no voice in the making of laws, no right to administer the law and no right to hold public offices.
Q.—In an Islamic State can the head of the State delegate any part of his powers to kuffar?
A.—No.”
Maulana Ahmad Ali, when questioned, said:—
“Q.—if we were to have an Islamic State in Pakistan, what will be the position of the kuffar? Will they have a hand in the making of the law, the right to administer the law and the right to hold public offices ?
A.—Their position will be that of zimmies. They will have no say in the making of law and no right to administer the law. Government may, however, permit them to hold any public office”.
Mian Tufail Muhammad stated as follows :—
“Q.—Read the article on minorities’ rights in the ‘Civil and Military Gazette’ of 13th October, 1953, and say whether it correctly represents your view of an Islamic State? (It was stated in the articles that minorities would have the same rights as Muslims).
A.—I have read this article and do not acknowledge these rights for the Christians or other non-Muslims in Pakistan if the State is founded on the ideology of the Jama’at”.
The confusion on this point in the mind of Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan, is apparent from the following: —
“Q.—Have you ever read the aforesaid speech (the speech of the Quaid-i-Azam to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on 11th August, 1947)?
A.—Yes, I have read that speech.
Q.—Do you still agree with the conception of Pakistan that the Quaid-i-Azam presented to the Constituent Assembly in this speech in which he said that thereafter there would be only one Pakistan nation, consisting of Muslims and non-Muslims, having equal civic rights, without any distinction of race, religion or creed and that religion would be merely a private affair of the individual ?
A.—I accept the principle that all communities, whether Muslims or non-Muslims, should have, according to their population, proper representation in the administration of the State and legislation, except that non-Muslims cannot be taken in the army or the judiciary or be appointed as Ministers or to other posts involving the reposing of confidence.
Q.—Are you suggesting that the position of non-Muslims would be that of zimmies or any better ?
A.—No. By zimmies are meant non-Muslim people of lands which have been conquered by an Islamic State, and the word is not applicable to non-Muslim minorities already living in an Islamic State. Such minorities are called mu’ahids, i.e. those people with whom some agreement has been made.
Q.—What will be their status if there is no agreement with them ?
A.—In that case such communities cannot have any rights of citizenship.
Q.—Will the non-Muslim communities inhabiting Pakistan be called by you as mu’ahids?
A.—No, not in the absence of an agreement with them. To my knowledge there is no such agreement with such communities in Pakistan.”
So, according to the evidence of this learned divine, the non-Muslims of Pakistan will neither be citizens nor will they have the status of zimmies or of mu’ahids. During the Islamic Republic, the head of the State, the khalifa, was chosen by a system of election, which was wholly different from the present system of election based on adult or any other form of popular suffrage. The oath of allegiance (ba’it) rendered to him possessed a sacramental virtue, and on his being chosen by the consensus of the people (ijma’-ul-ummat) he became the source of all channels of legitimate Government. He and he alone then was competent to rule, though he could delegate his powers to deputies and collect around him a body of men of outstanding piety and learning, called Majlis-i-Shura or Ahl-ul-Hall-i-wal-Aqd. The principal feature of this system was that the kuffar, for reasons which are too obvious and need not be stated, could not be admitted to this majlis and the power which had vested in the khalifa could not be delegated to the kuffar. The khalifa was the real head of the State, all power vesting in him and not a powerless individual like the President of a modern democratic State who is merely to sign the record of decisions taken by the Prime Minister and his Cabinet. He could not appoint non-Muslims to important posts, and could give them no place either in the interpretation or the administration of the law, the making of the law by them, as already pointed out, being a legal impossibility.
This being the position, the State will have to devise some machinery by which the distinction between a Muslim and a non-Muslim may be determined and its consequences enforced. The question, therefore, whether a person is or is not a Muslim will be of fundamental importance, and it was for this reason that we asked most of the leading ulama, to give their definition of a Muslim, the point being that if the ulama of the various sects believed the Ahmadis to be kafirs, they must have been quite clear in their minds not only about the grounds of such belief but also about the definition of a Muslim because the claim that a certain person or community is not within the pale of Islam implies on the part of the claimant an exact conception of what a Muslim is. The result of this part of the inquiry, however, has been anything but satisfactory, and if considerable confusion exists in the minds of our ulama on such a simple matter, one can easily imagine what the differences on more complicated matters will be. Below we reproduce the definition of a Muslim given by each alim in his own words. This definition was asked after it had been clearly explained to each witness that he was required to give the irreducible minimum conditions which, a person must satisfy to be entitled to be called a Muslim and that the definition was to be on the principle on which a term in grammar is defined.
Here is the result : —
Maulana Abul Hasanat Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulamai-
Pakistan —
“Q.— What is the definition of a Muslim ?
A — (1) He must believe in the Unity of God.
(2) He must believe in the prophet of Islam to be a true prophet as well as in all other prophets who have preceded him,
(3) He must believe in the Holy Prophet of Islam as the last of the prophets (khatam-un-nabiyin).
(4) He must believe in the Qur’an as it was revealed by God to the Holy
Prophet of Islam.
(5) He must believe as binding on him the injunctions of the Prophet of
Islam.
(6) He must believe in the qiyamat.
Q.—Is a tarik-us-salat a Muslim ?
A.—Yes, but not a munkir-us-salat”
Maulana Ahmad Ali, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Islam, Maghribi Pakistan —
“Q.— Please define a Muslim ?
A.—A person is a Muslim if he believes (1) in the Qur’an and (2) what has been said by the prophet. Any person who possesses these two qualifications is entitled to be called a Muslim without his being required to believe in anything more or to do anything more.”
Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, Amir Jama’at-i-Islami —
“Q.—Please define a Muslim ?
A.—A person is a Muslim if he believes (1) in tauheed, (2) in all the prophets (ambiya), (3) all the books revealed by God, (4) in mala’ika (angels), and (5) yaum-ul-akhira (the Day of Judgment).
Q.—Is a mere profession of belief in these articles sufficient to entitle a man
to call himself a Musalman and to be treated as a Musalman in an Islamic State ?
A.—Yes.
Q.—If a person says that he believes in all these things, does any one have a right to question the existence of his belief ?
A.—The five requisites that I have mentioned above are fundamental and any alteration in anyone of these articles will take him out of the pale of Islam.”
Ghazi Siraj-ud-Din Munir—
“Q.—Please define a Muslim ?
A.—I consider a man to be a Muslim if he professes his belief in the kalima, namely, La Ilaha Illalah-o-Muhammad-ur-Rasulullah, and leads a life in the footsteps of the Holy Prophet.”
Mufti Muhammad Idris, Jamia Ashrafia, Nila Gumbad, Lahore—
“Q.—Please give the definition of a Musalman ?
A.—The word ‘Musalman’ is a Persian one. There is a distinction between the word ‘Musalman’ which is a Persian word for Muslim and the word ‘momin’. It is impossible for me to give a complete definition of the word ‘momin’. I would require pages and pages to describe what a momin is. A person is a Muslim who professes to be obedient to Allah. He should believe in the Unity of God, prophethood of the ambiya and in the Day of Judgment. A person who does not believe in the azan or in the qurbani goes outside the pale of Islam. Similarly, there are a large number of other things which have been received by tavatir from our prophet. In order to be a Muslim, he must believe in all these things. It is almost impossible for me to give a complete list of such things.”
Hafiz Kifayat Hussain, Idara-i-Haquq-i-Tahaffuz-i-Shia—
“Q.—Who is a Musalman?
A.—A person is entitled to be called a Musalman if he believes in (1) tauheed, (2) nubuwwat and (3) qiyamat. These are the three fundamental beliefs which a person must profess to be called a Musalman. In regard to these three basic doctrines there is no difference between the Shias and the Sunnies. Besides the belief in these three doctrines, there are other things called ‘zarooriyat-i-din’ which a person must comply with in order to be entitled to be called a Musalman. These will take me two days to define and enumerate. But as an illustration I might state that the respect for the Holy Book, wajoob-i-nimaz, wajoob-i-roza, wajoob-i-hajj-ma’a-sharait, and other things too numerous to mention, are among the ‘zarooriyat-i-din’ ”
Maulana Abdul Hamid Badayuni, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan :
“Q.—Who is a Musalman according to you ?
A.—A person who believes in the zarooriyat-i-din is called a momin and every momin is entitled to be called a Musalman.
Q.—What are these zarooriyat-i-din ?
A.—A person who believes in the five pillars of Islam and who believes in the rasalat of our Holy Prophet fulfils the zarooriyat-i-din.
Q.—Have other actions, apart from the five arakan, anything to do with a man being a Muslim or being outside the pale of Islam?
(Note—Witness has been explained that by actions are meant those rules of moral conduct which in modern society are accepted as correct.)
A.—Certainly.
Q.—Then you will not call a person a Muslim who believes in arakan-ikhamsa and the rasalat of the prophet but who steals other peoples’ things, embezzles property entrusted to him, has an evil eye on his neighbour’s wife and is guilty of the grossest ingratitude to his benefector?
A.—Such a person, if he has the belief already indicated, will be a Muslim despite all this”.
Maulana Muhammad Ali Kandhalvi, Darush-Shahabia, Sialkot —
“Q.—Please define a Musalman?
A.—A person who in obedience to the commands of the prophet performs all the zarooriyat-i-din is a Musalman.
Q.—Can you define zarooriyat-i-din ?
A.—Zarooriyat-i-din are those requirements which are known to every Muslim irrespective of his religious knowledge.
Q.—Can you enumerate zarooriyat-i-din ?
A.—These are too numerous to be mentioned. I myself cannot enumerate these zarooriyat. Some of the zarooriyat-i-din may be mentioned as salat, saum, etc.”
Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi —
“Q.—Who is a Musalman?
A.—There are two kinds of Musalmans, a political (siyasi) Musalman and a real (haqiqi) Musalman. In order to be called a political Musalman, a person must:
(1) believe in the Unity of God,
(2) believe in our Holy Prophet being khatam-un-nabiyin, i.e., ‘final
authority’ in all matters relating to the life of that person,
(3) believe that all good and evil comes from Allah,
(4) believe in the Day of Judgment,
(5) believe in the Qur’an to be the last book revealed by Allah,
(6) perform the annual pilgrimage to Mecca,
(7) pay the zaka’at,
(8) say his prayers like the Musalmans,
(9) observe all apparent rules of Islami mu’ashira, and
(10) observe the fast (saum).
If a person satisfies all these conditions he is entitled to the rights of a full citizen of an Islamic State. If any one of these conditions is not satisfied, the person concerned will not be a political Musalman. (Again said) It would be enough for a person to be a Musalman if he merely professes his belief in these ten matters irrespective of whether he puts them into practice or not. In order to be a real Musalman, a person must believe in and act on all the injunctions by Allah and his prophet in the manner in which they have been enjoined upon him.
Q.—Will you say that only the real Musalman is ‘mard-i-saleh’ ?
A.—Yes.
Q.—do we understand you aright that in the case of what you have called a political (siyasi) Musalman, belief alone is necessary, while in the case of a haqiqi Musalman there must not only be belief but also action?
A.—No, you have not understood me aright. Even in the case of a political (siyasi) Musalman action is necessary but what I mean to say is that if a person does not act upon the belief that is necessary in the case of such a Musalman, he will not be outside the pale of a political (siyasi) Musalman.
Q.—If a political (siyasi) Musalman does not believe in things which you
have stated to be necessary, will you call such a person be-din ?
A.—No, I will call him merely be-amal”.
The definition by the Sadr Anjuman Ahmadiya, Rabwah, in its written statement
is that a Muslim is a person who belongs to the ummat of the Holy Prophet and professes belief in kalima-i-tayyaba.
Keeping in view the several definitions given by the ulama, need we make any comment except that no two learned divines are agreed on this fundamental. If we attempt our own definition as each learned divine has done and that definition differs from that given by all others, we unanimously go out of the fold of Islam. And if we adopt the definition given by any one of the ulama, we remain Muslims according to the view of that alim but kafirs according to the definition of every one else.
APOSTASY
Apostasy in an Islamic State is punishable with death. On this the ulama are practically unanimous (vide the evidence of Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyad Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan, Punjab; Maulana Ahmad Ali, Sadr Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Islam, West Pakistan; Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, founder and ex-Amir-i-Jama’at-i-Islami, Pakistan; Mufti Muhammad Idris, Jami’Ashrafia, Lahore, and Member, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan; Maulana Daud Ghaznavi, President, Jami’at-i-Ahl-i-Hadith, Maghribi Pakistan; Maulana Abdul Haleem Qasimi, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Islam, Punjab; and Mr. Ibrahim Ali Chishti). According to this doctrine, Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan, if he has not inherited his present religious beliefs but has voluntarily elected to be an Ahmadi, must be put to death. And the same fate should befall Deobandis and Wahabis, including Maulana Muhammad Shafi Deobandi, Member, Board of Talimat-i-Islami attached to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan, and Maulana Daud Ghaznavi, if Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyad Muhammad Ahmad Qadri or Mirza Raza Ahmad Khan Barelvi, or any one of the numerous ulama who are shown perched on every leaf of a beautiful tree in the fatwa, Ex. D. E. 14, were the head of such Islamic State. And if Maulana Muhammad Shafi Deobandi were the head of the State, he would exclude those who have pronounced Deobandis as kafirs from the pale of Islam and inflict on them the death penalty if they come within the definition of murtadd, namely, if they have changed and not inherited their religious views.
The genuineness of the fatwa, Ex. D. E. 13, by the Deobandis which says that Asna Ashari Shias are kafirs and murtadds, was questioned in the course of enquiry, but Maulana Muhammad Shafi made an inquiry on the subject from Deoband, and received from the records of that institution the copy of a fatwa signed by all the teachers of the Darul Uloom including Maulana Muhammad Shafi himself which is to the effect that those who do not believe in the sahabiyyat of Hazrat Siddiq Akbar and who are qazif of Hazrat Aisha Siddiqa and have been guilty of tehrif of Qur’an are kafirs. This opinion is also supported by Mr. Ibrahim Ali Chishti who has studied and knows his subject. He thinks the Shias are kafirs because they believe that Hazrat Ali shared the prophethood with our Holy Prophet. He refused to answer the question whether a person who being a Sunni changes his view and agrees with the Shia view would be guilty of irtidad so as to deserve the death penalty. According to the Shias all Sunnis are kafirs, and Ahl-i-Qur’an; namely, persons who consider hadith to be unreliable and therefore not binding, are unanimously kafirs and so are all independent thinkers. The net result of all this is that neither Shias nor Sunnis nor Deobandis nor Ahl-i-Hadith nor Barelvis are Muslims and any change from one view to the other must be accompanied in an Islamic State with the penalty of death if the Government of the State is in the hands of the party which considers the other party to be kafirs. And it does not require much imagination to judge of the consequences of this doctrine when it is remembered that no two ulama have agreed before us as to the definition of a Muslim. If the constituents of each of the definitions given by the ulama are given effect to, and subjected to the rule of ‘combination and permutation’ and the form of charge in the Inquisition’s sentence on Galileo is adopted mutatis mutandis as a model, the grounds on which a person may be indicted for apostasy will be too numerous to count.
In an earlier part of the report we have referred to the proscription of the ‘Ashshahab’, a pamphlet written by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani who later became Sheikh-ul-Islam-i-Pakistan. In that pamphlet the Maulana had attempted to show from the Qur’an, the sunna, the ijma’ and qayas that in Islam the punishment for apostasy (irtidad) simpliciter is death. After propounding the theological doctrine the Maulana had made in that document a statement of fact that in the time of the Caliph Siddiq-i-Akbar and the subsequent Caliphs vast areas of Arabia became repeatedly red with the blood of apostates. We are not called upon to express any opinion as to the correctness or otherwise of this doctrine but knowing that the suggestion to the Punjab Government to proscribe this pamphlet had come from the Minister for the Interior we have attempted to inquire of ourselves the reasons for Government’s taking a step which ex hypothesi amounted to condemning a doctrine which the Maulana had professed to derive from the Qur’an and the sunna. The death penalty for irtidad has implications of a far-reaching character and stamps Islam as a religion of fanatics, which punishes all independent thinking. The Qur’an again and again lays emphasis on reason and thought, advises toleration and preaches against compulsion in religious matters but the doctrine of irtidad as enunciated in this pamphlet strikes at the very root of independent thinking when it propounds the view that anyone who, being born a Muslim or having embraced Islam, attempts to think on the subject of religion with a view, if he comes to that conclusion, to choose for himself any religion he likes, has the capital penalty in store for him. With this implication Islam becomes an embodiment of complete intellectual paralysis. And the statement in the pamphlet that vast areas of Arabia were repeatedly bespattered with human blood, if true, could only lend itself to this inference that even when Islam was at the height of its splendour and held absolute sway in Arabia there were in that country a large number of people who turned away from that religion and preferred to die than to remain in that system. It must have been some such reaction of this pamphlet on the mind of the Minister for the Interior which prompted him to advise the Punjab Government to proscribe the pamphlet. Further the Minister who was himself well-versed in religious matters must have thought that the conclusion drawn by the author of the pamphlet which was principally based on the precedent mentioned in paras. 26, 27 and 28 of the Old Testament and which is only partially referred to in the Qur’an in the 54th verse of the Second Sura, could not be applicable to apostasy from Islam and that therefore the author’s opinion was in fact incorrect, there being no express text in the Qur’an for the death penalty for apostasy. On the contrary each of the two ideas, one underlying the six brief verses of Surat-ul-Kafiroon and the other the La Ikrah verse of the second Sura, has merely to be understood to reject as erroneous the view propounded in the ‘Ash-Shahab’. Each of the verses in Surat-ul-Kafiroon which contains thirty words and no verse of which exceeds six words, brings out a fundamental trait in man engrained in him since his creation while the La Ikrah verse, the relevant portion of which contains only nine words, states the rule of responsibility of the mind with a precision that cannot be surpassed. Both of these texts which are an early part of the Revelation are, individually and collectively, the foundation of that principle which human society, after centuries of conflict, hatred and bloodshed, has adopted in defining one of the most important fundamental rights of man. But our doctors would never dissociate chauvinism from Islam.
PROPAGATION OF OTHER RELIGIONS
Closely allied to the punishment for apostasy is the right of non-Muslims publicly to preach their religion. The principle which punishes an apostate with death must be applicable to public preaching of kufr and it is admitted by Maulana Abul Hasanat, Ghazi Siraj-ud-Din Munir and Master Taj-ud-Din Ansari, though the last subordinates his opinion to the opinion of the ulama, that any faith other than Islam will not be permitted publicly to be preached in the State. And Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, as will appear from his pamphlet ‘Punishment in Islam for an apostate’, has the same views on the subject.
Ghazi Siraj-ud-Din Munir, when questioned on this point, replied :—
“Q.—What will you do with them (Ahmadis) if you were the head of the
Pakistan State ?
A.—I would tolerate them as human beings but will not allow them the right
to preach their religion”.
The prohibition against public preaching of any non-Muslim religion must logically follow from the proposition that apostasy will be punished with death and that any attack on, or danger to Islam will be treated as treason and punished in the same way as apostasy.
JIHAD
Earlier we have pointed out that one of the doctrines on which the Musalmans and Ahmadis are at variance is that of jihad. This doctrine at once raises a host of other allied matters such as the meanings of ghazi, shahid, jihad-bis-saif, jihad fi sabili’llah, dar-ul-Islam, dar-ul-harb, hijrat, ghanima, khums and slavery, and the conflict or reconciliation of these conceptions with modern international problems such as aggression, genocide, international criminal jurisdiction, international conventions and rules of public international law.
An Islamic State is dar-ul-Islam, namely, a country where ordinances of Islam are established and which is under the rule of a Muslim sovereign. Its inhabitants are Muslims and also non-Muslims who have submitted to Muslim control and who under certain restrictions and without the possibility of full citizenship are guaranteed their lives and property by the Muslim State. They must, however, be people of Scriptures and may not be idolaters. An Islamic State is in theory perpetually at war with the neighbouring non-Muslim country, which at any time may become dar-ul-harb, in which case it is the duty of the Muslims of that country to leave it and to come over to the country of their brethren in faith. We put this aspect to Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi and reproduce his views :—
“Q.—is a country on the border of dar-ul-Islam always qua an Islamic State in the position of dar-ul-harb ?
A.—No. In the absence of an agreement to the contrary, the Islamic State will be potentially at war with the non-Muslim neighbouring country. The non-Muslim country acquires the status of dar-ul-harb only after the Islamic State declares a formal war against it”.
According to Ghias-ul-Lughat, dar-ul-harb is a country belonging to infidels which has not been subdued by Islam, and the consequences of a country becoming darul-harb are thus stated in the Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam :—
“When a country does become a dar-ul-harb, it is the duty of all Muslims to withdraw from it, and a wife who refuses to accompany her husband in this, is ipso facto divorced”.
Thus in case of a war between India and Pakistan, if the latter is an Islamic State, we must be prepared to receive forty million Muslims from across the border into Pakistan.
In fact, Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i- Pakistan, thinks that a case for hijrat already exists for the Musalmans of India. The following is his view on this subject :—
“Q.—Do yon call your migration to Pakistan as hijrat in the religious sense ?
A.—Yes”.
We shall presently point out why Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s version of the doctrine of jihad is relied on as a ground for his and his community’s kufr, but before we do that it is necessary first to state how jihad has been or is understood by the Musalmans. There are various theories about jihad which vary from the crude notion of a megalomaniac moved by religious frenzy going out armed with sword and indiscriminately slaughtering non-Muslims in the belief that if he dies in the combat he becomes a shahid and if he succeeds in killing attains the status of a ghazi, to the conception that a Musalman throughout his life is pitted against kufr, kufr here being used in the sense of evil and wrong, and that his principal activity in life is to strive by argument a where necessary by force to spread Islam until it becomes a world religion. In the latter case he fights not for any personal end but because he considers such strife as a duty and an obligation which he owes to Allah and the only recompense for which is the pleasure of Allah. The Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam contains the following brief article on djihad :—
“DJIHAD (A), holy war. The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general. It narrowly escaped being a sixth rukn, or fundamental duty, and is indeed still so regarded by the descendants of the Kharidjis. This position was reached gradually but quickly. In the Meccan Suras of the Qur’an patience under attack is taught ; no other attitude was possible. But at Medina the right to repel attack appears, and gradually it became a prescribed duty to fight against and subdue the hostile Meccans.
Whether Muhammad himself recognised that his position implied steady and unprovoked war against the unbelieving world until it was subdued to Islam may be in doubt. Traditions are explicit on the point ; but the Qur’anic passages speak always of the unbelievers who are to be subdued as dangerous or faithless. Still, the story of his writing to the powers around him shows that such a universal position was implicit in his mind, and it certainly developed immediately after his death, when the Muslim armies advanced out of Arabia. It is now a fard ala’l-kifaya, a duty in general on all male, free, adult Muslims, sane in mind and body and having means enough to reach the Muslim army, yet not a duty necessarily incumbent on every individual but sufficiently performed when done by a certain number. So it must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam. It must be controlled or headed by a Muslim sovereign or imam. As the imam of the Shias is now invisible, they cannot have a djihad until he reappears. Further, the requirement will be met if such a sovereign makes an expedition once a year, or, even, in the later view, if he makes annual preparation for one. The people against whom the djihad is directed must first be invited to embrace Islam. On refusal they have another choice. They may submit to Muslim rule, become dhimmis (q. v.) and pay djizya and kharadj (q. v.) or fight. In the first case, their lives, families and property are assured to them, but they have a definitely inferior status, with no technical citizenship, and a standing only as protected wards. If they fight, they and their families may be enslaved and all their property seized as booty, four-fifths of which goes to the conquering army. If they embrace Islam, and it is open to them to do so even when the armies are face to face, they become part of the Muslim community with all its rights and duties. Apostates must be put to death. But if a Muslim country is invaded by unbelievers, the imam may issue a general summons calling all Muslims there to arms, and as the danger grows so may be the width of the summons until the whole Muslim world is involved. A Muslim who dies fighting in the path of Allah (fi sabil Allah) is martyr (shahid) and is assured of Paradise and of peculiar privileges there. Such a death was, in the early generations, regarded as the peculiar crown of a pious life. It is still, on occasions, a strong incitement, but when Islam ceased to conquer it lost its supreme value. Even yet, however, any war between Muslims and non-Muslims must be a djihad with its incitements and rewards. Of course, such modern movements as the so-called Mu’tazili in India and the Young Turk in Turkey reject this and endeavour to explain away its basis; but the Muslim masses still follow the unanimous voice of the canon lawyers. Islam must be completely made over before the doctrine of djihad can be eliminated”.
The generally accepted view is that the fifth verse to Sura-i-Tauba (Sura IX) abrogated the earlier verses revealed in Mecca which permitted the killing of kuffar only in self-defence. As against this the Ahmadis believe that no verso in the Qur’an was abrogated by another verse and that both sets of verses, namely, the Meccan verses and the relative verses in Sura-i-Tauba have different scopes and can stand together. This introduces the difficult controversy of nasikh and mansukh, with all its implications. It is argued on behalf of the Ahmadis that the doctrine of nasikh and mansukh is opposed to the belief in the existence of an original Scripture in Heaven, and that implicit in this doctrine is the admission that unless the verse alleged to be repealed was meant for a specific occasion and by the coming of that occasion fulfilled its purpose and thus spent itself, God did not know of the subsequent circumstances which would make the earlier verse inapplicable or lead to an undesired result.
The third result of this doctrine, it is pointed out, cuts at the very root of the claim that laws of Islam are immutable and inflexible because if changed circumstances made a new revelation necessary, any change in the circumstances subsequent to the completion of the revelation would make most of the revelation otiose or obsolete.
We are wholly incompetent to pronounce on the merits of this controversy but what has to be pointed out is the result to which the doctrine of jihad will lead if, as appears from the article in the Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam and other writings produced before us including one by Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi and another by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, it involves the spread of Islam by arms and conquest. ‘Aggression’ and ‘genocide’ are now offences against humanity for which under sentences pronounced by different International tribunals at Nuremburg and Tokio the war lords of Germany and Japan had to forfeit their lives, and there is hardly any difference between the offences of aggression and genocide on the one hand and the doctrine of spread of Islam by arms and conquest on the other. An International Convention on genocide is about to be concluded but if the view of jihad presented to us is correct, Pakistan cannot be a party to it. And while the following verses in the Mecca Suras :—
Sura II, verses 190 and 193 :190. “Fight in the Cause of God Those who fight you,
But do not transgress limits ;
For God loveth not transgressors”.
193. “And fight them on
Until there is no more
Tumult or oppression,
And there prevail
Justice and faith in God ;
But if they cease,
Let there be no hostility
Except to those
Who practise oppression”.
Sura XXII, verses 39 and 40:
39. “To those against whom
War is made, permission
Is given (to fight) because
They are wronged;— and verily,
God is most Powerful
For their aid;—”
40. “(They are) those who have
Been expelled from their homes
In defiance of right,—
(For no cause) except
That they say, ‘Our Lord
Is God.’ Did not God
Check one set of people
By means of another,
There would surely have been
Pulled down monasteries, churches,
Synagogues, and mosques, in which
The name of God is commemorated
In abundant measure. God will
Certainly aid those who
Aid His (cause);—for verily
God is Full of Strength,
Exalted in Might,
(Able to enforce His Will),”
contain in them the sublime principle which international jurists have only faintly begun to discover, we must go on preaching that aggression is the chief characteristic of Islam. The law relating to prisoners of war is another branch of Islamic law which is bound to come in conflict with International Law.
As for instance, in matters relating to the treatment of prisoners of war, we shall have to be governed by Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi’s view, assuming that view is based on the Qur’an and the sunna, which is as follows :—
“Q.—Is there a law of war in Islam?
A.—Yes.
Q.—Does it differ fundamentally from the modern International Law of war?
A.—These two systems are based on a fundamental difference.
Q.—What rights have non-Muslims who are taken prisoners of war in a jihad?
A.—The Islamic law on the point is that if the country of which these prisoners are nationals pays ransom, they will be released. An exchange of prisoners is also permitted. If neither of these alternatives is possible, the prisoners will be converted into slaves for ever. If any such person makes an offer to pay his ransom out of his own earnings, he will be permitted to collect the money necessary for the fidya (ransom).
Q.—Are you of the view that unless a Government assumes the form of an Islamic Government, any war declared by it is not a jihad?
A.—No. A war may be declared to be a jihad if it is declared by a national Government of Muslims in the legitimate interests of the State. I never expressed the opinion attributed to me in Ex. D. E. 12:—
“Raha yeh masala keh agar hukumat-i-Pakisten apni maujuda shukl-o-surat ke sath Indian Union ke sath apne mu’ahadat khatm kar-ke i’lan-i-jang bar bhi de to kya us-ki yeh jang jihad ke hukam men a-ja’egi ? Ap ne is bare men jo rae zahir ki hai woh bilkul darust hai – Jab-tak hukumat Islami nizam ko ikhtiyar kar-ke Islami nah ho jae us waqt tak us-ki kisi jang ko jihad kehna aisa hi hai jaisa kisi ghair Muslim ke Azad Kashmir ki fauj men bharti ho-kar larne ko jihad aur us-ki maut ko shahadat ka nam dediya jae – Maulana ka jo mudd’a hai woh yeh hai keh mu’ahadat ki maujudgi men to hukumat ya us-ke shehriyon ka is jang men sharik hona shar’-an ja’iz hi nahin – Agar hukumat mu’ahadat khatm kar-ke jang ka
i’lan kar-de to hukumat ki jang to jihad phir bhi nahin hogi ta-an keh hukumat Islami nah ho jae.’
(translation)
‘The question remains whether, even if the Government of Pakistan, in its present form and structure, terminates her treaties with the Indian Union and declares war against her, this war would fall under the definition of jihad? The opinion expressed by him in this behalf is quite correct. Until such time as the Government becomes Islamic by adopting the Islamic form of Government, to call any of its wars a jihad would be tantamount to describing the enlistment and fighting of a non-Muslim on the side of the Azad Kashmir forces jihad and his death martyrdom. What the Maulana means is that, in the presence of treaties, it is against Shari’at, if the Government or its people participate in such a war. If the Government terminates the treaties and declares war, even then the war started by Government would not be termed jihad unless the Government becomes Islamic’.
About the view expressed in this letter being that of Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, there is the evidence of Mian Tufail Muhammad, the writer of the letter, who states: “Ex. D. E. 12 is a photostat copy of a letter which I wrote to someone whose name I do not now remember.”
Maulana Abul Hasanat Muhammad Ahmad Qadri’s view on this point is as
follows:—
“Q.—Is there a law of war in Islam?
A.—Yes.
Q.—Does it differ in fundamentals from the present International Law?
A.—Yes.
Q.—What are the rights of a person taken prisoner in war?
A.—He can embrace Islam or ask for aman, in which case he will be treated as a musta’min. If he does not ask for aman, he would be made a slave”.
Similar is the opinion expressed by Mian Tufail Muhammad of Jam’at-i-Islami who says:—
“Q.—Is there any law of war in Islamic laws?
A.—Yes.
Q.—If that comes into conflict with International Law, which will you follow?
A.—Islamic law.
Q.—Then please state what will be the status of prisoners of war captured by your
forces?
A.—I cannot reply to this off hand. I will have to study the point.”
Of course ghanima (plunder) and khums (one-fifth) if treated as a necessary incident of
jihad will be treated by international society as a mere act of brigandage.
REACTION ON MUSLIMS OF NON-MUSLIM STATES
The ideology on which an Islamic State is desired to be founded in Pakistan must have certain consequences for the Musalmans who are living in countries under non-Muslim sovereigns.
We asked Amir-i-Shari’at Sayyad Ataullah Shah Bukhari whether a Muslim could be a faithful subject of a non-Muslim State and reproduce his answer:—
“Q.—In your opinion is a Musalman bound to obey orders of a kafir Government?
A.—It is not possible that a Musalman should be faithful citizen of a non-Muslim Government.
Q.—Will it be possible for the four crore of Indian Muslims to be faithful citizens of their State?
A—No.”
The answer is quite consistent with the ideology which has been pressed before us, but then if Pakistan is entitled to base its Constitution on religion, the same right must be conceded to other countries where Musalmans are in substantial minorities or if they constitute a preponderating majority in a country where sovereignty rests with a non-Muslim community. We, therefore, asked the various ulama whether, if non-Muslims in Pakistan were to be subjected to this discrimination in matters of citizenship, the ulama would have any objection to Muslims in other countries being subjected to a similar discrimination. Their reactions to this suggestion are reproduced below:—
Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyed Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, President, Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan:—
“Q.—You will admit for the Hindus, who are in a majority in India, the right to have a Hindu religious State?
A.—Yes.
Q.—Will you have any objection if the Muslims are treated under that form of Government as malishes or shudras under the law of Manu?
A.— No.”
Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi :—
“Q.—If we have this form of Islamic Government in Pakistan, will you permit Hindus to base their Constitution on the basis of their own religion?
A—Certainly. I should have no objection even if the Muslims of India are treated in that form of Government as shudras and malishes and Manu’s laws are applied to them, depriving them of all share in the Government and the rights of a citizen. In fact such a state of affairs already exists in India.”
Amir-i-Shari’at Sayyad Ata Ullah Skak Bukhari :—
“Q.—How many crores of Muslims are there in India?
A.—Four crores.
Q.—Have you any objection to the law of Manu being applied to them according to which they will have no civil right and will be treated as malishes and shudras?
A.—I am in Pakistan and I cannot advise them.”
Mian Tufail Muhammad of Jama’at-i-Islami :—
“Q.—What is the population of Muslims in the world?
A.—Fifty crores.
Q.—If the total population of Muslims of the world is 50 crores, as you say, and the number of Muslims living in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Indonesia, Egypt, Persia, Syria, Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, Turkey and Iraq does not exceed 20 crores, will not the result of your ideology beto convert 30 crores of Muslims in the world into hewers of wood anddrawers of water?
A.—My ideology should not affect their position.
Q.—Even if they are subjected to discrimination on religious grounds and denied ordinary rights of citizenship ?
A.—Yes.”
This witness goes to the extent of asserting that even if a non-Muslim Government were to offer posts to Muslims in the public services of the country, it will be their duty to refuse such posts.
Ghazi Siraj-ud-Din Munir :—
“Q.—Do you want an Islamic State in Pakistan?
A.—Surely.
Q.—What will be your reaction if the neighbouring country was to found
their political system on their own religion?
A.—They can do it if they like.
Q.—Do you admit for them the right to declare that all Muslims in India, are shudras and malishes with no civil rights whatsoever?
A.—We will do our best to see that before they do it their political
sovereignty is gone. We are too strong for India. We will be strong enough to prevent India from doing this.
Q.—Is it a part of the religious obligations of Muslims to preach their religion?
A—Yes.
Q.—Is it a part of the duty of Muslims in India publicly to preach their religion?
A.—They should have that right.
Q.—What if the Indian State is founded on a religious basis and the right to preach religion is disallowed to its Muslim nationals?
A —If India makes any such law, believer in the Expansionist movement as I am, I will march on India and conquer her.”
So this is the reply to the reciprocity of discrimination on religious grounds.
Master Taj-ud-Din Ansari :—
“Q.—Would you like to have the same ideology for the four crores of Muslims in India as you are impressing upon the Muslims of
Pakistan?
A.—That ideology will not let them remain in India for one minute.
Q.—Does the ideology of a Muslim change from place to place and from time to time?
A.—No.
Q.—Then why should not the Muslims of India have the same ideology as you have?
A.—They should answer that question.”
The ideology advocated before us, if adopted by Indian Muslims, will completely
disqualify them for public offices in the State, not only in India but in other countries also which are under a non-Muslim Government. Muslims will become perpetual suspects everywhere and will not be enrolled in the army because according to this ideology, in case of war between a Muslim country and a non-Muslim country, Muslim soldiers of the non-Muslim country must either side with the Muslim country or surrender their posts.
The following is the view expressed by two divines whom we questioned on this point:—
Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyed Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, President, Jami’at-ul-
Ulama-i-Pakistan :—
“Q.—What will be the duty of Muslims in India in case of war between India
and Pakistan?
A.—Their duty is obvious, namely, to side with us and not to fight against us
on behalf of India.”
Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi : —
“Q.—What will be the duty of the Muslims in India in case of war between
India and Pakistan?
A.—Their duty is obvious, and that is not to fight against Pakistan or to do
anything injurious to the safety of Pakistan.”
OTHER INCIDENTS
Other incidents of an Islamic State are that all sculpture, playing of cards, portrait
painting, photographing human beings, music, dancing, mixed acting, cinemas and
theatres will have to be closed.
Thus says Maulana Abdul Haleem Qasimi, representative of Jami’at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan: —
“Q.—What are your views on tashbih and tamseel ?
A.—You should ask me a concrete question.
Q.—What are your views on lahw-o-la’b?
A.—The same is my reply to this question.
Q.—What are your views about portrait painting?
A.—There is nothing against it if any such painting becomes necessary.
Q.—What about photography?
A.—My reply to it is the same as the reply regarding portrait painting.
Q.—What about sculpture as an art?
A.—It is prohibited by our religion.
Q.—Will you bring playing of cards in lohw-o-la’b?
A.—Yes, it will amount to lahw-o-la’b.
Q.—What about music and dancing?
A.—It is all forbidden by our religion.
Q.—What about drama and acting?
A —It all depends on what kind of acting you mean. If it involves immodesty
and intermixture of sexes, the Islamic law is against it.
Q.—If the State is founded on your ideals, will you make a law stopping
portrait painting, photographing of human beings, sculpture, playing
of cards, music, dancing, acting and all cinemas and theatres?
A.—Keeping in view the present form of these activities, my answer is in the affirmative.”
Maulana Abdul Haamid Badayuni considers it to be a sin (ma’siyat) on the part of
professors of anatomy to dissect dead bodies of Muslims to explain points of anatomy to the students.
The soldier or the policeman will have the right, on grounds of religion, to disobey a command by a superior authority. Maulana Abul Hasanat’s view on this is as follows :—
“I believe that if a policeman is required to do something which we consider to be contrary to our religion, it should be the duty of the policeman to disobey the authority. The same would be my answer if ‘army’ were substituted for ‘police’.
Q.—You stated yesterday that if a policeman or a soldier was required by a
superior authority to do what you considered to be contrary to religion, it would be the duty of that policeman or the soldier to disobey such authority. Will you give the policeman or the soldier the right of himself determining whether the command he is given by his superior authority is contrary to religion ?
A.—Most certainly.
Q.—Suppose there is war between Pakistan and another Muslim country and the soldier feels that Pakistan is in the wrong; and that to shoot a soldier of other country is contrary to religion. Do you think he would be justified in disobeying his commanding officer ?
A.—In such a contingency the soldier should take a fatwa of the ‘ulama’.”
We have dwelt at some length on the subject of Islamic State not because we intended to write a thesis against or in favour of such State but merely with a view to presenting a clear picture of the numerous possibilities that may in future arise if true causes of the ideological confusion which contributed to the spread and intensity of the disturbances are not precisely located. That such confusion did exist is obvious because otherwise Muslim Leaguers, whose own Government was in office, would not have risen against it; sense of loyalty and public duty would not have departed from public officials who went about like maniacs howling against their own Government and officers; respect for property and human life would not have disappeared in the common man who with no scruple or compunction began freely to indulge in loot, arson and murder; politicians would not have shirked facing the men who had installed them in their offices; and administrators would not have felt hesitant or diffident in performing what was their obvious duty. If there is one thing which has been conclusively demonstrated in this inquiry, it is that provided you can persuade the masses to believe that something they are asked to do is religiously right or enjoined by religion, you can set them to any course of action, regardless of all considerations of discipline, loyalty, decency, morality or civic sense.
Pakistan is being taken by the common man, though it is not, as an Islamic State. This belief has been encouraged by the ceaseless clamour for Islam and Islamic State that is being heard from all quarters since the establishment of Pakistan. The phantom of an Islamic State has haunted the Musalman throughout the ages and is a result of the memory of the glorious past when Islam rising like a storm from the least expected quarter of the world—wilds of Arabia—instantly enveloped the world, pulling down from their high pedestal gods who had ruled over man since the creation, uprooting centuries old institutions and superstitions and supplanting all civilisations that had been built on an enslaved humanity. What is 125 years in human history, nay in the history of a people, and yet during this brief period Islam spread from the Indus to the Atlantic and Spain, and from the borders of China to Egypt, and the sons of the desert installed themselves in all old centres of civilisation—in Ctesiphon, Damascus, Alexandria, India and all places associated with the names of the Sumerian and the Assyrian civilisations. Historians have often posed the question : what would have been the state of the world today if Muawiya’s siege of Constantinople had succeeded or if the proverbial Arab instinct for plunder had not suddenly seized the mujahids of Abdur Rahman in their fight against Charles Martel on the plains of Tours in Southern France. May be Muslims would have discovered America long before Columbus did and the entire world would have been Moslemised; may be Islam itself would have been Europeanised. It is this brilliant achievement of the Arabian nomads, the like of which the world had never seen before, that makes the Musalman of today live in the past and yearn for the return of the glory that was Islam. He finds himself standing on the crossroads, wrapped in the mantle of the past and with the dead weight of centuries on his back, frustrated and bewildered and hesitant to turn one corner or the other. The freshness and the simplicity of the faith, which gave determination to his mind and spring to his muscle, is now denied to him. He has neither the means nor the ability to conquer and there are no countries to conquer. Little does he understand that the forces, which are pitted against him, are entirely different from those against which early Islam, had to fight, and that on the clues given by his own ancestors human mind has achieved results which he cannot understand. He therefore finds himself in a state of helplessness, waiting for some one to come and help him out of this morass of uncertainty and confusion. And he will go on waiting like this without anything happening. Nothing but a bold re-orientation of Islam to separate the vital from the lifeless can preserve it as a World Idea and convert the Musalman into a citizen of the present and the future world from the archaic in congruity that he is today. It is this lack of bold and clear thinking, the inability to understand and take decisions which has brought about in Pakistan a confusion which will persist and repeatedly create situations of the kind we have been inquiring into until our leaders have a clear conception of the goal and of the means to reach it. It requires no imagination to realise that irreconcilables remain irreconcilable even if you believe or wish to the contrary. Opposing principles, if left to themselves, can only produce confusion and disorder, and the application of a neutralising agency to them can only produce a dead result. Unless, in case of conflict between two ideologies, our leaders have the desire and the ability to elect, uncertainty must continue. And as long as we rely on the hammer when a file is needed and press Islam into service to solve situations it was never intended to solve, frustration and disappointment must dog our steps. The sublime faith called Islam will live even if our leaders are not there to enforce it. It lives in the individual, in his soul and outlook, in all his relations with God and men, from the cradle to the grave, and our politicians should understand that if Divine commands cannot make or keep a man a Musalman, their statutes will not….
December 13, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
Subroto Roy thinks the flare-up of the Telangana issue has one and only one positive consequence: it brings home to New Delhi’s ruling elite that there are real political questions in India, and not everything can be left to spin-doctors and lobbyists to handle.
November 29, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
From Facebook:
Subroto Roy finds it odd in diplomatic law and protocol that two American Presidents in succession have said respectively to the same Indian Prime Minister “You’re a good man” and a person of “honesty and integrity”.
Subroto Roy thinks Asia (from Israel-Palestine to Japan & Indonesia) needs its own Metternich and Congress of Vienna, but won’t get it and hence may remain many many decades behind Europe in political development. (And why Asia won’t get what Europe did may be because Europe did what it did.)
Subroto Roy agrees with Professor Juan Cole’s summary position: “India and Russia want an Obama ‘surge’ in Afghanistan because they are afraid that if Muslim extremists take over the country, that development could threaten their own security. China is more or less bankrolling the Afghanistan War…In contrast, Pakistan does not seem… eager for the further foreign troops, in part because it wants to project power and influence into Afghanistan itself”. But he would add Russia, China, India and Iran too are free-riders from the military standpoint (though India has built power-stations, roads etc for civilian economic development), while Pakistan remains schizophrenic as to whether it wishes to define itself by the lights of Iqbal and Jinnah or by the lunacy of Rahmat Ali.
October 15, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
P Chidambaram may recall our brief interaction at the residence of the late Shri Rajiv Gandhi in September-October 1990, and also my visit in July 1995 when he was a member of Narasimha Rao’s Government.
I am delighted to read in today’s paper that he believes a “unique solution” exists to the grave mortal problem of Jammu & Kashmir. Almost four years ago, I published in The Statesman my discovery of the existence of precisely such a unique solution in the three-part article “Solving Kashmir”.
This came to be followed by “Law, Justice and J&K”, “History of Jammu & Kashmir”, “Pakistan’s Allies”, “What to tell Musharraf” and a few others. The purpose of this open letter is to describe that solution which provides, I believe, the only just and lawful path available to the resolution of what has been known universally as the Kashmir problem.
Very briefly, it involves recognizing that the question of lawful territorial sovereignty in J&K is logically distinct from the question of the choice of nationality by individual inhabitants. The solution requires
(a) acknowledging that the original legal entity in the world system of nations known as Jammu & Kashmir arose on March 16 1846 and ceased to exist on or about October 22 1947; that the military contest that commenced on the latter date has in fact resulted, given all particular circumstances of history, in the lawful and just outcome in international law;
(b) offering all who may be Indian nationals or stateless and who presently live under Article 370, a formal choice of nationality between the Republics of India, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan: citizen-by-citizen, without fear or favour, under conditions of full information, individual privacy and security; any persons who voluntarily choose to renounce Indian nationality in such private individual decisions would be nevertheless granted lawful permanent residence in the Indian Republic and J&K in particular.
In other words, the dismemberment of the original J&K State and annexation of its territories by the entities known today as the Republic of Pakistan and Republic of India that occurred since October 22 1947, as represented first by the 1949 Ceasefire Line and then by the 1972 Line of Control, is indeed the just and lawful outcome prevailing in respect of the question of territorial sovereignty and jurisdiction. The remaining democratic question has to do with free individual choice of nationality by inhabitants, under conditions of full information and privacy, citizen-by-citizen, with the grant of permanent residency rights by the Indian Republic to persons under its jurisdiction in J&K who might wish to choose, for deeply personal individual reasons, not to remain Indian nationals but become Afghan, Iranian or Pakistani nationals instead (or remain stateless). Pakistan has said frequently its sole concern has been the freedom of Muslims of J&K under Indian rule, and any such genuine concern shall have been thereby fully met by India. Indeed if Pakistan agreed to act similarly this entire complex mortal problem of decades shall have begun to be resolved most appropriately. Pakistan and India are both wracked by corruption, poverty and bad governance, and would be able to mutually draw down military forces pit against one another everywhere, so as to begin to repair the grave damage to their fiscal health caused over decades by the deleterious draining away of vast public resources.
The full reasoning underlying this, which I believe to be the only lawful, just, efficient and stable solution that exists, is thoroughly explained in the following six articles. The first five, “Solving Kashmir”, “Law, Justice & J&K”, “History of J&K”, and “Pakistan’s Allies”, “What to Tell Musharraf” were published in The Statesman in 2005-2006 and are marked ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR and FIVE below, and are also available elsewhere here. The sixth “An Indian Reply to President Zardari”, marked SIX, was published for the first time here following the Mumbai massacres.
I believe careful reflection upon this entire body of reasoning may lead all reasonable men and women to a practically unanimous consensus about this as the appropriate course of action; if such a consensus happened to arise, the implementation of the solution shall only be a matter of (relatively) uncomplicated procedural detail.
Subroto Roy
October 15 2009
(This article has its origins in a paper “Towards an Economic Solution for Kashmir” which circulated in Washington DC in 1992-1995, including at the Indian and Pakistani embassies and the Carnegie Endowment, and was given as an invited lecture at the Heritage Foundation on June 23 1998. It should be read along with other articles also republished here, especially “History of J&K”, “Law, Justice and J&K” , “Understanding Pakistan”, “Pakistan’s Allies” and “What to Tell Musharraf”. The Washington paper and lecture itself originated from my ideas in the Introduction to Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy, edited by WE James and myself in the University of Hawaii project on Pakistan 1986-1992.)
I. Give Indian `Green Cards’ to the Hurriyat et al
India, being a liberal democracy in its constitutional law, cannot do in Jammu & Kashmir what Czechoslovakia did to the “Sudeten Germans” after World War II. On June 18 1945 the new Czechoslovakia announced those Germans and Magyars within their borders who could not prove they had been actively anti-fascist before or during the War would be expelled — the burden of proof was placed on the individual, not the State. Czechoslovakia “transferring” this population was approved by the Heads of the USA, UK and USSR Governments at Potsdam on August 2 1945. By the end of 1946, upto two million Sudeten Germans were forced to flee their homes; thousands may have died by massacre or otherwise; 165,000 remained who were absorbed as Czechoslovak citizens. Among those expelled were doubtless many who had supported Germany and many others who had not — the latter to this day seek justice or even an apology in vain. Czechoslovakia punished none of its nationals for atrocities, saying it had been revenge for Hitler’s evil (”badla” in Bollywood terms) and the post Cold War Czech Government too has declined to render an apology. Revenge is a wild kind of justice (while justice may be a civilised kind of revenge).
India cannot follow this savage precedent in international law. Yet we must recognise there are several hundred and up to several hundred thousand persons on our side of the boundary in the State of Jammu & Kashmir who do not wish to be Indian nationals. These people are presently our nationals ius soli, having been born in territory of the Indian Republic, and/or ius sanguinis, having been born of parents who are Indian nationals; or they may be “stateless” whom we must treat in accordance with the 1954 Convention on Stateless Persons. The fact is they may not wish to carry Indian passports or be Indian nationals.
In this respect their juridical persons resemble the few million “elite” Indians who have in the last few decades freely placed their hands on their hearts and solemnly renounced their Indian nationality, declaring instead their individual fidelity to other nation-states — becoming American, Canadian or Australian citizens, or British subjects or nationals of other countries. Such people include tens of thousands of the adult children of India’s metropolitan “elite”, who are annually visited abroad in the hot summer months by their Indian parents and relatives. They are daughters and sons of New Delhi’s Government and Opposition, of retired generals, air marshals, admirals, ambassadors, cabinet secretaries, public sector bureaucrats, private sector businessmen, university professors, journalists, doctors and many others. India’s most popular film-actress exemplified this “elite” capital-flight when, after a tireless search, she chose a foreign husband and moved to California.
The difference in Jammu & Kashmir would be that those wishing to renounce Indian nationality do not wish to move to any other place but to stay as and where they are, which is in Kashmir Valley or Jammu. Furthermore, they may wish, for whatever reason, to adopt, if they are eligible to do so, the nationality of e.g. the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan or the Islamic Republic of Iran or the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
They may believe themselves descended from Ahmad Shah Abdali whose Afghans ruled or mis-ruled Kashmir Valley before being defeated by Ranjit Singh’s Sikhs in 1819. Or they may believe themselves of Iranian descent as, for example, are the Kashmiri cousins of the late Ayatollah Khomeini. Or they may simply have wished to be, or are descended from persons who had wished to be on October 26 1947, citizens of the then-new British Dominion of Pakistan — but who came to be prevented from properly expressing such a desire because of the war-like conditions that have prevailed ever since between India and Pakistan. There may be even a few persons in Laddakh who are today Indian nationals but who wish to be considered Tibetans instead; there is, however, no Tibetan Republic and it does not appear there is going to be one.
India, being a free and self-confident country, should allow, in a systematic lawful manner, all such persons to fulfil their desires, and furthermore, should ensure they are not penalised for having expressed such “anti-national” desires or for having acted upon them. Sir Mark Tully, the British journalist, is an example of someone who has been a foreign national who has chosen to reside permanently in the Republic of India — indeed he has been an exemplary permanent resident of our country. There are many others like him. There is no logical reason why all those persons in Jammu & Kashmir who do wish not to be Indians by nationality cannot receive the same legal status from the Indian Republic as has been granted to Sir Mark Tully. There are already thousands of Sri Lankan, Bangladeshi and Nepalese nationals who are lawful permanent residents in the Indian Republic, and who travel back and forth between India and their home countries. There is no logical reason why the same could not be extended to several hundred or numerous thousand people in Jammu & Kashmir who may wish to not accept or to renounce their Indian nationality (for whatever personal reason) and instead become nationals, if they are so eligible, of the Islamic Republics of Afghanistan, Iran or Pakistan, or, for that matter, to remain stateless. On the one hand, their renunciation of Indian nationality is logically equivalent to the renunciation of Indian nationality by the adult children of India’s “elite” settled in North America and Western Europe. On the other hand, their wish to adopt, if they are eligible, a foreign nationality, such as that of Afghanistan, Iran or Pakistan, and yet remain domiciled in Indian territory is logically equivalent to that of many foreign nationals domiciled in India already like Sir Mark Tully.
Now if you are a permanent resident of some country, you may legally have many, perhaps most, but certainly not all the rights and duties of nationals of that country. e.g., though you will have to pay all the same taxes, you may not be allowed to (or be required to) vote in national or provincial elections but you may in local municipal elections. At the same time, permanently residing foreign nationals are supposed to be equal under the law and have equal access to all processes of civil and criminal justice. (As may be expected though from human frailty, even the federal courts of the USA can be notorious in their injustice and racism towards “Green Card” holders relative to “full” American citizens.) Then again, as a permanently resident foreigner, while you will be free to work in any lawful trade or profession, you may not be allowed to work in some or perhaps any Government agencies, certainly not the armed forces or the police. Many Indians in the USA were engineering graduates, and because many engineering jobs or contracts in the USA are related to the US armed forces and require US citizens only, it is commonplace for Indian engineers to renounce their Indian nationality and become Americans because of this. Many Indian-American families have one member who is American, another Indian, a third maybe Canadian, a fourth Fijian or British etc.
The same can happen in the Indian State of Jammu & Kashmir if it evolves peacefully and correctly in the future. It is quite possible to imagine a productive family in a peaceful Kashmir Valley of the future where one brother is an officer in the Indian Armed Forces, another brother a civil servant and a sister a police officer of the J&K State Government, another sister being a Pakistani doctor, while cousins are Afghan or Iranian or “stateless” businessmen. Each family-member would have made his/her choice of nationality as an individual given the circumstances of his/her life, his/her personal comprehension of the facts of history, his/her personal political and/or religious persuasions, and similar deeply private considerations. All would have their children going to Indian schools and being Indian citizens ius soli and/or ius sanguinis. When the children grow up, they would be free to join, if they wished, the existing capital flight of other Indian adult children abroad and there renounce their Indian nationality as many have come to do.
II Revealing Choices Privately with Full Information
For India to implement such a proposal would be to provide an opportunity for all those domiciled in Kashmir Valley, Jammu and Laddakh to express freely and privately as individuals their deepest wishes about their own identities, in a confidential manner, citizen by citizen, case by case. This would thereby solve the fundamental democratic problem that has been faced ever since the Pakistani attack on the original State of Jammu & Kashmir commenced on October 22 1947, which came to be followed by the Rape of Baramulla — causing the formal accession of the State to the then-new Dominion of India on October 26 1947.
A period of, say, 30 months may be announced by the Government of India during which full information would be provided to all citizens affected by this change, i.e. all those presently governed by Article 370 of the Indian Constitution. The condition of full information may include, for example, easy access to Afghan, Iranian and Pakistani newspapers in addition to access to Indian media. Each such person wishing to either remain with Indian nationality (by explicitly requesting an Indian passport if he/she does not have one already — and such passports can be printed in Kashmiri and Urdu too), or to renounce Indian nationality and either remain stateless or adopt, if he/she is so eligible, the nationality of e.g. Afghanistan, Iran, or Pakistan, should be administratively assisted by the Government of India to make that choice.
In particular, he/she should be individually, confidentially, and without fear or favour assured and informed of his/her new rights and responsibilities. For example, a resident of Kashmir Valley who chooses to become a Pakistani citizen, such as Mr Geelani, would now enjoy the same rights and responsibilities in the Indian Republic that Mr Tully enjoys, and at the same time no longer require a visa to visit Pakistan just as Mr Tully needs no visa to enter Britain. In case individual participants in the Hurriyat choose to renounce Indian nationality and adopt some other, they would no longer be able to legally participate in Indian national elections or J&K’s State elections. That is something which they say they do not wish to do in any case. Those members of the Hurriyat who chose e.g. Pakistani nationality while still residing in Jammu & Kashmir, would be free to send postal ballots or cross the border and vote in Pakistan’s elections if and when these occur. There are many Canadians who live permanently in the USA who cross home to Canada in order to cast a ballot.
After the period of 30 months, every person presently under Article 370 of the Indian Constitution would have received a full and fair opportunity to privately and confidentially reveal his/her preference or choice under conditions of full information. “Partition”, “Plebiscite”, and “Military Decision” have been the three alternatives under discussion ever since the National Conference of Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah and his then-loyal Deputy, Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad, helped the Indian Army and Air Force in 1947-1948 fight off the savage attack against Jammu & Kashmir State that had commenced from Pakistan on October 22 1947. When, during the Pakistani attack, the Sheikh and Bakshi agreed to the Muslim Conference’s demand for a plebiscite among the people, the Pakistanis balked — the Sheikh and Bakshi then withdrew their offer and decisively and irrevocably chose to accede to the Indian Union. The people of Jammu & Kashmir, like any other, are now bound by the sovereign political commitments made by their forebears. Even so, given the painful mortal facts of the several decades since, the solution here proposed if properly implemented would be an incomparably more thorough democratic exercise than any conceivable plebiscite could ever have been.
Furthermore, regardless of the outcome, it would not entail any further “Partition” or population “transfer” which inevitably would degenerate into a savage balkanization, and has been ruled out as an unacceptable “deal-breaker” by the Indian Republic. Instead, every individual person would have been required, in a private and confidential decision-making process, to have chosen a nationality or to remain stateless — resulting in a multitude of cosmopolitan families in Jammu & Kashmir. But that is something commonplace in the modern world. Properly understood and properly implemented, we shall have resolved the great mortal problem we have faced for more than half a century, and Jammu & Kashmir can finally settle into a period of peace and prosperity. The boundary between India and Pakistan would have been settled by the third alternative mentioned at the time, namely, “Military Decision”.
III. Of Flags and Consulates in Srinagar and Gilgit
Pakistan has demanded its flag fly in Srinagar. This too can happen though not in the way Pakistan has been wishing to see it happen. A Pakistan flag might fly in the Valley just as might an Afghan and Iranian flag as well. Pakistan has wished its flag to fly as the sovereign over Jammu & Kashmir. That is not possible. The best and most just outcome is for the Pakistani flag to fly over a recognised Pakistani consular or visa office in Srinagar, Jammu and Leh. In diplomatic exchange, the Indian tricolour would have to fly over a recognised Indian consular or visa office in Muzaffarabad, Gilgit and Skardu.
Pakistan also may have to act equivalently with respect to the original inhabitants of the territory of Jammu & Kashmir that it has been controlling — allowing those people to become Indian nationals if they so chose to do in free private decisions under conditions of full information. In other words, the “Military Decision” that defines the present boundary between sovereign states must be recognised by Pakistan sincerely and permanently in a Treaty relationship with India — and all of Pakistan’s official and unofficial protégés like the Hurriyat and the “United Jehad Council” would have to do the same. Without such a sovereign commitment from the Government of Pakistan, as shown by decisive actions of lack of aggressive intent (e.g. as came to be implemented between the USA and USSR), the Government of India has no need to involve the Government of Pakistan in implementing the solution of enhancing free individual choice of nationality with regard to all persons on our side of the boundary.
The “Military Decision” regarding the sovereign boundary in Jammu & Kashmir will be so recognised by all only if it is the universally just outcome in international law. And that in fact is what it is.
The original Jammu & Kashmir State began its existence as an entity in international law long before the present Republics of India and Pakistan ever did. Pakistan commences as an entity on August 14 1947; India commences as an entity of international law with its signing of the Treaty of Versailles on June 20 1918. Jammu & Kashmir began as an entity on March 16 1846 — when the Treaty of Amritsar was signed between Gulab Singh Dogra and the British, one week after the Treaty of Lahore between the British and the defeated Sikh regency of the child Daleep Singh.
Liaquat Ali Khan and Zafrullah Khan both formally challenged on Pakistan’s behalf the legitimacy of Dogra rule in Jammu & Kashmir since the Treaty of Amritsar. The Pakistani Mission to the UN does so even today. The Pakistanis were following Sheikh Abdullah and Jawaharlal Nehru himself, who too had at one point challenged Dogra legitimacy in the past. But though the form of words of the Pakistan Government and the Nehru-Abdullah position were similar in their attacks on the Treaty of Amritsar, their underlying substantive reasons were as different as chalk from cheese. The Pakistanis attacked the Dogra dynasty for being Dogra — i.e. because they were Hindus and not Muslims governing a Muslim majority. Nehru and Abdullah denounced monarchic autocracy in favour of mass democracy, and so attacked the Dogra dynasty for being a dynasty. All were wrong to think the Treaty of Amritsar anything but a lawful treaty in international law.
Furthermore, in this sombre political game of great mortal consequence, there were also two other parties who were, or appeared to be, in favour of the dynasty: one because the dynasty was non-Muslim, the other, despite it being so. Non-Muslim minorities like many Hindus and Sikhs in the business and governmental classes, saw the Dogra dynasty as their protector against a feared communalist tyranny arising from the Sunni Muslim masses of Srinagar Valley, whom Abdullah’s rhetoric at Friday prayer-meetings had been inciting or at least awakening from slumber. At the same time, the communalists of the Muslim Conference who had broken away from Abdullah’s secular National Conference, sought political advantage over Abdullah by declaring themselves in favour of keeping the dynasty — even elevating it to become an international sovereign, thus flattering the already pretentious potentate that he would be called “His Majesty” instead of merely “His Highness”. The ancestry of today’s Hurriyat’s demands for an independent Jammu & Kashmir may be traced precisely to those May 21-22 1947 declarations of the Muslim Conference leader, Hamidullah Khan.
Into this game stumbled the British with all the mix of cunning, indifference, good will, impatience, arrogance and pomposity that marked their rule in India. At the behest of the so-called “Native Princes”, the 1929 Butler Commission had hinted that the relationship of “Indian India” to the British sovereign was conceptually different from that of “British India” to the British sovereign. This view was adopted in the Cabinet Mission’s 12 May 1946 Memorandum which in turn came to be applied by Attlee and Mountbatten in their unseemly rush to “Divide and Quit” India in the summer of 1947.
It created the pure legal illusion that there was such a thing as “Lapse of Paramountcy” at which Jammu & Kashmir or any other “Native State” of “Indian India” could conceivably, even for a moment, become a sovereign enjoying the comity of nations — contradicting Britain’s own position that only two Dominions, India and Pakistan, could ever be members of the British Commonwealth and hence members of the newly created UN. British pusillanimity towards Jammu & Kashmir’s Ruler had even extended to making him a nominal member of Churchill’s War Cabinet because he had sent troops to fight in Burma. But the legal illusion had come about because of a catastrophic misunderstanding on the part of the British of their own constitutional law.
The only legal scholar who saw this was B R Ambedkar in a lonely and brilliant technical analysis released to the press on June 17 1947. No “Lapse of Paramountcy” over the “Native Princes” of Indian India could occur in constitutional law. Paramountcy over Indian India would be automatically inherited by the successor state of British India at the Transfer of Power. That successor state was the new British Dominion of India as well as (when it came to be finalised by Partition from India) the new British Dominion of Pakistan (Postscript: the deleted words represent a mistake made in the original paper, corrected in “Law, Justice & J&K” in view of the fact the UN in 1947 deemed India alone the successor state of British India and Pakistan a new state in the world system). A former “Native Prince” could only choose to which Dominion he would go. No other alternative existed even for a single logical moment. Because the British had catastrophically failed to comprehend this aspect of their own constitutional law, they created a legal vacuum whereby between August 15 and October 22-26 1947, Jammu & Kashmir became a local and temporary sovereign recognised only by the Dominion of Pakistan (until October 22) and the Dominion of India (until October 26). But it was not a globally recognised sovereign and was never going to be such in international law. This was further proved by Attlee refusing to answer the J&K Prime Minister’s October 18 1947 telegram.
All ambiguity came to end with the Pakistani attack of October 22 1947, the Rape of Baramulla, the secession of an “Azad Kashmir”declared by Sardar Ibrahim, and the Pakistani coup détat in Gilgit on October 31 1947 followed by the massacre of Sikh soldiers of the J&K Army at Bunji. With those Pakistani actions, Gulab Singh’s Jammu & Kashmir State, founded on March 16 1846 by the Treaty of Amritsar, ceased to logically exist as an entity in international law and fell into a state of ownerless anarchy. The conflict between Ibrahim’s Muslim communalists backed by the new Dominion of Pakistan and Abdullah’s secularists backed by the new Dominion of India had become a civil war within a larger intra-Commonwealth war that itself was almost a civil war between forces of the same military.
Jammu & Kashmir territory had become ownerless. The Roman Law which is at the root of all municipal and international law in the world today would declare that in the ownership of such an ownerless entity, a “Military Decision” was indeed the just outcome. Sovereignty over the land, waters, forests and other actual and potential resources of the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir has become divided by “Military Decision” between the modern Republics of India and Pakistan. By the proposal made herein, the people and their descendants shall have chosen their nationality and their domicile freely across the sovereign boundary that has come to result.
TWO
LAW, JUSTICE AND J&K by Subroto Roy First published in two parts in The Sunday Statesman, July 2 2006 and The Statesman July 3 2006 http://www.thestatesman.net Editorial Page Special Article
I.
For a solution to J&K to be universally acceptable it must be seen by all as being lawful and just. Political opinion in Pakistan and India as well as all people and parties in J&K ~ those loyal to India, those loyal to Pakistan, and any others ~ will have to agree that, all things considered, such is the right course of action for everyone today in the 21st Century, which means too that the solution must be consistent with the facts of history as well as account reasonably for all moral considerations.
On August 14, 1947, the legal entity known as “British India”, as one of its final acts, and based on a sovereign British decision made only two months earlier, created out of some of its territory a new State defined in international law as the “Dominion of Pakistan”. British India extinguished itself the very next day, and the newly independent “Dominion of India” succeeded to all its rights and obligations in international law. As the legal successor of the “India” which had signed the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 and the San Francisco Declaration of 1945, the Dominion of India was already a member of the new UN as well as a signatory to many international treaties. By contrast, the Dominion of Pakistan had to apply afresh to sign treaties and become a member of international organisations. The theory put forward by Argentina that two new States, India and Pakistan, had been created ab initio, came to be rejected and was withdrawn by Argentina. Instead, Pakistan with the wholehearted backing of India was made a member of the UN, with all except Afghanistan voting in favour. (Afghanistan’s exceptional vote signalled presence of conflict over the Durand Line and idea of a Pashtunistan; Dr Khan Sahib and Abdul Ghaffar Khan were imprisoned by the Muslim League regime of NWFP which later supported the tribesmen who attacked J&K starting October 22, 1947; that conflict remains unresolved to this day, even after the American attack on the Taliban, the restart of a constitutional process in Afghanistan, and the purported mediation of US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice.)
Zafrullah Khan, Pakistan’s distinguished first ambassador to the UN, claimed in September 1947: “Pakistan is not a new member of UNO but a successor to a member State which was one of the founders of the Organisation.” He noted that he himself had led India to the final session of the League of Nations in Geneva in 1939, and he wished to say that Pakistan had been present “as part of India… under the latter name” as a signatory to the Treaty of Versailles. This was, however, logically impossible. The Treaty of Versailles long predated (1) Mohammad Iqbal’s Allahabad Address which conceptualised for the first time in the 20th Century a Muslim State in Northwest India; (2) Rahmat Ali’s invention of the word “PAKSTAN” on the top floor of a London omnibus; (3) M. A. Jinnah and Fazlul Haq’s Lahore Resolution; and (4) the final British decision of June 3, 1947 to create by Partition out of “British India” a Dominion named Pakistan. Pakistan could not have acted in international law prior to having come into being or been created or even conceived itself. Zafrullah Khan would have been more accurate to say that the history of Pakistanis until August 14, 1947 had been one in common with that of their Indian cousins ~ or indeed their Indian brothers, since innumerable North Indian Muslim families came to be literally partitioned, with some brothers remaining Indians while other brothers became Pakistanis.
Pakistan was created at the behest of Jinnah’s Muslim League though with eventual agreement of the Indian National Congress (a distant ancestor of the political party going by the same name today). Pakistan arose not because Jinnah said Hindus and Muslims were “two nations” but because he and his League wished for a State where Muslims would find themselves ruled by fellow-Muslims and feel themselves part of a pan-Islamic culture. Yet Pakistan was intended to be a secular polity with Muslim-majority governance, not an Islamic theocracy. That Pakistan failed to become secular was exemplified most poignantly in the persecution Zafrullah himself later faced in his personal life as an Ahmadiya, even while he was Pakistan’s Foreign Minister. (The same happened later to Pakistan’s Nobel-winning physicist Abdus Salaam.) Pakistan was supposed to allow the genius of Indo-Muslim culture to flourish, transplanted from places like Lucknow and Aligarh which would never be part of it. In fact, the areas that are Pakistan today had in the 1937 provincial elections shown scant popular Muslim support for Jinnah’s League. The NWFP had a Congress Government in the 1946 elections, and its supporters boycotted the pro-Pakistan referendum in 1947. The imposition of Urdu culture as Pakistan’s dominant ethos might have come to be accepted later in West Punjab, Sindh and NWFP but it was not acceptable in East Bengal, and led inevitably to the Pakistani civil war and creation of Bangladesh by Sheikh Mujib in 1971.
In August 1947, the new Dominions of India and Pakistan were each supposed to protect their respective minority populations as their first political duty. Yet both palpably failed in this, and were reduced to making joint declarations pleading for peace and an end to communal killings and the abduction of women. The Karachi Government, lacking the wherewithal and administrative machinery of being a nation-state at all, and with only Liaquat and an ailing Jinnah as noted leaders, may have failed more conspicuously, and West Punjab, the Frontier and Sindh were soon emptied of almost all their many Sikhs and Hindus. Instead, the first act of the new Pakistan Government in the weeks after August 14, 1947 was to arrange for the speedy and safe transfer of the North Indian Muslim elite by air from Delhi using chartered British aeroplanes. The ordinary Muslim masses of UP, Delhi and East Punjab were left in danger from or were subjected to Sikh and Hindu mob attacks, especially as news and rumours spread of similar outrages against Pakistan’s departing minorities.
In this spiral of revenge attacks and counter-attacks, bloodshed inevitably spilled over from West and East Punjab into the northern Punjabi plains of Jammu, though Kashmir Valley remained conspicuously peaceful. Zafrullah and Liaquat would later claim it was this communal civil war which had caused thousands of newly decommissioned Mirpuri soldiers of the British Army, and thousands of Afridi and other Frontier tribesmen, to spontaneously act to “liberate” J&K’s Muslims from alleged tyranny under the Hindu Ruler or an allegedly illegal Indian occupation.
But the main attack on J&K State that began from Pakistan along the Manshera-Muzaffarabad road on October 22, 1947 was admittedly far too well-organised, well-armed, well-planned and well-executed to have been merely a spontaneous uprising of tribesmen and former soldiers. In all but name, it was an act of undeclared war of the new Dominion of Pakistan first upon the State of J&K and then upon the Indian Dominion. This became obvious to Field Marshall Auchinlek, who, as Supreme Commander of the armed forces of both India and Pakistan, promptly resigned and abolished the Supreme Command in face of the fact that two parts of his own forces were now at war with one another.
The invaders failed to take Srinagar solely because they lost their military purpose while indulging in the Rape of Baramula. Thousands of Kashmiri women of all communities ~ Muslim, Sikh and Hindu ~ were violated and transported back to be sold in markets in Peshawar and elsewhere. Such was standard practice in Central Asian tribal wars from long before the advent of Islam, and the invading tribesmen shared that culture. India’s Army and Air Force along with the militias of the secular democratic movement led by Sheikh Abdullah and those remaining loyal units of J&K forces, fought off the invasion, and liberated Baramula, Naushera, Uri, Poonch etc. Gilgit had a British-led coup détat against it bringing it under Pakistan’s control. Kargil was initially taken by the Pakistanis and then lost by them. Leh could have been but was not taken by Pakistani forces. But in seeking to protect Leh and to retake Kargil, the Indian Army lost the siege of Skardu ~ which ended reputedly with the infamous communication from the Pakistani commander to his HQ: “All Sikhs killed; all women raped.”
Legal theory
Now, in this grave mortal conflict, the legal theory to which both the Indian and Pakistani Governments have been wedded for sixty years is one that had been endorsed by the British Cabinet Mission in 1946 and originated with the Butler Commission of 1929. Namely, that “Lapse of Paramountcy” over the “Indian India” of the “Native States” could and did occur with the extinction of British India on August 15, 1947. By this theory, Hyderabad, J&K, Junagadh and the several other States which had not acceded to either Dominion were no longer subject to the Crown’s suzerainty as of that date. Both Dominions drew up “Instruments of Accession” for Rulers to sign upon the supposed “Lapse” of Paramountcy that was to occur with the end of British India.
Ever since, the Pakistan Government has argued that Junagadh’s Ruler acceded to Pakistan and Hyderabad’s had wished to do so but both were forcibly prevented by India. Pakistan has also argued the accession to India by J&K’s Ruler was “fraudulent” and unacceptable, and Sheikh Abdullah was a “Quisling” of India and it was not his National Conference but the Muslim Conference of Ibrahim, Abbas and the Mirwaiz (precursor of the Hurriyat) which represented J&K’s Muslims.
India argued that Junagadh’s accession to Pakistan or Hyderabad’s independence were legal and practical impossibilities contradicting the wills of their peoples, and that their integration into the Indian Dominion was carried out in an entirely legitimate manner in the circumstances prevailing.
On J&K, India has argued that not only had the Ruler requested Indian forces to fight off the Pakistani attack, and he acceded formally before Indian forces were sent, but also that democratic principles were fully adhered to in the unequivocal endorsement of the accession by Sheikh Abdullah and the National Conference and further by a duly called and elected J&K Constituent Assembly, as well as generations of Kashmiris since. In the Indian view, it is Pakistan which has been in illegal occupation of Indian territory from Mirpur, Muzaffarabad and Gilgit to Skardu all the way to the Khunjerab Pass, Siachen Glacier and K2, some of which it illegally ceded to its Communist Chinese ally, and furthermore that it has denied the peoples of these areas any democratic voice.
Roman law
In June 1947, it was uniquely and brilliantly argued by BR Ambedkar in a statement to the Press that the British had made a catastrophic error in comprehending their own constitutional law, that no such thing as “Lapse” of Paramountcy existed, and that suzerainty over the “Native States” of “Indian India” would be automatically transferred in international law to the successor State of British India. It was a legal illusion to think any Native State could be sovereign even for a single logical moment. On this theory, if the Dominion of India was the sole successor State in international law while Pakistan was a new legal entity, then a Native State which acceded to Pakistan after August 15, 1947 would have had to do so with the consent of the suzerain power, namely, India, as may be said to have happened implicitly in case of Chitral and a few others. Equally, India’s behaviour in integrating (or annexing) Junagadh and Hyderabad, would become fully explicable ~ as would the statements of Mountbatten, Nehru and Patel before October 1947 that they would accept J&K going to Pakistan if that was what the Ruler and his people desired. Pakistan unilaterally and by surprise went to war against J&K on October 22, declared the accession to India “fraudulent”, and to this day has claimed the territory of the original State of J&K is “disputed”. Certainly, even if the Ambedkar doctrine is applied that no “Lapse” was possible under British law, Pakistan did not recognise India’s jurisdiction there as the suzerain power as of August 15, 1947. Altogether, Pakistan’s sovereign actions from October 22 onwards amounted to acting to annex J&K to itself by military force ~ acts which came to be militarily resisted (with partial success) by India allied with Sheikh Abdullah’s National Conference and the remaining forces of J&K. By these military actions, Pakistan revealed that it considered J&K territory to have descended into a legal state of anarchy as of October 22, 1947, and hence open to resolution by “Military Decision” ~ as is indeed the just outcome under Roman Law, the root of all municipal and international law today, when there is a contest between claimants over an ownerless entity.
Choice of nationality
Hence, the present author concluded (“Solving Kashmir”, The Statesman December 1-3, 2005) that the dismemberment of the original J&K State and annexation of its territories by India and Pakistan that has occurred since 1947, as represented first by the 1949 Ceasefire Line and then by the 1972 Line of Control, is indeed the just and lawful outcome prevailing in respect of the question of territorial sovereignty and jurisdiction. The remaining “democratic” question described has to do with free individual choice of nationality by the inhabitants, under conditions of full information and privacy, citizen-by-citizen, with the grant of permanent residency rights by the Indian Republic to persons under its jurisdiction in J&K who may choose not to remain Indian nationals but become Afghan, Iranian or Pakistani nationals instead. Pakistan has said frequently its sole concern has been the freedom of the Muslims of J&K under Indian rule, and any such genuine concern shall have been thereby fully met by India. Indeed, if Pakistan agreed to act similarly, this entire complex mortal problem of decades shall have begun to be peacefully resolved. Both countries are wracked by corruption, poverty and bad governance, and would be able to mutually draw down military forces pit against one another everywhere, so as to begin to repair the grave damage to their fiscal health caused by the deleterious draining away of vast public resources.
THREE
HISTORY OF JAMMU & KASHMIR by Subroto Roy First published in two parts in The Sunday Statesman, Oct 29 2006 and The Statesman Oct 30 2006, Editorial Page Special Article, http://www.thestatesman.net
At the advent of Islam in distant Arabia, India and Kashmir in particular were being visited by Chinese Buddhist pilgrims during Harsha’s reign. The great “Master of Law” Hiuen Tsiang visited between 629-645 and spent 631-633 in Kashmir (”Kia-chi-mi-lo”), describing it to include Punjab, Kabul and Kandahar. Over the next dozen centuries, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh and again Hindu monarchs came to rule the 85 mile long 40 mile wide territory on the River Jhelum’s upper course known as Srinagar Valley, as well as its adjoining Jammu in the upper plains of the Punjab and “Little Tibet” consisting of Laddakh, Baltistan and Gilgit.
In 1344, a Persian adventurer from Swat or Khorasan by name of Amir or Mirza, who had “found his way into the Valley and in time gained great influence at the Raja’s court”, proclaimed himself Sultan Shamsuddin after the death of the last Hindu monarchs of medieval Kashmir. Twelve of his descendants formed the Shamiri dynasty including the notorious Sikander and the just and tolerant Zainulabidin. Sikander who ruled 1386-1410 “submitted himself” to the Uzbek Taimur the Lame when he approached Kashmir in 1398 “and thus saved the country from invasion”. Otherwise, “Sikander was a gloomy ferocious bigot, and his zeal in destroying temples and idols was so intense that he is remembered as the Idol-Breaker. He freely used the sword to propagate Islam and succeeded in forcing the bulk of the population to conform outwardly to the Muslim religion. Most of the Brahmins refused to apostatise, and many of them paid with their lives the penalty for their steadfastness. Many others were exiled, and only a few conformed.”
Zainulabidin who ruled 1417-1467 “was a man of very different type”. “He adopted the policy of universal toleration, recalled the exiled Brahmins, repealed the jizya or poll-tax on Hindus, and even permitted new temples to be built. He abstained from eating flesh, prohibited the slaughter of kine, and was justly venerated as a saint. He encouraged literature, painting and music, and caused many translations to be made of works composed in Sanskrit, Arabic and other languages.” During his “long and prosperous reign”, he “constructed canals and built many mosques; he was just and tolerant”.
The Shamiri dynasty ended in 1541 when “some fugitive chiefs of the two local factions of the Makri and the Chakk invited Mirza Haidar Dughlat, a relation of Babar, to invade Kashmir. The country was conquered and the Mirza held it (nominally in name of Humayan) till 1551, when he was killed in a skirmish. The line… was restored for a few years, until in 1559 a Chakk leader, Ghazi Shah, usurped the throne; and in the possession of his descendants it remained for nearly thirty years.” This dynasty marks the origins of Shia Islam in Srinagar though Shia influence in Gilgit, Baltistan and Laddakh was of longer standing. Constant dissensions weakened the Chakks, and in 1586, Akbar, then at Attock on the Indus, sent an army under Raja Bhagwan Das into Srinagar Valley and easily made it part of his Empire.
Shivaism and Islam both flourished, and Hindu ascetics and Sufi saints were revered by all. Far from Muslims and Hindus forming distinct nations, here they were genetically related kinsmen living in proximity in a small isolated area for centuries. Indeed Zainulabidin may have had a vast unspoken influence on the history of all India insofar as Akbar sought to attempt in his empire what Zainulabidin achieved in the Valley. Like Zainulabidin, Akbar’s governance of India had as its “constant aim” “to conciliate the Hindus and to repress Muslim bigotry” which in modern political parlance may be seen as the principle of secular governance ~ of conciliating the powerless (whether majority or minority) and repressing the bigotry of the powerful (whether minority or majority). Akbar had made the Valley the summer residence of the Mughals, and it was Jahangir, seeing the Valley for the first time, who apparently said the words agar behest baushad, hamee in hast, hamee in hast, hamee in hast: “if Heaven exists, it is here, it is here, it is here”. Yet like other isolated paradises (such as the idyllic islands of the Pacific Ocean) an accursed mental ether can accompany the magnificent beauty of people’s surroundings. As the historian put it: “The Kashmiris remained secure in their inaccessible Valley; but they were given up to internal weakness and discord, their political importance was gone…”
After the Mughals collapsed, Iran’s Turkish ruler Nadir Shah sacked Delhi in 1739 but the Iranian court fell in disarray upon his death. In 1747 a jirga of Pashtun tribes at Kandahar “broke normal tradition” and asked an old Punjabi holy man and shrine-keeper to choose between two leaders; this man placed young wheat in the hand of the 25 year old Ahmed Shah Saddozai of the Abdali tribe, and titled him “Durrani”. Five years later, Durrani took Kashmir and for the next 67 years the Valley was under Pashtun rule, a time of “unmitigated brutality and widespread distress”. Durrani himself “was wise, prudent and simple”, never declared himself king and wore no crown, instead keeping a stick of young wheat in his turban. Leaving India, he famously recited: “The Delhi throne is beautiful indeed, but does it compare with the mountains of Kandahar?”
Kashmir’s modern history begins with Ranjit Singh of the Sikhs who became a soldier at 12, and in 1799 at age 19 was made Lahore’s Governor by Kabul’s Zaman Shah. Three years later “he made himself master of Amritsar”, and in 1806 crossed the River Sutlej and took Ludhiana. He created a fine Sikh infantry and cavalry under former officers of Napoleon, and with 80,000 trained men and 500 guns took Multan and Peshawar, defeated the Pashtuns and overran Kashmir in 1819. The “cruel rule” of the Pashtuns ended “to the great relief of Kashmir’s inhabitants”.
The British Governor-General Minto (ancestor of the later Viceroy), seeing advantage in the Sikhs staying north of the Sutlej, sent Charles Metcalfe, “a clever young civilian”, to persuade the Khalsa; in 1809, Ranjit Singh and the British in the first Treaty of Amritsar agreed to establish “perpetual amity”: the British would “have no concern” north of the Sutlej and Ranjit Singh would keep only minor personnel south of it. In 1834 and 1838 Ranjit Singh was struck by paralysis and died in 1839, leaving no competent heir. The Sikh polity collapsed, “their power exploded, disappearing in fierce but fast flames”. It was “a period of storm and anarchy in which assassination was the rule” and the legitimate line of his son and grandson, Kharak Singh and Nao Nihal Singh was quickly extinguished. In 1845 the Queen Regent, mother of the five-year old Dalip Singh, agreed to the Khalsa ending the 1809 Treaty. After bitter battles that might have gone either way, the Khalsa lost at Sobraon on 10 February 1846, and accepted terms of surrender in the 9 March 1846 Treaty of Lahore. The kingdom had not long survived its founder: “created by the military and administrative genius of one man, it crumbled into powder when the spirit which gave it life was withdrawn; and the inheritance of the Khalsa passed into the hands of the English.”
Ranjit Singh’s influence on modern J&K was even greater through his having mentored the Rajput Gulab Singh Dogra (1792-1857) and his brothers Dhyan Singh and Suchet Singh. Jammu had been ruled by Ranjit Deo until 1780 when the Sikhs made it tributary to the Lahore Court. Gulab Singh, a great grand nephew of Ranjit Deo, had left home at age 17 in search of a soldierly fortune, and ended up in 1809 in Ranjit Singh’s army, just when Ranjit Singh had acquired for himself a free hand to expand his domains north of the River Sutlej.
Gulab Singh, an intrepid soldier, by 1820 had Jammu conferred upon him by Ranjit Singh with the title of Raja, while Bhimber, Chibal, Poonch and Ramnagar went to his brothers. Gulab Singh, “often unscrupulous and cruel, was a man of considerable ability and efficiency”; he “found his small kingdom a troublesome charge but after ten years of constant struggles he and his two brothers became masters of most of the country between Kashmir and the Punjab”, though Srinagar Valley itself remained under a separate Governor appointed by the Lahore Court. Gulab Singh extended Jammu’s rule from Rawalpindi, Bhimber, Rajouri, Bhadarwah and Kishtwar, across Laddakh and into Tibet. His General Zorawar Singh led six expeditions into Laddakh between 1834 and 1841 through Kishtwar, Padar and Zanskar. In May 1841, Zorawar left Leh with an army of 5000 Dogras and Laddakhis and advanced on Tibet. Defeating the Tibetans at Rudok and Tashigong, he reached Minsar near Lake Mansarovar from where he advanced to Taklakot (Purang), 15 miles from the borders of Nepal and Kumaon, and built a fort stopping for the winter. Lhasa sent large re-inforcements to meet him. Zorawar, deciding to take the offensive, was killed in the Battle of Toyu, on 11-12 December 1841 at 16,000 feet.
A Laddakhi rebellion resulted against Jammu, aided now by the advancing Tibetans. A new army was sent under Hari Chand suppressing the rebellion and throwing back the Tibetans, leading to a peace treaty between Lhasa and Jammu signed on 17 September 1842: “We have agreed that we have no ill-feelings because of the past war. The two kings will henceforth remain friends forever. The relationship between Maharajah Gulab Singh of Kashmir and the Lama Guru of Lhasa (Dalai Lama) is now established. The Maharajah Sahib, with God (Kunchok) as his witness, promises to recognise ancient boundaries, which should be looked after by each side without resorting to warfare. When the descendants of the early kings, who fled from Laddakh to Tibet, now return they will not be stopped by Shri Maharajah. Trade between Laddakh and Tibet will continue as usual. Tibetan government traders coming into Laddakh will receive free transport and accommodations as before, and the Laddakhi envoy will, in turn, receive the same facilities in Lhasa. The Laddakhis take an oath before God (Kunchok) that they will not intrigue or create new troubles in Tibetan territory. We have agreed, with God as witness, that Shri Maharajah Sahib and the Lama Guru of Lhasa will live together as members of the same household.” The traditional boundary between Laddakh and Tibet “as recognised by both sides since olden times” was accepted by the envoys of Gulab Singh and the Dalai Lama.
An earlier 1684 treaty between Laddakh and Lhasa had said that while Laddakh would send tribute to Lhasa every three years, “the king of Laddakh reserves to himself the village of Minsar in Ngarees-khor-sum, that he may be independent there; and he sets aside its revenue for the purpose of meeting the expense involved in keeping up the sacrificial lights at Kangree (Kailas), and the Holy Lakes of Mansarovar and Rakas Tal”. The area around Minsar village near Lake Mansarovar, held by the rulers of Laddakh since 1583, was retained by Jammu in the 1842 peace-treaty, and its revenue was received by J&K State until 1948.
After Ranjit Singh’s death in 1839, Gulab Singh was alienated from the Lahore Court where the rise of his brothers and a nephew aroused enough Khalsa jealousy to see them assassinated in palace intrigues. While the Sikhs imploded, Gulab Singh had expanded his own dominion from Rawalpindi to Minsar ~ everywhere except Srinagar Valley itself. He had apparently advised the Sikhs not to attack the British in breach of the 1809 Treaty, and when they did so he had not joined them, though had he done so British power in North India might have been broken. The British were grateful for his neutrality and also his help in their first misbegotten adventure in Afghanistan. It was Gulab Singh who was now encouraged by both the British and the Sikhs to mediate between them, indeed “to take a leading part in arranging conditions of peace”, and he formally represented the Sikh regency in the negotiations. The 9 March 1846 Treaty of Lahore “set forth that the British Government having demanded in addition to a certain assignment of territory, a payment of a crore and a half of rupees, and the Sikh Government being unable to pay the whole”, Dalip Singh “should cede as equivalent to one crore the hill country belonging to the Punjab between the Beas and the Indus including Kashmir and the Hazara”.
For the British to occupy the whole of this mountainous territory was judged unwise on economic and military grounds; it was not feasible to occupy from a military standpoint and the area “with the exception of the small Valley of Kashmir” was “for the most part unproductive”. “On the other hand, the ceded tracts comprised the whole of the hereditary possessions of Gulab Singh, who, being eager to obtain an indefeasible title to them, came forward and offered to pay the war indemnity on condition that he was made the independent ruler of Jammu & Kashmir.
A separate treaty embodying this arrangement was thus concluded between the British and Gulab Singh at Amritsar on 16 March 1846.” Gulab Singh acknowledged the British Government’s supremacy, and in token of it agreed to present annually to the British Government “one horse, twelve shawl goats of approved breed and three pairs of Kashmir shawls. This arrangement was later altered; the annual presentation made by the Kashmir State was confined to two Kashmir shawls and three romals (handkerchiefs).” The Treaty of Amritsar “put Gulab Singh, as Maharaja, in possession of all the hill country between the Indus and the Ravi, including Kashmir, Jammu, Laddakh and Gilgit; but excluding Lahoul, Kulu and some areas including Chamba which for strategic purposes, it was considered advisable (by the British) to retain and for which a remission of Rs 25 lakhs was made from the crore demanded, leaving Rs 75 lakhs as the final amount to be paid by Gulab Singh.” The British retained Hazara which in 1918 was included into NWFP. Through an intrigue emanating from Prime Minister Lal Singh in Lahore, Imamuddin, the last Sikh-appointed Governor of Kashmir, sought to prevent Gulab Singh taking possession of the Valley in accordance with the Treaty’s terms. By December 1846 Gulab Singh had done so, though only with help of a British force which included 17,000 Sikh troops “who had been fighting in the campaign just concluded”. (Contemporary British opinion even predicted Sikhism like Buddhism “would become extinct in a short time if it were not kept alive by the esprit de corps of the Sikh regiments”.)
The British in 1846 may have been glad enough to allow Gulab Singh take independent charge of the new entity that came to be now known as the “State of Jammu & Kashmir”. Later, however. they and their American allies would grow keen to control or influence the region vis-à-vis their new interests against the Russian and Soviet Empires.
FOUR
PAKISTAN’S ALLIES by Subroto Roy First published in two parts in The Sunday Statesman, June 4 2006, The Statesman June 5 2006, Editorial Page Special Article, http://www.thestatesman.net
From the 1846 Treaty of Amritsar creating the State of Jammu & Kashmir until the collapse of the USSR in 1991, Britain and later the USA became increasingly interested in the subcontinent’s Northwest. The British came to India by sea to trade. Barren, splendid, landlocked Afghanistan held no interest except as a home of fierce tribes; but it was the source of invasions into the Indian plains and prompted a British misadventure to install Shah Shuja in place of Dost Mohammad Khan leading to ignominious defeat. Later, Afghanistan was seen as the underbelly of the Russian and Soviet empires, and hence a location of interest to British and American strategic causes.
In November 1954, US President Dwight Eisenhower authorized 30 U-2 spy aircraft to be produced for deployment against America’s perceived enemies, especially to investigate Soviet nuclear missiles which could reach the USA. Reconnaissance balloons had been unsuccessful, and numerous Western pilots had been shot down taking photographs from ordinary military aircraft. By June 1956, U-2 were making clandestine flights over the USSR and China. But on May 1 1960, one was shot or forced down over Sverdlovsk, 1,000 miles within Soviet territory. The Americans prevaricated that it had taken off from Turkey on a weather-mission, and been lost due to oxygen problems. Nikita Kruschev then produced the pilot, Francis Gary Powers, who was convicted of spying, though was exchanged later for a Soviet spy. Powers had been headed towards Norway, his task to photograph Soviet missiles from 70,000 ft, his point of origin had been an American base 20 miles from Peshawar.
America needed clandestine “forward bases” from which to fly U-2 aircraft, and Pakistan’s ingratiating military and diplomatic establishment was more than willing to offer such cooperation, fervently wishing to be seen as a “frontline state” against the USSR. “We will help you defeat the USSR and we are hopeful you will help us defeat India” became their constant refrain. By 1986, the Americans had been permitted to build air-bases in Balochistan and also use Mauripur air-base near Karachi.
Jammu & Kashmir and especially Gilgit-Baltistan adjoins the Pashtun regions whose capital has been Peshawar. In August-November 1947, a British coup d’etat against J&K State secured Gilgit-Baltistan for the new British Dominion of Pakistan.
The Treaty of Amritsar had nowhere required Gulab Singh’s dynasty to accept British political control in J&K as came to be exercised by British “Residents” in all other Indian “Native States”. Despite this, Delhi throughout the late 19th Century relentlessly pressed Gulab Singh’s successors Ranbir Singh and Partab Singh to accept political control. The Dogras acquiesced eventually. Delhi’s desire for control had less to do with the welfare of J&K’s people than with protection of increasing British interests in the area, like European migration to Srinagar Valley and guarding against Russian or German moves in Afghanistan. “Sargin” or “Sargin Gilit”, later corrupted by the Sikhs and Dogras into “Gilgit”, had an ancient people who spoke an archaic Dardic language “intermediate between the Iranian and the Sanskritic”. “The Dards were located by Ptolemy with surprising accuracy on the West of the Upper Indus, beyond the headwaters of the Swat River (Greek: Soastus) and north of the Gandarae (i.e. Kandahar), who occupied Peshawar and the country north of it. This region was traversed by two Chinese pilgrims, Fa-Hsien, coming from the north about AD 400 and Hsuan Tsiang, ascending from Swat in AD 629, and both left records of their journeys.”
Gilgit had been historically ruled by a Hindu dynasty called Trakane; when they became extinct, Gilgit Valley “was desolated by successive invasions of neighbouring rulers, and in the 20 or 30 years ending with 1842 there had been five dynastic revolutions. The Sikhs entered Gilgit about 1842 and kept a garrison there.” When J&K came under Gulab Singh, “the Gilgit claims were transferred with it, and a boundary commission was sent” by the British. In 1852 the Dogras were driven out with 2,000 dead. In 1860 under Ranbir Singh, the Dogras “returned to Gilgit and took Yasin twice, but did not hold it. They also in 1866 invaded Darel, one of the most secluded Dard states, to the south of the Gilgit basin but withdrew again.”
The British appointed a Political Agent in Gilgit in 1877 but he was withdrawn in 1881. “In 1889, in order to guard against the advance of Russia, the British Government, acting as the suzerain power of Kashmir, established the Gilgit Agency”. The Agency was re-established under control of the British Resident in Jammu & Kashmir. “It comprised the Gilgit Wazarat; the State of Hunza and Nagar; the Punial Jagir; the Governorships of Yasin, Kuh-Ghizr and Ishkoman, and Chilas”. In 1935, the British demanded J&K lease to them for 60 years Gilgit town plus most of the Gilgit Agency and the hill-states Hunza, Nagar, Yasin and Ishkuman. Hari Singh had no choice but to acquiesce. The leased region was then treated as part of British India, administered by a Political Agent at Gilgit responsible to Delhi, first through the Resident in J& K and later a British Agent in Peshawar. J& K State no longer kept troops in Gilgit and a mercenary force, the Gilgit Scouts, was recruited with British officers and paid for by Delhi. In April 1947, Delhi decided to formally retrocede the leased areas to Hari Singh’s J& K State as of 15 August 1947. The transfer was to formally take place on 1 August.
On 31 July, Hari Singh’s Governor arrived to find “all the officers of the British Government had opted for service in Pakistan”. The Gilgit Scouts’ commander, a Major William Brown aged 25, and his adjutant, a Captain Mathieson, planned openly to engineer a coup détat against Hari Singh’s Government. Between August and October, Gilgit was in uneasy calm. At midnight on 31 October 1947, the Governor was surrounded by the Scouts and the next day he was “arrested” and a provisional government declared.
Hari Singh’s nearest forces were at Bunji, 34 miles from Gilgit, a few miles downstream from where the Indus is joined by Gilgit River. The 6th J& K Infantry Battalion there was a mixed Sikh-Muslim unit, typical of the State’s Army, commanded by a Lt Col. Majid Khan. Bunji controlled the road to Srinagar. Further upstream was Skardu, capital of Baltistan, part of Laddakh District where there was a small garrison. Following Brown’s coup in Gilgit, Muslim soldiers of the 6th Infantry massacred their Sikh brothers-at-arms at Bunji. The few Sikhs who survived escaped to the hills and from there found their way to the garrison at Skardu.
On 4 November 1947, Brown raised the new Pakistani flag in the Scouts’ lines, and by the third week of November a Political Agent from Pakistan had established himself at Gilgit. Brown had engineered Gilgit and its adjoining states to first secede from J&K, and, after some talk of being independent, had promptly acceded to Pakistan. His commander in Peshawar, a Col. Bacon, as well as Col. Iskander Mirza, Defence Secretary in the new Pakistan and later to lead the first military coup détat and become President of Pakistan, were pleased enough. In July 1948, Brown was awarded an MBE (Military) and the British Governor of the NWFP got him a civilian job with ICI~ which however sent him to Calcutta, where he came to be attacked and left for dead on the streets by Sikhs avenging the Bunji massacre. Brown survived, returned to England, started a riding school, and died in 1984. In March 1994, Pakistan awarded his widow the Sitara-I-Pakistan in recognition of his coup détat.
Gilgit’s ordinary people had not participated in Brown’s coup which carried their fortunes into the new Pakistan, and to this day appear to remain without legislative representation. It was merely assumed that since they were mostly Muslim in number they would wish to be part of Pakistan ~ which also became Liaquat Ali Khan’s assumption about J&K State as a whole in his 1950 statements in North America. What the Gilgit case demonstrates is that J&K State’s descent into a legal condition of ownerless anarchy open to “Military Decision” had begun even before the Pakistani invasion of 22 October 1947 (viz. “Solving Kashmir”, The Statesman, 1-3 December 2005). Also, whatever else the British said or did with respect to J & K, they were closely allied to the new Pakistan on the matter of Gilgit.
The peak of Pakistan’s Anglo-American alliance came with the enormous support in the 1980s to guerrilla forces created and headquartered in Peshawar, to battle the USSR and Afghan communists directly across the Durand Line. It was this guerrilla war which became a proximate cause of the collapse of the USSR as a political entity in 1991. President Ronald Reagan’s CIA chief William J. Casey sent vast sums in 1985-1988 to supply and train these guerrillas. The Washington Post and New Yorker reported the CIA training guerrillas “in the use of mortars, rocket grenades, ground-to-air missiles”. 200 hand-held Stinger missiles were supplied for the first time in 1986 and the New Yorker reported Gulbudin Hikmatyar’s “Hizbe Islami” guerrillas being trained to bring down Soviet aircraft. “Mujahideen had been promised two Stingers for every Soviet aircraft brought down. Operators who failed to aim correctly were given additional training… By 1986, the United States was so deeply involved in the Afghan war that Soviet aircraft were being brought down under the supervision of American experts”. (Raja Anwar, The Tragedy of Afghanistan, 1988, p. 234).
The budding US-China détente brokered by Pakistan came into full bloom here. NBC News on 7 January 1980 said “for the first time in history (a senior State Department official) publicly admitted the possibility of concluding a military alliance between the United States and China”. London’s Daily Telegraph reported on 5 January 1980 “China is flying large supplies of arms and ammunition to the insurgents in Afghanistan. According to diplomatic reports, supplies have arrived in Pakistan from China via the Karakoram Highway…. A major build-up of Chinese involvement is underway ~ in the past few days. Scores of Chinese instructors have arrived at the Shola-e-Javed camps.”
Afghan reports in 1983-1985 said “there were eight training camps near the Afghan border operated by the Chinese in Sinkiang province” and that China had supplied the guerrillas “with a variety of weapons including 40,000 RPG-7 and 20,000 RPG-II anti tank rocket launchers.” Like Pakistan, “China did not publicly admit its involvement in the Afghan conflict: in 1985 the Chinese Mission at the UN distributed a letter denying that China was extending any kind of help to the Afghan rebels” (Anwar, ibid. p. 234). Support extended deep and wide across the Arab world. “The Saudi and Gulf rulers … became the financial patrons of the Afghan rebels from the very start of the conflict”. Anwar Sadat, having won the Nobel Peace Prize, was “keen to claim credit for his role in Afghanistan…. by joining the Afghanistan jihad, Sadat could re-establish his Islamic credentials, or so he believed. He could thus not only please the Muslim nations but also place the USA and Israel in his debt.” Sadat’s Defence Minister said in January 1980: “Army camps have been opened for the training of Afghan rebels; they are being supplied with weapons from Egypt” and Sadat told NBC News on 22 September 1981 “that for the last twenty-one months, the USA had been buying arms from Egypt for the Afghan rebels. He said he had been approached by the USA in December 1979 and he had decided to `open my stores’. He further disclosed that these arms were being flown to Pakistan from Egypt by American aircraft. Egypt had vast supplies of SAM-7 and RPG-7 anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons which Sadat agreed to supply to Afghanistan in exchange for new American arms. The Soviet weapons, being light, were ideally suited to guerrilla warfare. … the Mujahideen could easily claim to have captured them from Soviet and Afghan troops in battle.… Khomeini’s Iran got embroiled in war (against Iraq) otherwise Kabul would also have had to contend with the full might of the Islamic revolutionaries.” (Anwar ibid. p. 235).
Afghanistan had been occupied on 26-27 December 1979 by Soviet forces sent by the decrepit Leonid Brezhnev and Yuri Andropov to carry out a putsch replacing one communist, Hafizullah Amin, with a rival communist and Soviet protégé, Babrak Karmal. By 1985 Brezhnev and Andropov were dead and Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev had begun his attempts to reform the Soviet system, usher in openness, end the Cold War and in particular withdraw from Afghanistan, which by 1986 he had termed “a bleeding wound”. Gorbachev replaced Karmal with a new protégé Najibullah Khan, who was assigned the impossible task of bringing about national reconciliation with the Pakistan-based guerrillas and form a national government. Soviet forces withdrew from Afghanistan in February 1989 having lost 14,500 dead, while more than a million Afghans had been killed since the invasion a decade earlier.
Not long after Russia’s Bolshevik Revolution, Gregory Zinoviev had said that international communism “turns today to the peoples of the East and says to them, `Brothers, we summon you to a Holy War first of all against British imperialism!’ At this there were cries of Jehad! Jehad! And much brandishing of picturesque Oriental weapons.” (Treadgold, Twentieth Century Russia, 1990, p. 213). Now instead, the Afghan misadventure had contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Empire itself, the USSR ceasing to be a political entity by 1991, and even Gorbachev being displaced by Boris Yeltsin and later Vladimir Putin in a new Russia.
What resulted for the people of the USA and Britain and the West in general was that they no longer had to live under threat of hostile Soviet tanks and missiles, while the people of Russia, Ukraine and the other erstwhile Soviet republics as well as Eastern Europe were able to throw off the yoke of communism that had oppressed them since the Bolshevik Revolution and instead to breathe the air of freedom.
What happened to the people of Afghanistan, however, was that they were plunged into further ghastly civil war for more than ten years. And what happened to the people of Pakistan was that their country was left resembling a gigantic Islamist military camp, awash with airfields, arms, ammunition and trained guerrillas, as well as a military establishment enlivened as always by perpetual hope that these supplies, provisions and personnel of war might find alternative use in attacks against India over J& K. “We helped you when you wished to see the Soviet Union defeated and withdrawing in Afghanistan”, Pakistan’s generals and diplomats pleaded with the Americans and British, “now you must help us in our wish to see India defeated and withdrawing in Kashmir”. Pakistan’s leaders even believed that just as the Soviet Union had disintegrated afterwards, the Indian Union perhaps might be made to do the same. Not only were the two cases as different as chalk from cheese, Palmerstone’s dictum there are no permanent allies in the politics of nations could not have found more apt use than in what actually came to take place next.
Pakistan’s generals and diplomats felt betrayed by the loss of Anglo-American paternalism towards them after 1989.
Modern Pakistanis had never felt they subscribed to the Indian nationalist movement culminating in independence in August 1947. The Pakistani state now finally declared its independence in the world by exploding bombs in a nuclear arsenal secretly created with help purchased from China and North Korea. Pakistan’s leaders thus came to feel in some control of Pakistan’s destiny as a nation-state for the first time, more than fifty years after Pakistan’s formal creation in 1947. If nothing else, at least they had the Bomb.
Secondly, America and its allies would not be safe for long since the civil war they had left behind in Afghanistan while trying to defeat the USSR now became a brew from which arose a new threat of violent Islamism. Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, whom Pakistan’s military and the USA had promoted, now encouraged unprecedented attacks on the American mainland on September 11 2001 ~ causing physical and psychological damage which no Soviet, Chinese or Cuban missiles ever had been allowed to do. In response, America attacked and removed the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, once again receiving the cooperative use of Pakistani manpower and real estate ~ except now there was no longer any truck with the Pakistani establishment’s wish for a quid pro quo of Anglo-American support against India on J&K. Pakistan’s generals and diplomats soon realised their Anglo-American alliance of more than a half-century ended on September 11 2001. Their new cooperation was in killing or arresting and handing over fellow-Muslims and necessarily lacked their earlier feelings of subservience and ingratiation towards the Americans and British, and came to be done instead under at least some duress. No benefit could be reaped any more in the fight against India over Jammu & Kashmir. An era had ended in the subcontinent.
WHAT TO TELL MUSHARRAF: PEACE IS IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT NON-AGGRESSIVE PAKISTANI INTENTIONS by Subroto Roy, First published in The Statesman December 15 2006 Editorial Page Special Article, www.thestatesman.net
In June 1989 a project at an American university involving Pakistani and other scholars, including one Indian, led to the book Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s published in Karachi, New Delhi and elsewhere. The book reached Nawaz Sharif and the Islamabad elite, and General Musharraf’s current proposal on J&K, endorsed warmly by the US State Department last week, derives from the last paragraph of its editorial introduction: “Kashmir… must be demilitarised and unified by both countries sooner or later, and it must be done without force. There has been enough needless bloodshed on the subcontinent… Modern Pakistanis and Indians are free peoples who can voluntarily agree in their own interests to alter the terms set hurriedly by Attlee or Mountbatten in the Indian Independence Act 1947. Nobody but we ourselves keeps us prisoners of superficial definitions of who we are or might be. The subcontinent could evolve its political identity over a period of time on the pattern of Western Europe, with open borders and (common) tariffs to the outside world, with the free movement of people, capital, ideas and culture. Large armed forces could be reduced and transformed in a manner that would enhance the security of each nation. The real and peaceful economic revolution of the masses of the subcontinent would then be able to begin.”
The editors as economists decried the waste of resources involved in the Pakistan-India confrontation, saying it had “greatly impoverished the general budgets of both Pakistan and India. If it has benefited important sections of the political and military elites of both countries, it has done so only at the expense of the general welfare of the masses.”
International law
Such words may have been bold in the early 1990s but today, a decade and a half later, they seem incomplete and rather naïve even to their author, who was myself, the only Indian in that project. Most significantly, the position in international law in the context of historical facts had been wholly neglected. So had been the manifest nature of the contemporary Pakistani state.
Jammu & Kashmir became an entity in international law when the Treaty of Amritsar was signed between Gulab Singh and the British on March 16 1846. British India itself became an entity in international law much later, possibly as late as June 1919 when it signed the Treaty of Versailles. As for Pakistan, it had no existence in world history or international law until August 14 1947, when the British created it as a new entity out of certain demarcated areas of British India and gave it the status of a Dominion. British India dissolved itself on August 15 1947 and the Dominion of India became its successor-state in international law on that date. As BR Ambedkar pointed out at the time, the new India automatically inherited British India’s suzerainty over any and all remaining “princely” states of so-called “Indian India”. In case of J&K in particular, there never was any question of it being recognised as an independent entity in global international law.
The new Pakistan, by entering a Standstill Agreement with J&K as of August 15 1947, did locally recognise J&K’s sovereignty over its decision whether to join Pakistan or India. But this Pakistani recognition lasted only until the attack on J&K that commenced from Pakistani territory as of October 22 1947, an attack in which Pakistani forces were complicit (something which, in different and mutating senses, has continued ever since). The Dominion of India had indicated it might have consented if J&K’s Ruler had decided to accede to Pakistan in the weeks following the dissolution of British India. But no such thing happened: what did happen was the descent of J&K into a condition of legal anarchy.
Beginning with the Pakistani attack on J&K as of October 22 upto and including the Rape of Baramulla and the British-led Pakistani coup détat in Gilgit on one side, and the arrival of Indian forces as well as mobilization by Sheikh Abdullah and Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad of J&K’s civilians to repel the Pakistani invaders on the other side, the State of Jammu & Kashmir became an ownerless entity in international law. In Roman Law, from which all modern international and municipal law ultimately derives, the ownership of an ownerless entity is open to be determined by “military decision”. The January 1949 Ceasefire Line that came to be renamed the Line of Control after the 1971 Bangladesh War, demarcates the respective territories that the then-Dominions and later Republics of India and Pakistan acquired by “military decision” of the erstwhile State of J&K which had come to cease to exist.
What the Republic of India means by saying today that boundaries cannot be redrawn nor any populations forcibly transferred is quite simply that the division of erstwhile J&K territory is permanent, and that sovereignty over it is indivisible. It is only sheer ignorance on the part of General Musharraf’s Indian interviewer the other day which caused it to be said that Pakistan was willing to “give up” its claim on erstwhile J&K State territory which India has held: Pakistan has never had nor even made such a claim in international law. What Pakistan has claimed is that India has been an occupier and that there are many people inhabiting the Indian area who may not wish to be Indian nationals and who are being compelled against their will to remain so ~ forgetting to add that precisely the same could be said likewise of the Pakistani-held area.
Accordingly, the lawful solution proposed in these pages a year ago to resolve that matter, serious as it is, has been that the Republic of India invite every person covered under Article 370, citizen-by- citizen, under a condition of full information, to privately and without fear decide, if he/she has not done so already, between possible Indian, Iranian, Afghan or Pakistani nationalities ~ granting rights and obligations of permanent residents to any of those persons who may choose for whatever private reason not to remain Indian nationals. If Pakistan acted likewise, the problem of J&K would indeed come to be resolved. The Americans, as self- appointed mediators, have said they wish “the people of the region to have a voice” in a solution: there can be no better expression of such voice than allowing individuals to privately choose their own nationalities and their rights and responsibilities accordingly. The issue of territorial sovereignty is logically distinct from that of the choice of nationality by individual inhabitants.
Military de-escalation
Equally significant though in assessing whether General Musharraf’s proposal is an anachronism, is Pakistan’s history since 1947: through Ayub’s 1965 attack, the civil war and secession of Bangladesh, the Afghan war and growth of the ISI, the Kargil incursion, the 1999 coup détat, and, once or twice removed, the 9/11 attacks against America. It is not a history that allows any confidence to arise in Indians that we are not dealing with a country misgoverned by a tiny arrogant exploitative military elite who remain hell-bent on aggression against us. Like the USA and USSR twenty years ago, what we need to negotiate about, and negotiate hard about, is an overall mutual military drawdown and de-escalation appropriate to lack of aggressive intent on both sides. Is General Musharraf willing to discuss that? It would involve reciprocal verifiable assessment of one another’s reasonable military requirements on the assumption that each was not a threatening enemy of the other. That was how the USA-USSR drawdown and de-escalation occurred successfully. If General Musharraf is unwilling to enter such a discussion, there is hardly anything to talk about with him. We should wait for democracy to return.
SIX
by Subroto Roy, December 17 2008
Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari’s recent argument in the New York Times resembles closely the well-known publications of his ambassador to the United States, Mr Husain Haqqani. Unfortunately, this Zardari-Haqqani thesis about Pakistan’s current predicament in the world and the world’s predicament with Pakistan is shot through with clear factual and logical errors. These need to be aired because true or useful conclusions cannot be reached from mistaken premises or faulty reasoning.
1. Origins of Pakistan, India, J&K, and their mutual problems
Mr Zardari makes the following seemingly innocuous statement:
“…. the two great nations of Pakistan and India, born together from the same revolution and mandate in 1947, must continue to move forward with the peace process.”
Now as a matter of simple historical fact, the current entities in the world system known as India and Pakistan were not “born together from the same revolution and mandate in 1947”. It is palpably false to suppose they were and Pakistanis indulge in wishful thinking and self-deception about their own political history if they suppose this.
India’s Republic arose out of the British Dominion known as “India” which was the legal successor of the entity known previously in international law as “British India”. British India had had secular governance and so has had the Indian Republic.
By contrast, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan arose out of a newly created state in international law known as the British Dominion of Pakistan, consisting of designated territory carved out of British India by a British decision and coming into existence one day before British India extinguished itself. (Another new state, Bangladesh, later seceded from Pakistan.)
The British decision to create territory designated “Pakistan” had nothing to do with any anti-British “revolution” or “mandate” supported by any Pakistani nationalism because there was none. (Rahmat Ali’s anti-Hindu pamphleteering in London could be hardly considered Pakistani nationalism against British rule. Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan’s Pashtun patriots saw themselves as Indian, not Pakistani.)
To the contrary, the British decision had to do with a small number of elite Pakistanis — MA Jinnah foremost among them — demanding not to be part of the general Indian nationalist movement that had been demanding a British departure from power in the subcontinent. Jinnah’s separatist party, the Muslim League, was trounced in the 1937 provincial elections in all the Muslim-majority areas of British India that would eventually become Pakistan. Despite this, in September 1939, Britain, at war with Nazi Germany, chose to elevate the political power of Jinnah and his League to parity with the general Indian nationalist movement led by MK Gandhi. (See, Francis Robinson, in William James and Subroto Roy (eds), Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s.) Britain needed India’s mostly Muslim infantry-divisions — the progenitors of the present-day Pakistan Army — and if that meant tilting towards a risky political idea of “Pakistan” in due course, so it would be. The thesis that Pakistan arose from any kind of “revolution” or “mandate” in 1947 is fantasy — the Muslim super-elite that invented and endorsed the Pakistan idea flew from Delhi to Karachi in chartered BOAC Dakotas, caring not a hoot about the vulnerability of ordinary Muslim masses to Sikh and Hindu majority wrath and retaliation on the ground.
Modern India succeeded to the rights and obligations of British India in international law, and has had a recognized existence as a state since at least the signing of the Armistice and Treaty of Versailles in 1918-1919. India was a founding member of the United Nations, being a signatory of the 1945 San Francisco Declaration, and an original member of the Bretton Woods institutions. An idea put forward by Argentina that as of 1947 India and Pakistan were both successor states of British India was rejected by the UN (Argentina withdrew its own suggestion), and it was universally acknowledged India was already a member of the UN while Pakistan would have to (and did) apply afresh for membership as a newly created state in the UN. Pakistan’s entry into the UN had the enthusiastic backing of India and was opposed by only one existing UN member, Afghanistan, due to a conflict that continues to this day over the legitimacy of the Durand Line that bifurcated the Pashtun areas.
Such a review of elementary historical facts and the position in law of Pakistan and India is far from being of merely pedantic interest today. Rather, it goes directly to the logical roots of the conflict over the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) — a state that itself originated as an entity in the world system a full century before Pakistan was to do so and more than half a century before British India did, but which would collapse into anarchy and civil war in 1947-1949.
Britain (or England) had been a major nation-state in the world system recognized since Grotius first outlined modern international law. On March 16 1846, Britain entered into a treaty, the Treaty of Amritsar, with one Gulab Singh, and the “State of Jammu & Kashmir” came to arise as a recognizable entity in international law for the first time. (See my “History of Jammu and Kashmir” published in The Statesman, Oct 29-30 2006, available elsewhere here.)
Jammu & Kashmir continued in orderly existence as a state until it crashed into legal and political anarchy and civil war a century later. The new Pakistan had entered into a “Standstill Agreement” with the State of Jammu & Kashmir as of August 15 1947. On or about October 22 1947, Pakistan unilaterally ended that Standstill Agreement and instead caused military forces from its territory to attack the State of Jammu & Kashmir along the Mansehra Road towards Baramula and Srinagar, coinciding too with an Anglo-Pakistani coup d’etat in Gilgit and Baltistan (see my “Solving Kashmir”; “Law, Justice & J&K”; “Pakistan’s Allies”, all published in The Statesman in 2005-2006 and available elsewhere here).
The new Pakistan had chosen, in all deliberation, to forswear law, politics and diplomacy and to resort to force of arms instead in trying to acquire J&K for itself via a military decision. It succeeded only partially. Its forces took and then lost both Baramula and Kargil; they may have threatened Leh but did not attempt to take it; they did take and retain Muzaffarabad and Skardu; they were never near taking the summer capital, Srinagar, though might have threatened the winter capital, Jammu.
All in all, a Ceasefire Line came to be demarcated on the military positions as of February 1 1949. After a war in 1971 that accompanied the secession of Bangladesh from Pakistan, that Ceasefire Line came to be renamed the “Line of Control” between Pakistan and India. An ownerless entity may be acquired by force of arms — the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir in 1947-1949 had become an ownerless entity that had been dismembered and divided according to military decision following an armed conflict between Pakistan and India. The entity in the world system known as the “State of Jammu & Kashmir” created on March 16 1846 by Gulab Singh’s treaty with the British ceased to exist as of October 22 1947. Pakistan had started the fight over J&K but there is a general rule of conflicts that he who starts a fight does not get to finish it.
Such is the simplest and most practical statement of the history of the current problem. The British, through their own compulsions and imperial pretensions, raised all the talk about a “Lapse of Paramountcy” of the British Crown over the “Native Princes” of “Indian India”, and of how, the “Native Princes” were required to “accede” to either India or Pakistan. This ignored Britain’s own constitutional law. BR Ambedkar pointed out with unsurpassed clarity that no “Lapse of Paramountcy” was possible even for a single logical moment since “Paramountcy” over any “Native Princes” who had not joined India or Pakistan as of August 15 1947, automatically passed from British India to its legal successor, namely, the Dominion of India. It followed that India’s acquiescence was required for any subsequent accession to Pakistan – an acquiescence granted in case of Chitral and denied in case of Junagadh.
What the Republic of India means by saying today that boundaries cannot be redrawn nor any populations forcibly transferred is quite simply that the division of erstwhile J&K territory is permanent, and that sovereignty over it is indivisible. What Pakistan has claimed is that India has been an occupier and that there are many people inhabiting the Indian area who may not wish to be Indian nationals and who are being compelled against their will to remain so ~ forgetting to add that precisely the same could be said likewise of the Pakistani-held area. The lawful solution I proposed in “Solving Kashmir, “Law, Justice and J&K” and other works has been that the Republic of India invite every person covered under its Article 370, citizen-by-citizen, under a condition of full information, to privately and without fear decide, if he/she has not done so already, between possible Indian, Iranian, Afghan or Pakistani nationalities ~ granting rights and obligations of permanent residents to any of those persons who may choose for whatever private reason not to remain Indian nationals. If Pakistan acted likewise, the problem of J&K would indeed come to be resolved. The Americans, as self-appointed mediators, have said they wish “the people of the region to have a voice” in a solution: there can be no better expression of such voice than allowing individuals to privately choose their own nationalities and their rights and responsibilities accordingly. The issue of territorial sovereignty is logically distinct from that of the choice of nationality by individual inhabitants.
2. Benazir’s assassination falsely compared to the Mumbai massacres
Secondly, President Zardari draws a mistaken comparison between the assassination last year of his wife, Benazir Bhutto, and the Mumbai massacres a few weeks ago. Ms Bhutto’s assassination may resemble more closely the assassinations in India of Indira Gandhi in 1984 and Rajiv Gandhi in 1991.
Indira Gandhi died in “blowback” from the unrest she and her younger son and others in their party had opportunistically fomented among Sikh fundamentalists and sectarians since the late 1970s. Rajiv Gandhi died in “blowback” from an erroneous imperialistic foreign policy that he, as Prime Minister, had been induced to make by jingoistic Indian diplomats, a move that got India’s military needlessly involved in the then-nascent Sri Lankan civil war. Benazir Bhutto similarly may be seen to have died in “blowback” from her own political activity as prime minister and opposition leader since the late 1980s, including her own encouragement of Muslim fundamentalist forces. Certainly in all three cases, as in all assassinations, there were lapses of security too and imprudent political judgments made that contributed to the tragic outcomes.
Ms Bhutto’s assassination has next to nothing to do with the Mumbai massacres, besides the fact the perpetrators in both cases were Pakistani terrorists. President Zardari saying he himself has lost his wife to terrorism is true but not relevant to the proper diagnosis of the Mumbai massacres or to Pakistan-India relations in general. Rather, it serves to deflect criticism and condemnation of the Pakistani state’s pampered handing of Pakistan’s terrorist masterminds, as well as the gross irresponsibility of Pakistan’s military scientists (not AQ Khan) who have been recently advocating a nuclear first strike against India in the event of war.
3. Can any religious nation-state be viable in the modern world?
President Zardari’s article says:
“The world worked to exploit religion against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan by empowering the most fanatic extremists as an instrument of destruction of a superpower. The strategy worked, but its legacy was the creation of an extremist militia with its own dynamic.”
This may be overly simplistic. As pointed out in my article “Pakistan’s Allies”, Gregory Zinoviev himself after the Bolshevik Revolution had declared that international communism “turns today to the peoples of the East and says to them, ‘Brothers, we summon you to a Holy War first of all against British imperialism!’ At this there were cries of Jehad! Jehad! And much brandishing of picturesque Oriental weapons.” (Treadgold, Twentieth Century Russia, 1990, p. 213). For more than half of the 20th century, orthodox Muslims had been used by Soviet communists against British imperialism, then by the British and Americans (through Pakistan) against Soviet communism. Touché! Blowback and counter-blowback! The real question that arises from this today may be why orthodox Muslims have allowed themselves to be used either way by outside forces and have failed in developing a modern nation-state and political culture of their own. Europe and America only settled down politically after their religious wars were over. Perhaps no religious nation-state is viable in the modern world.
4. Pakistan’s behaviour leads to schizophrenia in international relations
President Zardari pleads for, or perhaps demands, resources from the world:
“the best response to the Mumbai carnage is to coordinate in counteracting the scourge of terrorism. The world must act to strengthen Pakistan’s economy and democracy, help us build civil society and provide us with the law enforcement and counterterrorism capacities that will enable us to fight the terrorists effectively.”
Six million pounds from Mr Gordon Brown, so much from here or there etc – President Zardari has apparently demanded 100 billion dollars from America and that is the price being talked about for Pakistan to dismantle its nuclear weapons and be brought under an American “nuclear umbrella” instead.
I have pointed out elsewhere that what Pakistan seems to have been doing in international relations for decades is send out “mixed messages” – i.e. contradictory signals, whether in thought, word or deed. Clinical psychologists following the work of Gregory Bateson would say this leads to confusion among Pakistan’s interlocutors (a “double bind”) and the symptoms arise of what may be found in schizophrenic relationships. (See my article “Do President-elect Obama’s Pakistan specialists believe…”; on the “double bind” theory, an article I chanced to publish in the Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1986, may be of interest).
Here are a typical set of “mixed messages” emanating from Pakistan’s government and opinion-makers:
“We have nuclear weapons
“We keep our nuclear weapons safe from any misuse or unauthorized use
“We are willing to use nuclear weapons in a first strike against India
“We do not comprehend the lessons of Hiroshima-Nagasaki
“We do not comprehend the destruction India will visit upon us if we strike them
“We are dangerous so we must not be threatened in any way
“We are peace-loving and want to live in peace with India and Afghanistan
“We love to play cricket with India and watch Bollywood movies
“We love our Pakistan Army as it is one public institution that works
“We know the Pakistan Army has backed armed militias against India in the past
“We know these militias have caused terrorist attacks
“We are not responsible for any terrorist attacks
“We do not harbour any terrorists
“We believe the world should pay us to not use or sell our nuclear weapons
“We believe the world should pay us to not encourage the terrorists in our country
“We believe the world should pay us to prevent terrorists from using our nuclear weapons
“We hate India and do not want to become like India
“We love India and want to become like India
“We are India and we are not India…”
Etc.
A mature rational responsible and self-confident Pakistan would have said instead:
“We apologise to India and other countries for the outrageous murders our nationals have committed in Mumbai and elsewhere
“We ask the world to watch how our professional army is deployed to disarm civilian and all “non-state” actors of unauthorized firearms and explosives
“We do not need and will not demand or accept a dollar in any sort of foreign aid, military or civilian, to solve our problems
“We realize our economic and political institutions are a mess and we must clean them up
“We will strive to build a society imbued with what Iqbal described as the spirit of modern times..”
As someone who created at great personal cost at an American university twenty years ago the book Foundations of Pakistan’s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s, I have a special interest in hoping that Pakistan shall find the path of wisdom.”
June 22, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
I was born in Tehran because my parents were Indian diplomats there, and I would love to go back to visit Iran someday. Not right now though as the country seems to be plunging itself into a new Revolution and yesterday’s Revolutionaries are today’s Reactionaries in a way that George Orwell would have understood and might have predicted. (Back in December 1982, at the American Economic Association meetings in New York City, a man looking surprisingly similar to Mr Mohammad Ahmadinajad approached me after I had read a paper “Economic Theory and Development Economics” to a large audience, introducing himself as a member of the UN delegation of the new Islamic Republic, giving me his card which I never kept… a story for another time…)
It would appear to me that the right political course of action would be for the disputed poll to be cancelled — with the consent and indeed at the statesmanlike initiative of its declared winner; to be followed by a short interregnum for normalisation and a calming down of all tempers to occur; and then for fresh polls to occur within, say, two or three months, taking transparent precautions that such an ugly mess not be repeated.
Subroto Roy
see too
June 18, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
Yesterday the PM is reported to have been asked by someone travelling on his aeroplane from Moscow “whether he had forgiven Advani for calling him a ‘weak Prime Minister’”.
The question was absurd, almost ridiculous, typical of our docile ingratiating rather juvenile English-language press and media, as if any issue of forgiveness arises at all about what one politician says during an election campaign about another politician’s performance in office.
Dr Manmohan Singh’s answer was surprising too: “I was compelled to reply to what Advani said…On May 16 when (Advani) telephoned me, he told me that he was hurt by some of my statements. He said he was hurt and regretted his statements… I apologised to him if I have hurt him. I am looking forward to a close relationship with the Leader of the Opposition.”
So LK Advani appears to have apologised to Manmohan Singh and Manmohan Singh to LK Advani for what they said about each other during the recent general election campaign! What is going on? Were they schoolboys exchanging fisticuffs in a school playground or elderly men battling over power and policy in modern Indian politics?
What would we have done if there was a Churchill in Indian politics today – hurling sarcastic insults at domestic opponents and foreign leaders while guiding a nation on its right course during turbulent times?
Churchill once famously said his parents had not shown him “The Boneless Wonder” in PT Barnum’s circus because it was too horrible a sight but now he had finally seen such a “Boneless Wonder” in his opponent on the Treasury Benches, namely, Ramsay MacDonald. Of the same opponent he said later “He has the gift of compressing the largest number of words into the smallest amount of thought”.
When accused of being drunk by a woman MP he replied “And you are very ugly, but tomorrow I’ll be sober”. Today’s politically correct world would scream at far less. Field Marshall Montgomery told Churchill, “I neither drink nor smoke and am 100% fit,” to which Churchill replied, “I drink and smoke and I am 200% fit”. That too would be politically incorrect today.
Churchill described Prime Minister Clement Attlee as “a modest man with much to be modest about”; also about Attlee: “If any grub is fed on Royal Jelly it turns into a Queen Bee”. Yet Attlee had enough dignity and self-knowledge and self-confidence to brush it all off and instead respect and praise him. In the 1954 volume Winston Spencer Churchill Servant of Crown and Commonwealth Attlee added his own tribute to his great opponent: “I recall…the period when he was at odds with his own party and took a seat on the Bench below the Gangway on the Government side. Here he was well placed to fire on both parties. I remember describing him as a heavily armed tank cruising in No Man’s Land. Very impressive were the speeches he delivered as the international horizon grew darker. He became very unpopular with the predominant group in his own party, but he never minded fighting a lone battle.”
Stanley Baldwin, who as PM first appointed Churchill as Chancellor of the Exchequer, once said “There comes Winston with his hundred horsepower mind”. Yet Churchill was to later say harshly “I wish Stanley Baldwin no ill, but it would have been much better had he never lived.”
Of Lenin, Churchill said, he was “transported in a sealed truck like a plague bacillus from Switzerland into Russia”. Of Molotov: “I have never seen a human being who more perfectly represented the modern concept of a robot.” Of Hitler, “If [he] invaded hell I would at least make a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons”. Of De Gaulle, “He was a man without a country yet he acted as if he was head of state”.” Of John Foster Dulles, “[He] is the only bull who carries his china shop with him”. Of Stafford Cripps, British Ambassador to the USSR, “…a lunatic in a country of lunatics”; and also “There but for the Grace of God, goes God”.
Decades later, that great neo-Churchillian Margaret Thatcher was on the receiving end of a vast amount of sarcasm. “President Mitterrand once famously remarked that Thatcher had ‘the eyes of Caligula and the lips of Marilyn Monroe’. Rather less flatteringly, Dennis Healey described her as Attila the Hen. She probably took both descriptions as compliments.” (Malcolm Rifkind in Margaret Thatcher’s Revolution: How it Happened and What it Meant edited by Subroto Roy and John Clarke, 2005).
Politics is, and should be, grown up stuff because it deals with human lives and national destinies, and really, if you can’t take the heat please do not enter the kitchen. The slight Churchillian sarcasm that does arise within modern Indian politics comes very occasionally from Bihar but nowhere else, e.g. about the inevitability of aloo in samosas and of bhaloos in the jungle but no longer of Laloo being in the seat of power. In general, everyone seems frightfully sombre and self-important though may be in fact short of self-knowledge and hence self-confidence.
What had Manmohan Singh said about LK Advani that he felt he had to apologise for? That Advani had no substantial political achievement to his credit and did not deserve to be India’s PM. Manmohan was not alone in making the charge – Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and numerous other spokesmen and representatives of their party said the same. Has Manmohan’s apology to Advani been one on behalf of the whole Congress Party itself?
Was Advani’s apology to Manmohan one on behalf of the whole BJP too?
What had the BJP charged Manmohan with that Advani felt he had to apologise for? Being a “weak PM”.
Hmmm. Frankly, thinking about it, it is hard to count who has not been weak as a PM in India’s modern history.
Certainly Vallabhai Patel as a kind of co-PM was decisive and far from weak back in 1947-48.
Lal Bahadur Shastri was not weak when he told Pakistan that a Pakistani attack on Kashmir would result in an Indian attack on Pakistan.
Indira Gandhi was not weak when she resisted the Yahya Khan-Tikka Khan tyranny against Bangladesh.
Had he not been assassinated, Rajiv Gandhi in a second term would have been decisive and not weak in facing up to and tackling the powerful lobbies and special interest groups that have crippled our domestic economic policy for decades.
But the number of such examples may be counted by hand. Perhaps VP Singh might count, riding in an open jeep to Amritsar, as might AB Vajpayee’s Pokhran II and travelling on a bus to Lahore. In general, the BJP’s charge that Manmohan was “weak” may have constructively led to serious discussion in the country about the whole nature of the Prime Ministership in modern India, which means raising a whole gamut of issues about Indian governance – about India being the softest of “soft states”, with the softest of “soft government budget constraints” (i.e., endless deficit finance and paper money creation) etc.
Instead, what we have had thus far is apologies being exchanged for no real political reason between the leaderships of the Government and the Opposition. If two or three sellers come to implicitly carve up a market between themselves they are said by economic theory to be colluding rather than being in competition. Indian politics may be revealing such implicit collusive behaviour. The goal of this political oligopoly would seem to be to preserve and promote the status quo of the post-1947 Dilli Raj with its special hereditary nomenclatura, at the expense of anonymous diffused teeming India.
Subroto Roy
Postscript July 15 2009: Churchill’s mature opinion of Baldwin was one of the fullest praise at the 20 May 1950 unveiling of a memorial to him. See his In the Balance, edited by Randolph S Churchill, 1951, p. 281
May 28, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
A lawyer friend tells me she thinks it a “technicality” that there is no Lok Sabha or Parliament in India today despite eleven long days and nights having passed since the 15th Lok Sabha came to be elected by the people of India. “At least we did not get Advani and Modi to rule”, is how she sought to justify the current circumstance. I am afraid I think she has produced a non sequitur, and also forgotten the constitutional law she would have read as a student.
The best argument that I think the Government of India shall be able to give justifying their legal error in not having the 15th Lok Sabha up and running yet 11 days after India’s people have spoken would run something like this:
(1) The President of India invites a Council of Ministers led by a PM to form the government and has done so.
(2) The President must be satisfied that the PM commands a majority in the Lok Sabha, and the President has been satisfied by the 322 “letters of support” that the PM produced.
(3) The Government of the day calls parliamentary sessions and does so at its discretion, and the Government of the day headed by this PM has announced when it shall call the 15th Lok Sabha which will be in a few days yet.
Any such argument, I am afraid, would be specious because it simply puts the cart before the horse.
Parliament is sovereign in India, to repeat what I have said several times before.
Parliament is sovereign in India — not even the President who is the symbol of that sovereignty. We do not follow the British quite exactly in this because we are a republic and not a monarchy. In Britain sovereignty rests with “The King in Parliament”. With us, Parliament is sovereign and the President is the symbol of that sovereignty. In all matters of state, our President must act in a manner that Parliament and parliamentary law says.
Parliament is sovereign in India — not the Executive Government, certainly not its largest political party or its leader.
Parliament is sovereign in India because the people of India have chosen it to be so within the Constitution of India.
Parliament is sovereign in India and the people of India have elected the 15th Lok Sabha which has still not been allowed to meet eleven days later.
To the contrary, as noted days ago, the purported “Cabinet” of the 14th Lok Sabha, a dead institution, met on May 18 2009, some 48 hours after the 15th Lok Sabha had already been declared! The 14th Lok Sabha in fact stood automatically dissolved in law when General Elections came to be announced.
Is all this merely a “technicality” as my friend believes? I think not.
Executive Government in India derives its political legitimacy from being elected by Parliament, i.e., from holding the confidence of Parliament, and that means the Lok Sabha.
The Government of the day might for sake of convenience have a prerogative of calling sessions of the 15th Lok Sabha once it has been constituted but the Government of the day cannot logically constitute a Lok Sabha after a General Election because it itself receives legitimacy from such a Lok Sabha.
If the 15th Lok Sabha has not met, confidence in any Executive has yet to be recorded, and hence any such Government has yet to receive legitimacy.
Do “322 letters of support” suffice? Hardly. They are signed after all by persons who have yet to take their seats in the Lok Sabha! (Let us leave aside the fact that the PM, not being a member of the Lok Sabha, is in this case unable to be one of those 322 himself!)
Yet we have 79 “Ministers” of this new “Government” holding press-conferences and giving out free-bees and favours etc already. As I have said before, Ambedkar, Nehru and others of their generation, plus Indira and Rajiv too, would all have been appalled.
Because the incompetence of the fascists and communists in the Opposition may continue to be expected, it will be up to ordinary citizens and voters of India to point out such simple truths whenever the Emperor is found to be naked. (Our docile juvenile ingratiating media may well remain mostly hopeless.)
Subroto Roy
May 27, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
There are at least three Supreme Court lawyers, all highly voluble, among the higher echelons of Congress Party politicians; it is surprising that not one of them has been able to get the top Party leadership of Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh to see the apparent breach of normal constitutional law in Parliament not having met more than 10 days after it was elected.
A Government has been formed, Ministers have entered their offices and have been holding press-conferences and taking executive decisions, wannabe-Ministers continue to be wrangling night-and-day for the plums of office — BUT THERE IS NO PARLIAMENT!
Today is the death-anniversary of Jawaharlal Nehru and last week was the death anniversary of Rajiv Gandhi.
Nehru, whatever his faults and infirmities, was an outstanding parliamentarian and a believer in the Westminster model in particular. He was intimately familiar with its unpoken customs and unwritten laws. He would have been completely appalled by the situation today where luminaries of the party that goes by the same name as the one he had led are paying obeisance to his memory 45 years after his death but have failed to see the absurdity in having a Government in office with no new Parliament ten days after a month-long General Election was over! (Incidentally, had he not left explicit instructions against any hero-worship taking place of himself too?)
Rajiv knew his grandfather and had acquired a sense of noblesse oblige from him. He too would have been appalled that the procedural business of government had been simply procrastinated over like this.
It surprises me that Dr Manmohan Singh, having been a post-graduate of Cambridge, having earned a doctorate from Oxford, and more recently having been awarded honorary doctorates from both Ancient Universities, should seem so unaware of the elements of the Westminster model of constitutional jurisprudence which guides our polity too.
It is too late now and the mistakes have been made. I hope his new Government will come to realise at some point and then keep in mind that our Executive receives political legitimacy from Parliament, not vice versa. An Executive can hardly be legitimately in office until the Parliament that is supposed to elect it has been sworn in.
As for our putative Opposition in the Parliament-yet-to-meet, it seems to have drawn a blank too, and eo ipso revealed its own constitutional backwardness and lethargy.
Subroto Roy
May 26, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
The power of organised Big Business over New Delhi’s economic policies (whether Congress-led or BJP-led) was signalled by the presence in the audience at Rashtrapati Bhavan last week of several prominent lobbyists when Dr Manmohan Singh and his senior-most Cabinet colleagues were being sworn-in by the President of India. Why were such witnesses needed at such an auspicious national occasion?
Organised Big Business (both private sector and public sector) along with organised Big Labour (whose interests are represented most ably by New Delhi’s official communist parties like the CPI-M and CPI), are astutely aware of how best to advance their own economic interests; this usually gets assisted nicely enough through clever use of our comprador English-language TV, newspaper and magazine media. Shortly after the election results, lobbyists were all over commercial TV proposing things like FDI in insurance and airports etc– as if that was the meaning of the Sonia-Rahul mandate or were issues of high national priority. A typical piece of such “pretend-economics” appears in today’s business-press from a formerly Leftist Indian bureaucrat: “With its decisive victory, the new Manmohan Singh government should at last be able to implement the required second generation reforms. Their lineaments (sic) are well known and with the removal of the Left’s veto, many of those stalled in the legislature as well as those which were forestalled can now be implemented. These should be able to put India back on a 9-10 per cent per annum growth rate…”
Today’s business-press also reports that the new Government is planning to create a fresh “Disinvestment Ministry” and Dr Singh’s chief economic policy aide is “a frontrunner among the names short-listed to head the new ministry” with Cabinet rank.
That being said, I have to say I think a new Indian policy of creating a Ministry to privatise India’s public sector is probably a very BAD idea indeed in present circumstances — mainly because it will be driven by the interests of the organised Big Business lobbies that have so profoundly and subtly been able to control the New Delhi Government’s behaviour in recent decades.
Such lobbyist control is exercised often without the Government even realising or comprehending its parameters. For example, ask yourself: Is there any record anywhere of Dr Manmohan Singh, in his long career as a Government economist and then as a Rajya Sabha MP, having ever proposed before 2004-2005 that nuclear reactors were something vitally important to India’s future? And why do you suppose the most prominent Indian business lobby spent a million dollars and registered itself as an official lobbyist in Washington DC to promote the nuclear deal among American legislators? Because Big Business was feeling generous and altruistic towards the “energy security” of the ordinary people of India? Hardly. Indian Big Business calculates and acts in its own interests, as is only to be expected under economic assumptions; those interests are frequently camouflaged by their lobbyist and media friends into seeming to be economic policy for the country as a whole.
Now our Government every year produces paper rupees and bank deposits in practically unlimited amounts to pay for its practically unlimited deficit financing, and it has behaved thus over decades. Why we do not hear about this at all is because the most prominent Government economists themselves remain clueless — sometimes by choice, mostly by sheer ignorance — about the nature of the macroeconomic process that they are or have been part of. (See my “India’s Macroeconomics”, “The Dream Team: A Critique” etc elsewhere here). As for the Opposition’s economists, the less said about the CPI-M’s economists the better while the BJP, poor thing, has absolutely no economists at all!
Briefly speaking, Indian Big Business has acquired an acute sense of this long-term nominal/paper expansion of India’s economy, and as a result acts towards converting wherever possible its own hoards of paper rupees and rupee-denominated assets into more valuable portfolios for itself of real or durable assets, most conspicuously including hard-currency denominated assets, farm-land and urban real-estate, and, now, the physical assets of the Indian public sector. Such a path of trying to transform local domestic paper assets – produced unlimitedly by Government monetary and fiscal policy and naturally destined to depreciate — into real durable assets, is a privately rational course of action to follow in an inflationary economy. It is not rocket-science to realise the long-term path of the Indian rupee is downwards in comparison to the hard-currencies of the world – just compare our money supply growth and inflation rates with those of the rest of the world.
The Statesman of November 15 2006 had a lead editorial titled Government’s land-fraud: Cheating peasants in a hyperinflation-prone economy. It said:
“There is something fundamentally dishonourable about the way the Centre, the state of West Bengal and other state governments are treating the issue of expropriating peasants, farm-workers, petty shop-keepers etc of their small plots of land in the interests of promoters, industrialists and other businessmen. Singur may be but one example of a phenomenon being seen all over the country: Hyderabad, Karnataka, Kerala, Haryana, everywhere. So-called “Special Economic Zones” will merely exacerbate the problem many times over. India and its governments do not belong only to business and industrial lobbies, and what is good for private industrialists may or may not be good for India’s people as a whole. Economic development does not necessarily come to be defined by a few factories or high-rise housing complexes being built here or there on land that has been taken over by the Government, paying paper-money compensation to existing stakeholders, and then resold to promoters or industrialists backed by powerful political interest-groups on a promise that a few thousand new jobs will be created. One fundamental problem has to do with inadequate systems of land-description and definition, implementation and recording of property rights. An equally fundamental problem has to do with fair valuation of land owned by peasants etc. in terms of an inconvertible paper-money. Every serious economist knows that “land” is defined as that specific factor of production and real asset whose supply is fixed and does not increase in response to its price. Every serious economist also knows that paper-money is that nominal asset whose price can be made to catastrophically decline by a massive increase in its supply, i.e. by Government printing more of the paper it holds a monopoly to print. For Government to compensate people with paper-money it prints itself by valuing their land on the basis of an average of the price of the last few years, is for Government to cheat them of the fair present-value of the land. That present-value of land must be calculated in the way the present-value of any asset comes to be calculated, namely, by summing the likely discounted cash-flows of future values. And those future values should account for the likelihood of a massive future inflation causing decline in the value of paper-money in view of the fact we in India have a domestic public debt of some Rs. 30 trillion (Rs. 30 lakh crore) and counting, and money supply growth rates averaging 16-17% per annum. In fact, a responsible Government would, given the inconvertible nature of the rupee, have used foreign exchange or gold as the unit of account in calculating future-values of the land. India’s peasants are probably being cheated by their Government of real assets whose value is expected to rise, receiving nominal paper assets in compensation whose value is expected to fall.”
Mamata Banerjee started her famous protest fast-unto-death in Kolkata not long afterwards, riveting the nation’s attention in the winter of 2006-2007.
What goes for the government buying land on behalf of its businessman friends also goes, mutatis mutandis, for the public sector’s real assets being bought up by the private sector using domestic paper money in a potentially hyperinflationary economy. If Dr Singh’s new Government wishes to see real public sector assets being sold, let the Government seek to value these assets not in inconvertible rupees which the Government itself has been producing in unlimited quantities but rather in forex or gold-units instead!
Today’s headline says “Short of cash, govt. plans to revive disinvestment ministry”. Big Business’s powerful lobbies will suggest that real public assets must be sold (to whom? to organised Big Business of course!) in order to solve the grave fiscal problems in an inflationary economy caused precisely by those grave fiscal problems! What I said in 2002 at IndiaSeminar may still be found to apply: I said the BJP’s privatisation ideas “deserve to be condemned…because they have made themselves believe that the proceeds of selling the public sector should merely go into patching up the bleeding haemorrhage which is India’s fiscal and monetary situation… (w)hile…Congress were largely responsible for that haemorrhage to have occurred in the first place.”
If the new Government would like to know how to proceed more wisely, they need to read and grasp, in the book edited by myself and Professor John Clarke in 2004-2005, the chapter by Professor Patrick Minford on Margaret Thatcher’s fiscal and monetary policy (macroeconomics) before they read the chapter by Professor Martin Ricketts on Margaret Thatcher’s privatisation (microeconomics). India’s fiscal and monetary or macroeconomic problems are far worse today than Britain’s were when Thatcher came in.
During the recent Election Campaign, I contrasted Dr Singh’s flattering praise in 2005 of the CPI-M’s Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee with Sonia Gandhi’s pro-Mamata line in 2009 saying the CPI-M had taken land away from the poor. This may soon signal a new fault-line in the new Cabinet too on economic policy with respect to not only land but also public sector privatisation – with Dr Singh’s pro-Big Business acolytes on one side and Mamata Banerjee’s stance in favour of small-scale unorganised business and labour on the other. Party heavyweights like Dr Singh himself and Sharad Pawar and Pranab Mukherjee will weigh in one side or the other with Sonia being asked in due course to referee.
I personally am delighted to see the New Rahul Gandhi deciding not to be in Government and to instead reflect further on the “common man” and “common woman” about whom I had described his father talking to me on September 18 1990 at his home. Certainly the “aam admi” is not someone to be found among India’s organised Big Business or organised Big Labour nor their paid lobbyists in the big cities.
Subroto Roy
May 21, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
We in India did not invent the idea of Parliament, the British did. Even the British did not invent the idea of a “Premier Ministre”, the French did that, though the British came to develop its meaning most. Because these are not our own inventions, when something unusual happens in contemporary India to political entities and offices known as “Parliament”, “Prime Minister” etc, contrast and comparison is inevitable with standards and practices that have prevailed around the world in other parliamentary democracies.
Indeed we in India did not even fully invent the idea of our own Parliament though the national struggle led by the original Indian National Congress caused it to come to be invented. The Lok Sabha is the outcome of a long and distinguished constitutional and political history from the Morley-Minto reforms a century ago to the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms and Government of India Act of 1919 to the Government of India Act of 1935 and the first general elections of British India in 1937 (when Jawaharlal Nehru briefly became PM for the first time) and in due course the 1946 Constituent Assembly. Out of all this emerged the 1950 Constitution of India, drafted by that brilliant jurist BR Ambedkar as well as other sober intelligent well-educated and dedicated men and women of his time, and thence arose our first Lok Sabha following the 1951 General Elections.
“What are Lok Sabha Members and State MLAs legitimately required to be doing in caring for their constituents? First of all, as a body as a whole, they need to elect the Government, i.e. the Executive Branch, and to hold it accountable in Parliament or Assembly. For example, the Comptroller and Auditor General submits his reports directly to the House, and it is the duty of individual legislators to put these to good use in controlling the Government’s waste, fraud or abuse of public resources. Secondly, MPs and MLAs are obviously supposed to literally represent their individual constituencies in the House, i.e. to bring the Government and the House’s attention to specific problems or contingencies affecting their constituents as a whole, and call for the help, funds and sympathy of the whole community on their behalf. Thirdly, MPs and MLAs are supposed to respond to pleas and petitions of individual constituents, who may need the influence associated with the dignity of their office to get things rightly done. For example, an impoverished orphan lad once needed surgery to remove a brain tumour; a family helping him was promised the free services of a top brain surgeon if a hospital bed and operating theatre could be arranged. It was only by turning to the local MLA that the family were able to get such arrangements made, and the lad had his tumour taken out at a public hospital. MPs and MLAs are supposed to vote for and create public goods and services, and to use their moral suasion to see that existing public services actually do get to reach the public.”
What about the Rajya Sabha? I said in the same article:
“Rajya Sabha Members are a different species altogether. Most if not all State Legislative Councils have been abolished, and sadly the present nature of the Rajya Sabha causes similar doubts to arise about its utility. The very idea of a Rajya Sabha was first mooted in embryo form in an 1888 book A History of the Native States of India, Vol I. Gwalior, whose author also advocated popular constitutions for the “Indian India” of the “Native States” since “where there are no popular constitutions, the personal character of the ruler becomes a most important factor in the government… evils are inherent in every government where autocracy is not tempered by a free constitution.” When Victoria was declared India’s “Empress” in 1877, a “Council of the Empire” was mooted but had remained a non-starter even until the 1887 Jubilee. An “Imperial Council” was now designed of the so-called “Native Princes”, which came to evolve into the “Chamber of Princes” which became the “Council of the States” and the Rajya Sabha. It was patterned mostly on the British and not the American upper house except in being not liable to dissolution, and compelling periodic retirement of a third of members. The American upper house is an equal if not the senior partner of the lower house. Our Rajya Sabha follows the British upper house in being a chamber which is duty-bound to oversee any exuberance in the Lok Sabha but which must ultimately yield to it if there is any dispute. Parliament in India’s democracy effectively means the Lok Sabha — where every member has contested and won a direct vote in his/her constituency. The British upper house used to have an aristocratic hereditary component which Tony Blair’s New Labour Government has now removed, so it has now been becoming more like what the Rajya Sabha was supposed to have been like.”
The Canadian upper house is similar to ours in intent: a place for “sober second thought” intended to curb the “democratic excesses” of the lower house. In the Canadian, British, Australian, Irish and our own cases, the Prime Minister, as the chief executive of the lower house has immense indirect power over the upper house, whether in appointing members or even, in the Australian case, dissolving the entire upper house if he/she wishes.
Now yesterday apparently Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, as the duly elected leader of the largest political party in the 15th Lok Sabha, accompanied by Dr Manmohan Singh, as her party’s choice for the position of Prime Minister, went to see the President of India where the Hon’ble President apparently appointed Dr Singh to be the Prime Minister of India – meaning the Prime Minister of the 15th Lok Sabha, except that Dr Singh is not a member of the Lok Sabha and apparently has had no intent of becoming one.
In 2004 Shrimati Gandhi had declined to accept an invitation to become PM and instead effectively recommended Dr Singh to be PM despite his not being a member of the Lok Sabha nor intending to be so. This exploited a constitutional loophole to the extent that the drafters of our 1950 Constitution happened not to have explicitly stated that the PM must be from the Lok Sabha. But the reason the founders of our democratic polity such as BR Ambedkar and Jawaharlal Nehru did not specify that the PM must be from the Lok Sabha was quite simply that it was a matter of complete obviousness to them and to their entire generation that this must be so — it would have been appalling to them and something beyond their wildest imagination that a later generation, namely our own, would exploit such a loophole and allow a PM to be appointed who is not a member of the Lok Sabha and intends not to be so.
Ambedkar, Nehru and all others of their time knew fully well that the history and intended purpose of the Lok Sabha was completely different from the history and intended purpose of the Rajya Sabha. They knew too fully well that Lord Curzon had been explicitly denied the leadership of Britain’s Tory Party in 1922 because that would have made him a potential PM when he was not prepared to be a member of the House of Commons. That specific precedent culminated a centuries’-old democratic trend of political power flowing from monarchs to lords to commoners, and has governed all parliamentary democracies worldwide ever since — until Dr Singh’s appointment in 2004.
When such an anomalous situation once arose in Britain, Lord Home resigned his membership of the House of Lords to contest a House of Commons seat as Sir Alec Douglas Home so that he could be PM in a manner consistent with parliamentary law.
Dr Singh instead for five years remained PM of India while not being a member of the Lok Sabha. Even if reasons and exigencies of State could have been cited for such an anomalous situation during his first term, there was really no such reason for him not to contest the 2009 General Election if he wished to be the Congress Party’s prime ministerial candidate a second time. Numerous Rajya Sabha members alongside him have contested Lok Sabha seats this time, and several have won.
As of today, Dr Singh is due to be sworn in tomorrow as Prime Minister for a second term while still having no declared intention of resigning from the Rajya Sabha and contesting a Lok Sabha seat instead. What the present-day Congress has done is elect him the leader of the “Congress Parliamentary Party” and claim that it is in such a capacity that he received the invitation to be Prime Minister of India. But surely if the question had been asked to the Congress Party under Nehru or Indira or Rajiv: “Can you foresee a circumstance ever in which the PM of India is not a member of the Lok Sabha?” their answer in each case would have been a categorical and resounding “no”.
So the question does arise why the Congress under Sonia Gandhi has with deliberation allowed such an anomalous situation to develop. Its effect is to completely distort the trends of relative political power between the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. On the one hand, the Lok Sabha’s power is deliberately made to diminish as the chief executive of the Government of India shall not be from the Lok Sabha but from “the other place” despite the Lok Sabha having greater political legitimacy by having been directly elected by India’s people. This sets a precedent that might get repeated in India in the future but which contradicts the worldwide trend in parliamentary democracies over decades and centuries in precisely the opposite direction – of power flowing in the direction of the people not away from them. On the other hand, the fact this anomalous idea has been pioneered by the elected leader of the largest political party in the Lok Sabha while her PM is in the Rajya Sabha causes a member of the lower house to have unexpected control over the upper house when the latter is supposed to be something of an independent check on the former!
It all really seems an unnecessary muddle and a jumbling up of normal constitutional law and parliamentary procedure. The Sonia-Manmohan Government at the outset of its second term should hardly want to be seen by history as having set a poor precedent using brute force. The situation can be corrected with the utmost ease by following the Alec Douglas Home example, with Dr Singh being given a relatively safe seat to contest as soon as possible, if necessary by some newly elected Congress MP resigning and allowing a bye-election to be called.
Subroto Roy
May 2, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
Close to 389 million valid votes were cast in India’s previous General Election in 2004 to the 14th Lok Sabha, according to the Election Commission’s volume STATISTICAL REPORT ON GENERAL ELECTIONS, 2004 TO THE 14th LOK SABHA VOLUME III (DETAILS FOR ASSEMBLY SEGMENTS OF PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCIES).
Unfortunately, the Election Commission, like the Government of India in general, remains extremely uncomfortable with using Excel or any spreadsheets at all, and hence much of the information they provide remains unproductive — reflecting, I am afraid, rather obsolescent technology and organisation and management. From an Excel spreadsheet I have had to create for myself using EC data, my calculations give the following breakdown of the votes received in 2004 by most of the larger political parties:
2004 Lok Sabha Elections
ADMK AllIndiaAnnaDravidaMunnetraKazhagam 8,547,014
AGP AsomGanaParishad 2,069,600
AIFB AllIndiaForwardBloc 1,365,055
AITC AllIndiaTrinamoolCongress 7,863,220
BJD BijuJanataDal 5,082,849
BJP BharatiyaJanataParty 86,181,116
BSP BahujanSamajParty 21,037,968
CPI CommunistPartyofIndia 5,484,111
CPI(ML)(L) CommunistPartyofIndia(Marxist-Leninist)(Liberation) 1,280,240
CPM CommunistPartyofIndia(Marxist) 22,065,283
DMK DravidaMunnetraKazhagam 7,064,393
INC IndianNationalCongress 103,118,475
IND Independents 16,523,857
INLD IndianNationalLokDal 1,918,943
JD(S) JanataDal(Secular) 5,732,296
JD(U) JanataDal(United) 9,129,366
JMM JharkhandMuktiMorcha 1,846,843
MDMK MarumalarchiDravidaMunnetraKazhagam 1,679,870
PMK PattaliMakkalKatchi 2,169,020
NCP NationalistCongressParty 7,019,236
RJD RashtriyaJanataDal 9,384,147
RLD RashtriyaLokDal 2,463,603
RSP RevolutionarySocialistParty 1,689,794
SAD ShiromaniAkaliDal 3,506,681
SHS ShivSena 7,050,432
SP SamajwadiParty 16,822,902
TDP TeluguDesam 11,844,811
TRS TelanganaRashtraSamithi 2,441,405
That accounts for 372,382,530. The precise total of valid votes that I get by tabulating EC data using my spreadsheet is 388,920,557. The EC itself reports in the very same document a total of 388,672,504. The percentage difference is close enough to zero but it should be zero itself; I shall be delighted if my spreadsheet’s total is the incorrect one somehow, even though it uses the EC’s own data; but it does lead me to ask: “Who, if anyone, audits the Election Commission’s numerical calculations and vote tallies? Why is India’s ordinary public not informed about all this and other processes of the Election Commission perfectly transparently as a matter of routine? Is reform necessary of the processes and procedures of the Election Commission itself?”.
(Incidentally, the slight discrepancy in the totals could have arisen perhaps because my spreadsheet does, correctly, include the relatively small number of postal ballots, whereas the EC’s total possibly has not done.)
Raw votes like those described above do not of course translate directly into seats in Parliament but even so they indicate the state of popular political opinion in 2004. By how much will that popular opinion be found to have changed in 2009? How will demographic changes, and the delimitation exercise that has redrawn constituencies, affect the new outcomes? These are the kind of grown-up adult questions to ask yourself if you get bored with the endless pretentious waffle that emerges from our talking-heads on TV etc regarding the ongoing election.
Notice too the 16.5 million people of India who voted in 2004 for Independents! What on earth has made Dr Manmohan Singh recently initiate an absurd debate against them?
Here below as well is the full list of all parties that were in contention in 2004; if you want to know the vote-share any of them received according to my spreadsheet, send in a comment to this post and I shall try to respond. Better still, look up the EC volume mentioned and create your own spreadsheet from its data, and tell me how accurate mine is. (But beware, the spreadsheet will have some 60,000 rows to start with!)
Subroto Roy
List of parties in 2004
AB AkhandBharti
ABCD(A) AkhilBharatiyaCongressDal(Ambedkar)
ABDBM AkhilBharatiyaDeshBhaktMorcha
ABHM AkhilBharatHinduMahasabha
ABHS AkhilBharatiyaSena
ABJS AkhilBharatiyaJanSangh
ABLTASJM AkhilBharatiyaLokTantrikAlp-SankhyakJanMorcha
ABLTP AkhilBharatiyaLoktantraParty
ABRAHP AkhilBharatiyaRashtriyaAzadHindParty
ABRS AkhilBharatiyaRajaryaSabha
AC ArunachalCongress
AD ApnaDal
ADMK AllIndiaAnnaDravidaMunnetraKazhagam
AGP AsomGanaParishad
AIFB AllIndiaForwardBloc
AIMF AllIndiaMinoritiesFront
AIMIM AllIndiaMajlis-E-IttehadulMuslimeen
AITC AllIndiaTrinamoolCongress
AJSU AllJharkhandStudentsUnion
AKMDMP AllKeralaM.G.R.DravidaMunnetraParty
AMB AmraBangalee
ANC AmbedkarNationalCongress
AP AwamiParty
ARP AmbedkaristRepublicanParty
ASDC AutonomousStateDemandCommittee
ASP AmbedkarSamajParty
BBM BharipaBahujanMahasangha
BBP BharatiyaBackwardParty
BED BharatiyaEktaDal
BEP BharatiyaEklavyaParty
BGTD BharatiyaGaonTajDal
BJD BijuJanataDal
BJP BharatiyaJanataParty
BJVP BharatiyaJanvadiParty
BKD BahujanKisanDal
BKLJP BharatKiLokJimmedarParty
BKRP BharatKrantiRakshakParty
BLKD BharatiyaLokKalyanDal
BLP BharatiyaLabourParty
BMP(AI) BharatiyaMuhabbatParty(AllIndia)
BMSM BharatiyaMinoritiesSurakshaMahasangh
BMVP BharatiyaManavataVikasParty
BNP BharatiyaNavshaktiparty
BNRP BharatiyaNagrikParty
BPSGKD BharatiyaPrajatantrikShudhGandhiwadiKrishakDal
BPSP BiharPeople’sParty
BPTP BharatiyaPrajatantraParty
BRP BharatiyaRashtravadiPaksha
BRPP BharatiyaRepublicanPaksha
BSDP BhartiSarvadarshiParishad
BSJM BharatiyaSurajyaManch
BSK BharatiyaSarvkalayanKrantiDal
BSP BahujanSamajParty
BVP BahujanVikasParty
CPI CommunistPartyofIndia
CPI(ML)(L) CommunistPartyofIndia(Marxist-Leninist)(Liberation)
CPM CommunistPartyofIndia(Marxist)
CSP ChhattisgarhiSamajParty
DBP DeshBhaktParty
DBSP DemocraticBharatiyaSamajParty
DMK DravidaMunnetraKazhagam
EKD(UP) EktaKrantiDalU.P.
ES EktaShakti
EU EphraimUnion
FCI FederalCongressofIndia
FPM FederalPartyofManipur
GGP GondvanaGantantraParty
HEAP HinduEktaAndolanParty
HJP HindustanJantaParty
HM HindMorcha
HVP HaryanaVikasParty
IBSP IndianBahujanSamajwadiParty
IFDP IndianFederalDemocraticParty
IJP IndianJusticeParty
INC IndianNationalCongress
IND Independent
INL IndianNationalLeague
INLD IndianNationalLokDal
JCP JanChetnaParty
JD(S) JanataDal(Secular)
JD(U) JanataDal(United)
JDP JharkhandDisomParty
JHP JaiHindParty
JHSP JanhitSamajParty
JJ JebamaniJanata
JKAL JammuAndKashmirAwamiLeague
JKN Jammu&KashmirNationalConference
JKNPP Jammu&KashmirNationalPanthersParty
JKP JharkhandParty
JKP(N) JharkhandParty(Naren)
JKPDP Jammu&KashmirPeoplesDemocraticParty
JKPP JharkhandPeople’sParty
JMM JharkhandMuktiMorcha
JMP JanmangalPaksh
JP JanataParty
JSP JansattaParty
JUM JanaUnnayanMancha
JVP JanataVikasParty
KEC KeralaCongress
KEC(M) KeralaCongress(M)
KKJHS KrantiKariJaiHindSena
KMM KrantikariManuwadiMorcha
KNDP KannadaNaduParty
KSVP KrantikariSamyavadiParty
KVSP KosiVikasParty
LBP LokBhalaiParty
LCP LoktantrikChetnaParty
LJNSP LokJanShaktiParty
LP(S) LabourParty(Secular)
LPI(V) LabourPartyOfIndia(V.V.Prasad)
LPSP LokpriyaSamajParty
LRP LokRajyaParty
LSD LokSewaDal
LSWP LoktantrikSamajwadiParty
MAG MaharashtrawadiGomantak
MB(S)P MoolBharati(S)Party
MBT MajlisBachaoTahreek
MC MominConference
MCO MarxistCo-Ordination
MCPI(S) MarxistCommunistPartyofIndia(S.S.Srivastava)
MDMK MarumalarchiDravidaMunnetraKazhagam
MJM ManavJagritiManch
MNF MizoNationalFront
MNVP ManuvadiParty
MPP ManipurPeople’sParty
MRRC MaharashtraRajivCongress
MRS MudirajRashtriyaSamithi
MUL MuslimLeagueKeralaStateCommittee
NBNP NavbharatNirmanParty
NCP NationalistCongressParty
NLP NationalLoktantrikParty
NMNP NidayaMalik(N)Party
NPF NagalandPeoplesFront
NPF NagalandPeoplesFront
NSP NationalStudentsParty
NSSP NiswarthSewaParty
NSTP NaariShaktiParty
NTRTDP(LP) NTRTeluguDesamParty(LakshmiParvathi)
PBLP PhuleBhartiLokParty
PBRML PaschimBangaRajyaMuslimLeague
PDP PeoplesDemocraticParty
PDS PartyforDemocraticSocialism
PHSP PichhraSamajParty
PMK PattaliMakkalKatchi
PMP ParmarthParty
PMSP PragatisheelManavSamajParty
PP PrajaParty
PPOI PyramidPartyofIndia
PRBP PeoplesRepublicanParty
PRCP PrabuddhaRepublicanParty
PRP PanchayatRajParty
PSJP ParivartanSamajParty
PTSS ProutistSarvaSamajParty
PWPI PeasantsAndWorkersPartyofIndia
RCP RashtravadiCommunistParty
RCPI(R) RevolutionaryCommunistPartyofIndia(RasikBhatt)
RGD RashtriyaGaribDal
RHD RashtriyaHamaraDal
RJAP RashtriyaJanadhikarParty
RJD RashtriyaJanataDal
RJVP RajasthanVikasParty
RKSP RashtriyaKrantikariSamajwadiParty
RLD RashtriyaLokDal
RLD RashtriyaLokDal
RLSM RashtriyaLokSevaMorcha
RPD RashtriyaParivartanDal
RPI RepublicanPartyofIndia
RPI(A) RepublicanPartyofIndia(A)
RPI(D) RepublicanPartyOfIndia(Democratic)
RPI(KH) RepublicanPartyOfIndia(Khobragade)
RSBP RashtriyaSwabhimaanParty
RSD RashtriyaSawarnDal
RSGP RashtriyaGarimaParty
RSKP RashtriyaSakarParty
RSMD RashtriyaSamantaDal
RSNP RashtriyaSamajikNayakPaksha
RSP RevolutionarySocialistParty
RSP RevolutionarySocialistParty
RSPS RashtriyaSamajPaksha
RVNP RashtravadiJanataParty
RVP RashtriyaVikasParty
SAD ShiromaniAkaliDal
SAD(M) ShiromaniAkaliDal(SimranjitSinghMann)
SAP SamataParty
SBS ShikshitBerozgarSena
SBSP SuheldevBhartiyaSamajParty
SDF SikkimDemocraticFront
SDP SocialisticDemocraticParty
SHRP SikkimHimaliRajyaParishad
SHS Shivsena
SHS Shivsena
SHSP ShoshitSamajParty
SJP(R) SamajwadiJanataParty(Rashtriya)
SLAP SocialActionParty
SLP(L) SocialistParty(Lohia)
SMSP SamataSamajParty
SP SamajwadiParty
SP SamajwadiParty
SPI SecularPartyofIndia
SPVD SampurnaVikasDal
SSD ShoshitSamajDal
SSJP SanatanSamajParty
SSP SikkimSangramParishad
SVRP ShivrajyaParty
SVSP SavarnSamajParty
SWD SwarajDal
SWJP SamajwadiJanParishad
TDK TamilDesiyakKatchi
TDP TeluguDesam
TNGP TrinamoolGanaParishad
TRS TelanganaRashtraSamithi
UGDP UnitedGoansDemocraticParty
UKKD UttarakhandKrantiDal
UMFA UnitedMinoritiesFront,Assam
USYP UrsSamyukthaPaksha
VJC VidharbhaJanataCongress
VJP VijetaParty
VP VikasParty
VRP VidharbhaRajyaParty
YGP YuvaGantantraParty
YSP YouthandStudentsParty
April 24, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
It is constantly the task of practical wisdom not to say
“This is good, and I will have it,”
but to say
“This is the less of two unavoidable evils, and I will bear it.”
——— “Address to Working-Men by Felix Holt”,
George Eliot, Blackwood’s Magazine 1868
April 23, 2009 — drsubrotoroy
We appear to have no serious academic political science or voting theory available in the public domain in India today, despite our having the world’s vastest electorate. Our rather juvenile national-level media too often passes off personal gossip and wild speculation as analytical discussion.
There has been zero mention of the fact that the 15th Lok Sabha is the result of a brand new delimitation (or redistricting) exercise. Hence an enormous amount of uncertainty must be added to all calculations and attempts at prediction. Many old Assembly constituencies have been moved to new Lok Sabha constituencies — for example, Tollygunge was part of the old Calcutta South but is not anymore; Allahabad West and Allahabad North are not part of the new Allahabad Lok Sabha constituency, etc etc. What this means is that even if the actual votes received in 2009 were identical to those in 2004, there would be different electoral outcomes marginally and hence, most probably, in aggregate as well. The only thing not to be surprised by with the results after voting in this Election may be surprise itself!
[Postscript April 25: I am glad to see that two days after this post, one national newspaper has ever so slightly begun to realise the significance of delimitation.]
Here are some data based on the EC’s raw data to allow a better picture. It is placed here in the public interest; please check against the EC’s raw data before operational use.
Subroto Roy
State Lok Sabha Constituency State Assembly Constituency No.
AP ADILABAD “S01 1” SIRPUR 1
“S01 1” ASIFABAD 5
“S01 1” KHANAPUR 6
“S01 1” ADILABAD 7
“S01 1” BOATH 8
“S01 1” NIRMAL 9
“S01 1” MUDHOLE 10
AP PEDDAPALLE “S01 2” CHENNUR 2
“S01 2” BELLAMPALLY 3
“S01 2” MANCHERIAL 4
“S01 2” DHARMAPURI 22
“S01 2” RAMAGUNDAM 23
“S01 2” MANTHANI 24
“S01 2” PEDDAPALLE 25
AP KARIMNAGAR “S01 3” KARIMNAGAR 26
“S01 3” CHOPPADANDI 27
“S01 3” VEMULAWADA 28
“S01 3” SIRCILLA 29
“S01 3” MANAKONDUR 30
“S01 3” HUZURABAD 31
“S01 3” HUSNABAD 32
AP NIZAMABAD “S01 4” ARMUR 11
“S01 4” BODHAN 12
“S01 4” NIZAMABAD (URBAN) 17
“S01 4” NIZAMABAD (RURAL) 18
“S01 4” BALKONDA 19
“S01 4” KORATLA 20
“S01 4” JAGTIAL 21
AP ZAHIRABAD “S01 5” JUKKAL 13
“S01 5” BANSWADA 14
“S01 5” YELLAREDDY 15
“S01 5” KAMAREDDY 16
“S01 5” NARAYANKHED 35
“S01 5” ANDOLE 36
“S01 5” ZAHIRABAD 38
AP MEDAK “S01 6” SIDDIPET 33
“S01 6” MEDAK 34
“S01 6” NARSAPUR 37
“S01 6” SANGAREDDY 39
“S01 6” PATANCHERU 40
“S01 6” DUBBAK 41
“S01 6” GAJWEL 42
AP MALKAJGIRI “S01 7” MEDCHAL 43
“S01 7” MALKAJGIRI 44
“S01 7” QUTHBULLAPUR 45
“S01 7” KUKATPALLY 46
“S01 7” UPPAL 47
“S01 7” LAL BAHADUR NAGAR 49
“S01 7” SECUNDERABAD CANTT. 71
AP SECUNDRABAD “S01 8” MUSHEERABAD 57
“S01 8” AMBERPET 59
“S01 8” KHAIRATABAD 60
“S01 8” JUBILEE HILLS 61
“S01 8” SANATH NAGAR 62
“S01 8” NAMPALLI 63
“S01 8” SECUNDRABAD 70
AP HYDERABAD “S01 9” MALAKPET 58
“S01 9” KARWAN 64
“S01 9” GOSHAMAHAL 65
“S01 9” CHARMINAR 66
“S01 9” CHANDRAYANGUTTA 67
“S01 9” YAKUTPURA 68
“S01 9” BAHDURPURA 69
AP CHELVELLA “S01 10” MAHESHWARAM 50
“S01 10” RAJENDRANAGAR 51
“S01 10” SERILINGAMPALLY 52
“S01 10” CHEVELLA 53
“S01 10” PARGI 54
“S01 10” VICARADAB 55
“S01 10” TANDUR 56
AP MAHBUBNAGAR “S01 11” KODANGAL 72
“S01 11” NARAYANPET 73
“S01 11” MAHBUBNAGAR 74
“S01 11” JADCHERLA 75
“S01 11” DEVARKADRA 76
“S01 11” MAKTHAL 77
“S01 11” SHADNAGAR 84
AP NAGARKURNOOL “S01 12” WANAPARTHY 78
“S01 12” GADWAL 79
“S01 12” ALAMPUR 80
“S01 12” NAGARKURNOOL 81
“S01 12” ACHAMPET 82
“S01 12” KALWAKURTHY 83
“S01 12” KOLLAPUR 85
AP NALGONDA “S01 13” DEVARAKONDA 86
“S01 13” NAGARJUNA SAGAR 87
“S01 13” MIRYALGUDA 88
“S01 13” HUZURNAGAR 89
“S01 13” KODAD 90
“S01 13” SURYAPET 91
“S01 13” NALGONDA 92
AP BHONGIR “S01 14” IBRAHIMPATNAM 48
“S01 14” MUNUGODE 93
“S01 14” BHONGIR 94
“S01 14” NAKREKAL 95
“S01 14” THUNGATHURTHY 96
“S01 14” ALAIR 97
“S01 14” JANGOAN 98
AP WARANGAL “S01 15” GHANPUR (STATION) 99
“S01 15” PALAKURTHI 100
“S01 15” PARKAL 104
“S01 15” WARANGAL WEST 105
“S01 15” WARANGAL EAST 106
“S01 15” WARDHANAPET 107
“S01 15” BHUPALPALLE 108
AP MAHABUBABAD “S01 16” DORNAKAL 101
“S01 16” MAHABUBABAD 102
“S01 16” NARSAMPET 103
“S01 16” MULUG 109
“S01 16” PINAPAKA 110
“S01 16” YELLANDU 111
“S01 16” BHADRACHELAM 119
AP KHAMMAM “S01 17” KHAMMAM 112
“S01 17” PALAIR 113
“S01 17” MADIRA 114
“S01 17” WYRA 115
“S01 17” SATHUPALLI 116
“S01 17” KOTHAGUDEM 117
“S01 17” ASWARAOPETA 118
AP ARUKU “S01 18” PALAKONDA 129
“S01 18” KURUPAM 130
“S01 18” PARVATHIPURAM 131
“S01 18” SALUR 132
“S01 18” ARAKU VALLEY 147
“S01 18” PADERU 148
“S01 18” RAMPACHODAVARAM 172
AP SRIKAKULAM “S01 19” ICHCHAPURAM 120
“S01 19” PALASA 121
“S01 19” TEKKALI 122
“S01 19” PATHAPATNAM 123
“S01 19” SRIKAKULAM 124
“S01 19” AMADALAVALASA 125
“S01 19” NARASANNAPETA 127
AP VIZIANAGARAM “S01 20” ETCHERLA 126
“S01 20” RAJAM 128
“S01 20” BOBBILI 133
“S01 20” CHEEPURUPALLE 134
“S01 20” GAJAPATHINAGARAM 135
“S01 20” NELLIMARLA 136
“S01 20” VIZIANAGARAM 137
AP VISAKHAPATNAM “S01 21” SRUNGAVARAPUKOTA 138
“S01 21” BHIMLI 139
“S01 21” VISAKHAPATNAM EAST 140
“S01 21” VISAKHAPATNAM SOUTH 141
“S01 21” VISAKHAPATNAM NORTH 142
“S01 21” VISAKHAPATNAM WEST 143
“S01 21” GAJUWAKA 144
AP ANAKAPALLI “S01 22” CHODAVARAM 145
“S01 22” MADUGULA 146
“S01 22” ANAKAPALLE 149
“S01 22” PENDURTHI 150
“S01 22” ELAMANCHILI 151
“S01 22” PAYAKARAOPET 152
“S01 22” NARSIPATNAM 153
AP KAKINADA “S01 23” TUNI 154
“S01 23” PRATHIPADU 155
“S01 23” PITHAPURAM 156
“S01 23” KAKINADA RURAL 157
“S01 23” PEDDAPURAM 158
“S01 23” KAKINADA CITY 160
“S01 23” JAGGAMPETA 171
AP AMALAPURAM “S01 24” RAMACHANDRAPURAM 161
“S01 24” MUMMIDIVARAM 162
“S01 24” AMALAPURAM 163
“S01 24” RAZOLE 164
“S01 24” GANNAVARAM 165
“S01 24” KOTHAPETA 166
“S01 24” MANDAPETA 167
AP RAJAHMUNDRY “S01 25” ANAPARTHY 159
“S01 25” RAJANAGARAM 168
“S01 25” RAJAHMUNDRY CITY 169
“S01 25” RAJAMUNDRY RURAL 170
“S01 25” KOVVUR 173
“S01 25” NIDADAVOLE 174
“S01 25” GOPALAPURAM 185
AP NARSAPURAM “S01 26” ACHANTA 175
“S01 26” PALACOLE 176
“S01 26” NARASAPURAM 177
“S01 26” BHIMAVARAM 178
“S01 26” UNDI 179
“S01 26” TANUKU 180
“S01 26” TADEPALLIGUDEM 181
AP ELURU “S01 27” UNGUTURU 182
“S01 27” DENDULURU 183
“S01 27” ELURU 184
“S01 27” POLAVARAM 186
“S01 27” CHINTALAPUDI 187
“S01 27” NUZVID 189
“S01 27” KAIKALUR 192
AP MACHILIPATNAM “S01 28” GANNAVARAM 190
“S01 28” GUDIVADA 191
“S01 28” PEDANA 193
“S01 28” MACHILIPATNAM 194
“S01 28” AVANIGADDA 195
“S01 28” PAMARRU 196
“S01 28” PENAMALURU 197
AP VIJAYAWADA “S01 29” TIRUVURU 188
“S01 29” VIJAYWADA WEST 198
“S01 29” VIJAYAWADA CENTRAL 199
“S01 29” VIJAYAWADA EAST 200
“S01 29” MYLAVARAM 201
“S01 29” NANDIGAMA 202
“S01 29” JAGGAYYAPETA 203
AP GUNTUR “S01 30” TADIKONDA 205
“S01 30” MANGALAGIRI 206
“S01 30” PONNUR 207
“S01 30” TENALI 210
“S01 30” PRATHIPADU 212
“S01 30” GUNTUR WEST 213
“S01 30” GUNTUR EAST 214
AP NARASARAOPET “S01 31” PEDAKURAPADU 204
“S01 31” CHILAKALURIPET 215
“S01 31” NARASARAOPET 216
“S01 31” SATTENPALLI 217
“S01 31” VINUKONDA 218
“S01 31” GURUZALA 219
“S01 31” MACHERLA 220
AP BAPATLA “S01 32” VEMURU 208
“S01 32” REPALLE 209
“S01 32” BAPATLA 211
“S01 32” PARCHUR 223
“S01 32” ADDANKI 224
“S01 32” CHIRALA 225
“S01 32” SANTHANUTHALAPADU 226
AP ONGOLE “S01 33” YERRAGONDAPALEM 221
“S01 33” DARSI 222
“S01 33” ONGOLE 227
“S01 33” KONDAPI 229
“S01 33” MARKAPURAM 230
“S01 33” GIDDALUR 231
“S01 33” KANIGIRI 232
AP NANDYAL “S01 34” ALLAGADDA 253
“S01 34” SRISAILAM 254
“S01 34” NANDIKOTKUR 255
“S01 34” PANYAM 257
“S01 34” NANDYAL 258
“S01 34” BANAGANAPALLE 259
“S01 34” DHONE 260
AP KURNOOL “S01 35” KURNOOL 256
“S01 35” PATTIKONDA 261
“S01 35” KODUMUR 262
“S01 35” YEMMIGANUR 263
“S01 35” MANTRALAYAM 264
“S01 35” ADONI 265
“S01 35” ALUR 266
AP ANANTAPUR “S01 36” RAYADURG 267
“S01 36” URAVAKONDA 268
“S01 36” GUNTAKAL 269
“S01 36” TADPATRI 270
“S01 36” SINGANAMALA 271
“S01 36” ANANTAPUR URBAN 272
“S01 36” KALYANDURG 273
AP HINDUPUR “S01 37” RAPTADU 274
“S01 37” MADAKASIRA 275
“S01 37” HINDUPUR 276
“S01 37” PENUKONDA 277
“S01 37” PUTTAPARTHI 278
“S01 37” DHARMAVARAM 279
“S01 37” KADIRI 280
AP KADAPA “S01 38” BADVEL 243
“S01 38” KADAPA 245
“S01 38” PULIVENDLA 248
“S01 38” KAMALAPURAM 249
“S01 38” JAMMALAMADUGU 250
“S01 38” PRODDATUR 251
“S01 38” MYDUKUR 252
AP NELLORE “S01 39” KANDUKUR 228
“S01 39” KAVALI 233
“S01 39” ATMAKUR 234
“S01 39” KOVUR 235
“S01 39” NELLORE CITY 236
“S01 39” NELLORE RURAL 237
“S01 39” UDAYAGIRI 242
AP TIRUPATI “S01 40” SARVEPALLI 238
“S01 40” GUDUR 239
“S01 40” SULLURPETA 240
“S01 40” VENKATAGIRI 241
“S01 40” TIRUPATI 286
“S01 40” SRIKALAHASTI 287
“S01 40” SATYAVEEDU 288
AP RAJAMPET “S01 41” RAJAMPET 244
“S01 41” KODUR 246
“S01 41” RAYACHOTI 247
“S01 41” THAMBALLAPALLE 281
“S01 41” PILERU 282
“S01 41” MADANAPALLE 283
“S01 41” PUNGANUR 284
AP CHITTOOR “S01 42” CHANDRAGIRI 285
“S01 42” NAGARI 289
“S01 42” GANGADHARA NELLORE 290
“S01 42” CHITTOOR 291
“S01 42” PUTHALAPATTU 292
“S01 42” PALAMANER 293
“S01 42” KUPPAM 294
AR ARUNACHAL WEST “S02 1” LUMLA 1
“S02 1” TAWANG 2
“S02 1” MUKTO 3
“S02 1” DIRANG 4
“S02 1” KALAKTANG 5
“S02 1” THRIZINO-BURAGAON 6
“S02 1” BOMDILA 7
“S02 1” BAMENG 8
“S02 1” CHAYANG TAJO 9
“S02 1” SEPPA EAST 10
“S02 1” SEPPA WEST 11
“S02 1” PAKKE KESSANG 12
“S02 1” ITANAGAR 13
“S02 1” DOIMUKH 14
“S02 1” SAGALEE 15
“S02 1” YACHULI 16
“S02 1” ZIRO HAPOLI 17
“S02 1” PALIN 18
“S02 1” NYAPIN 19
“S02 1” TALI 20
“S02 1” KOLORIANG 21
“S02 1” NACHO 22
“S02 1” TALIHA 23
“S02 1” DAPORIJO 24
“S02 1” RAGA 25
“S02 1” DUMPORIJO 26
“S02 1” LIROMOBA 27
“S02 1” LIKABALI 28
“S02 1” BASAR 29
“S02 1” ALONG WEST 30
“S02 1” ALONG EAST 31
“S02 1” RUMGONG 32
“S02 1” MECHUKHA 33
AR ARUNACHAL EAST “S02 2” TUTING YINGKIONG 34
“S02 2” PANGIN 35
“S02 2” NARI-KOYU 36
“S02 2” PASIGHAT WEST 37
“S02 2” PASIGHAT EAST 38
“S02 2” MEBO 39
“S02 2” MARIYANG-GEKU 40
“S02 2” ANINI 41
“S02 2” DAMBUK 42
“S02 2” ROING 43
“S02 2” TEZU 44
“S02 2” HAYULIANG 45
“S02 2” CHOWKHAM 46
“S02 2” NAMSAI 47
“S02 2” LEKANG 48
“S02 2” BORDUMSA – DIYUM 49
“S02 2” MIAO 50
“S02 2” NAMPONG 51
“S02 2” CHANGLANG SOUTH 52
“S02 2” CHANGLANG NORTH 53
“S02 2” NAMSANG 54
“S02 2” KHONSA EAST 55
“S02 2” KHONSA WEST 56
“S02 2” BORDURIA BOGAPANI 57
“S02 2” KANUBARI 58
“S02 2” LONGDING PUMAO 59
“S02 2” PONGCHAO WAKKA 60
AS KARIMGANJ “S03 1” RATABARI 1
“S03 1” PATHERKANDI 2
“S03 1” KARIMGANJ NORTH 3
“S03 1” KARIMGANJ SOUTH 4
“S03 1” BADARPUR 5
“S03 1” HAILAKANDI 6
“S03 1” KATLICHERRA 7
“S03 1” ALGAPUR 8
AS SILCHAR “S03 2” SILCHAR 9
“S03 2” SONAI 10
“S03 2” DHOLAI 11
“S03 2” UDHARBOND 12
“S03 2” LAKHIPUR 13
“S03 2” BORKHOLA 14
“S03 2” KATIGORAH 15
AS AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT “S03 3” HAFLONG 16
“S03 3” BOKAJAN 17
“S03 3” HOWRAGHAT 18
“S03 3” DIPHU 19
“S03 3” BAITHALANGSO 20
AS DHUBRI “S03 4” MANKACHAR 21
“S03 4” SALMARA SOUTH 22
“S03 4” DHUBRI 23
“S03 4” GAURIPUR 24
“S03 4” GOLOKGANJ 25
“S03 4” BILASIPARA WEST 26
“S03 4” BILASIPARA EAST 27
“S03 4” GOALPARA EAST 37
“S03 4” GOALPARA WEST 38
“S03 4” JALESWAR 39
AS KOKRAJHAR “S03 5” GOSSAIGAON 28
“S03 5” KOKRAJHAR WEST 29
“S03 5” KOKRAJHAR EAST 30
“S03 5” SIDLI 31
“S03 5” BIJNI 33
“S03 5” SORBHOG 40
“S03 5” BHABANIPUR 41
“S03 5” TAMULPUR 58
“S03 5” BARAMA 62
“S03 5” CHAPAGURI 63
AS BARPETA “S03 6” BONGAIGAON 32
“S03 6” ABHAYAPURI NORTH 34
“S03 6” ABHAYAPURI SOUTH 35
“S03 6” PATACHARKUCHI 42
“S03 6” BARPETA 43
“S03 6” JANIA 44
“S03 6” BAGHBAR 45
“S03 6” SARUKHETRI 46
“S03 6” CHENGA 47
“S03 6” DHARMAPUR 61
AS GAUHATI “S03 7” DUDHNOI 36
“S03 7” BOKO 48
“S03 7” CHHAYGAON 49
“S03 7” PALASBARI 50
“S03 7” JALUKBARI 51
“S03 7” DISPUR 52
“S03 7” GAUHATI EAST 53
“S03 7” GAUHATI WEST 54
“S03 7” HAJO 55
“S03 7” BARKHETRI 60
AS MANGALDOI “S03 8” KAMALPUR 56
“S03 8” RANGIA 57
“S03 8” NALBARI 59
“S03 8” PANERY 64
“S03 8” KALAIGAON 65
“S03 8” SIPAJHAR 66
“S03 8” MANGALDOI 67
“S03 8” DALGAON 68
“S03 8” UDALGURI 69
“S03 8” MAZBAT 70
AS TEZPUR “S03 9” DHEKIAJULI 71
“S03 9” BARCHALLA 72
“S03 9” TEZPUR 73
“S03 9” RANGAPARA 74
“S03 9” SOOTEA 75
“S03 9” BISWANATH 76
“S03 9” BEHALI 77
“S03 9” GOHPUR 78
“S03 9” BIHPURIA 109
AS NOWGONG “S03 10” JAGIROAD 79
“S03 10” MORIGAON 80
“S03 10” LAHARIGHAT 81
“S03 10” RAHA 82
“S03 10” NAGAON 86
“S03 10” BARHAMPUR 87
“S03 10” JAMUNAMUKH 90
“S03 10” HOJAI 91
“S03 10” LUMDING 92
AS KALIABOR “S03 11” DHING 83
“S03 11” BATADRABA 84
“S03 11” RUPAHIHAT 85
“S03 11” SAMAGURI 88
“S03 11” KALIABOR 89
“S03 11” BOKAKHAT 93
“S03 11” SARUPATHAR 94
“S03 11” GOLAGHAT 95
“S03 11” KHUMTAI 96
“S03 11” DERGAON 97
AS JORHAT “S03 12” JORHAT 98
“S03 12” TITABAR 100
“S03 12” MARIANI 101
“S03 12” TEOK 102
“S03 12” AMGURI 103
“S03 12” NAZIRA 104
“S03 12” MAHMORA 105
“S03 12” SONARI 106
“S03 12” THOWRA 107
“S03 12” SIVASAGAR 108
AS DIBRUGARH “S03 13” MORAN 115
“S03 13” DIBRUGARH 116
“S03 13” LAHOWAL 117
“S03 13” DULIJAN 118
“S03 13” TINGKHONG 119
“S03 13” NAHARKATIA 120
“S03 13” TINSUKIA 122
“S03 13” DIGBOI 123
“S03 13” MARGHERITA 124
AS LAKHIMPUR “S03 14” MAJULI 99
“S03 14” NAOBOICHA 110
“S03 14” LAKHIMPUR 111
“S03 14” DHAKUAKHANA 112
“S03 14” DHEMAJI 113
“S03 14” JONAI 114
“S03 14” CHABUA 121
“S03 14” DOOMDOOMA 125
“S03 14” SADIYA 126
BR VALMIKI NAGAR “S04 1” VALMIKI NAGAR 1
“S04 1” RAMNAGAR 2
“S04 1” NARKATIAGANJ 3
“S04 1” BAGAHA 4
“S04 1” LAURIYA 5
“S04 1” SIKTA 9
BR PASCHIM CHAMPARAN “S04 2” NAUTAN 6
“S04 2” CHANPATIA 7
“S04 2” BETTIAH 8
“S04 2” RAXAUL 10
“S04 2” SUGAULI 11
“S04 2” NARKATIA 12
BR PURVI CHAMPARAN “S04 3” HARSIDHI 13
“S04 3” GOVINDGANJ 14
“S04 3” KESARIA 15
“S04 3” KALYANPUR 16
“S04 3” PIPRA 17
“S04 3” MOTIHARI 19
BR SHEOHAR “S04 4” MADHUBAN 18
“S04 4” CHIRAIA 20
“S04 4” DHAKA 21
“S04 4” SHEOHAR 22
“S04 4” RIGA 23
“S04 4” BELSAND 30
BR SITAMARHI “S04 5” BATHNAHA 24
“S04 5” PARIHAR 25
“S04 5” SURSAND 26
“S04 5” BAJPATTI 27
“S04 5” SITAMARHI 28
“S04 5” RUNISAIDPUR 29
BR MADHUBANI “S04 6” HARLAKHI 31
“S04 6” BENIPATTI 32
“S04 6” BISFI 35
“S04 6” MADHUBANI 36
“S04 6” KEOTI 86
“S04 6” JALE 87
BR JHANJHARPUR “S04 7” KHAJAULI 33
“S04 7” BABUBARHI 34
“S04 7” RAJNAGAR 37
“S04 7” JHANJHARPUR 38
“S04 7” PHULPARAS 39
“S04 7” LAUKAHA 40
BR SUPAUL “S04 8” NIRMALI 41
“S04 8” PIPRA 42
“S04 8” SUPAUL 43
“S04 8” TRIBENIGANJ 44
“S04 8” CHHATAPUR 45
“S04 8” SINGHESHWAR 72
BR ARARIA “S04 9” NARPATGANJ 46
“S04 9” RANIGANJ 47
“S04 9” FORBESGANJ 48
“S04 9” ARARIA 49
“S04 9” JOKIHAT 50
“S04 9” SIKTI 51
BR KISHANGANJ “S04 10” BAHADURGANJ 52
“S04 10” THAKURGANJ 53
“S04 10” KISHANGANJ 54
“S04 10” KOCHADHAMAN 55
“S04 10” AMOUR 56
“S04 10” BAISI 57
BR KATIHAR “S04 11” KATIHAR 63
“S04 11” KADWA 64
“S04 11” BALRAMPUR 65
“S04 11” PRANPUR 66
“S04 11” MANIHARI 67
“S04 11” BARARI 68
BR PURNIA “S04 12” KASBA 58
“S04 12” BANMANKHI 59
“S04 12” RUPAULI 60
“S04 12” DHAMDAHA 61
“S04 12” PURNIA 62
“S04 12” KORHA 69
BR MADHEPURA “S04 13” ALAMNAGAR 70
“S04 13” BIHARIGANJ 71
“S04 13” MADHEPURA 73
“S04 13” SONBARSA 74
“S04 13” SAHARSA 75
“S04 13” MAHISHI 77
BR DARBHANGA “S04 14” GORA BAURAM 79
“S04 14” BENIPUR 80
“S04 14” ALINAGAR 81
“S04 14” DARBHANGA RURAL 82
“S04 14” DARBHANGA 83
“S04 14” BAHADURPUR 85
BR MUZAFFARPUR “S04 15” GAIGHAT 88
“S04 15” AURAI 89
“S04 15” BOCHAHA 91
“S04 15” SAKRA 92
“S04 15” KURHANI 93
“S04 15” MUZAFFARPUR 94
BR VAISHALI “S04 16” MINAPUR 90
“S04 16” KANTI 95
“S04 16” BARURAJ 96
“S04 16” PAROO 97
“S04 16” SAHEBGANJ 98
“S04 16” VAISHALI 125
BR GOPALGANJ “S04 17” BAIKUNTHPUR 99
“S04 17” BARAULI 100
“S04 17” GOPALGANJ 101
“S04 17” KUCHAIKOTE 102
“S04 17” BHOREY 103
“S04 17” HATHUA 104
BR SIWAN “S04 18” SIWAN 105
“S04 18” ZIRADEI 106
“S04 18” DARAULI 107
“S04 18” RAGHUNATHPUR 108
“S04 18” DARAUNDHA 109
“S04 18” BARHARIA 110
BR MAHARAJGANJ “S04 19” GORIYAKOTHI 111
“S04 19” MAHARAJGANJ 112
“S04 19” EKMA 113
“S04 19” MANJHI 114
“S04 19” BANIAPUR 115
“S04 19” TARAIYA 116
BR SARAN “S04 20” MARHAURA 117
“S04 20” CHAPRA 118
“S04 20” GARKHA 119
“S04 20” AMNOUR 120
“S04 20” PARSA 121
“S04 20” SONEPUR 122
BR HAJIPUR “S04 21” HAJIPUR 123
“S04 21” LALGANJ 124
“S04 21” MAHUA 126
“S04 21” RAJA PAKAR 127
“S04 21” RAGHOPUR 128
“S04 21” MANHAR 129
BR UJIARPUR “S04 22” PATEPUR 130
“S04 22” UJIARPUR 134
“S04 22” MORWA 135
“S04 22” SARAIRANJAN 136
“S04 22” MOHIUDDINNAGAR 137
“S04 22” BIBHUTPUR 138
BR SAMASTIPUR “S04 23” KUSHESHWAR ASTHAN 78
“S04 23” HAYAGHAT 84
“S04 23” KALYANPUR 131
“S04 23” WARISNAGAR 132
“S04 23” SAMASTIPUR 133
“S04 23” ROSERA 139
BR BEGUSARAI “S04 24” CHERIA BARIARPUR 141
“S04 24” BACHHWARA 142
“S04 24” TEGHRA 143
“S04 24” MATIHANI 144
“S04 24” SAHEBPUR KAMAL 145
“S04 24” BEGUSARAI 146
“S04 24” BAKHRI 147
BR KHAGARIA “S04 25” SIMRI BAKHTIARPUR 76
“S04 25” HASANPUR 140
“S04 25” ALAULI 148
“S04 25” KHAGARIA 149
“S04 25” BELDAUR 150
“S04 25” PARBATTA 151
BR BHAGALPUR “S04 26” BIHPUR 152
“S04 26” GOPALPUR 153
“S04 26” PIRPAINTI 154
“S04 26” KAHALGAON 155
“S04 26” BHAGALPUR 156
“S04 26” NATHNAGAR 158
BR BANKA “S04 27” SULTANGANJ 157
“S04 27” AMARPUR 159
“S04 27” DHURAIYA 160
“S04 27” BANKA 161
“S04 27” KATORIA 162
“S04 27” BELHAR 163
BR MUNGER “S04 28” MUNGER 165
“S04 28” JAMALPUR 166
“S04 28” SURYAGARHA 167
“S04 28” LAKHISARAI 168
“S04 28” MOKAMA 178
“S04 28” BARH 179
BR NALANDA “S04 29” ASTHAWAN 171
“S04 29” BISHARSHARIF 172
“S04 29” RAJGIR 173
“S04 29” ISLAMPUR 174
“S04 29” HILSA 175
“S04 29” NALANDA 176
“S04 29” HARNAUT 177
BR PATNA SAHIB “S04 30” BAKHTIARPUR 180
“S04 30” DIGHA 181
“S04 30” BANKIPUR 182
“S04 30” KUMHRARH 183
“S04 30” PATNA SAHIB 184
“S04 30” FATWAH 185
BR PATALIPUTRA “S04 31” DANAPUR 186
“S04 31” MANER 187
“S04 31” PHULWARI 188
“S04 31” MASAURHI 189
“S04 31” PALIGANJ 190
“S04 31” BIKRAM 191
BR ARRAH “S04 32” SANDESH 192
“S04 32” BARHARA 193
“S04 32” ARRAH 194
“S04 32” AGIAON 195
“S04 32” TARARI 196
“S04 32” JAGDISHPUR 197
“S04 32” SHAHPUR 198
BR BUXAR “S04 33” BARHAMPUR 199
“S04 33” BUXAR 200
“S04 33” DUMRAON 201
“S04 33” RAJPUR 202
“S04 33” RAMGARH 203
“S04 33” DINARA 210
BR SASARAM “S04 34” MOHANIA 204
“S04 34” BHABUA 205
“S04 34” CHAINPUR 206
“S04 34” CHENARI 207
“S04 34” SASARAM 208
“S04 34” KARGAHAR 209
BR KARAKAT “S04 35” NOKHA 211
“S04 35” DEHRI 212
“S04 35” KARAKAT 213
“S04 35” GOH 219
“S04 35” OBRA 220
“S04 35” NABINAGAR 221
BR JAHANABAD “S04 36” ARWAL 214
“S04 36” KURTHA 215
“S04 36” JAHANABAD 216
“S04 36” GHOSI 217
“S04 36” MAKHDUMPUR 218
“S04 36” ATRI 233
BR AURANGABAD “S04 37” KUTUMBA 222
“S04 37” AURANGABAD 223
“S04 37” RAFIGANJ 224
“S04 37” GURUA 225
“S04 37” IMAMGANJ 227
“S04 37” TIKARI 231
BR GAYA “S04 38” SHERGHATI 226
“S04 38” BARACHATTI 228
“S04 38” BODH GAYA 229
“S04 38” GAYA TOWN 230
“S04 38” BELAGANJ 232
“S04 38” WAZIRGANJ 234
BR NAWADA “S04 39” BARBIGHA 170
“S04 39” RAJAULI 235
“S04 39” HISUA 236
“S04 39” NAWADA 237
“S04 39” GOBINDPUR 238
“S04 39” WARSALIGANJ 239
BR JAMUI “S04 40” TARAPUR 164
“S04 40” SHEIKHPURA 169
“S04 40” SIKANDRA 240
“S04 40” JAMUI 241
“S04 40” JHAJHA 242
“S04 40” CHAKAI 243
GA NORTH GOA “S05 1” MANDREM 1
“S05 1” PERNEM 2
“S05 1” BICHOLIM 3
“S05 1” TIVIM 4
“S05 1” MAPUSA 5
“S05 1” SIOLIM 6
“S05 1” SALIGAO 7
“S05 1” CALANGUTE 8
“S05 1” PORVORIM 9
“S05 1” ALDONA 10
“S05 1” PANAJI 11
“S05 1” TALEIGAO 12
“S05 1” ST. CRUZ 13
“S05 1” ST. ANDRE 14
“S05 1” CUMBARJUA 15
“S05 1” MAEM 16
“S05 1” SANQUELIM 17
“S05 1” PORIEM 18
“S05 1” VALPOI 19
“S05 1” PRIOL 20
GA SOUTH GOA “S05 2” PONDA 21
“S05 2” SIRODA 22
“S05 2” MARCAIM 23
“S05 2” MORMUGAO 24
“S05 2” VASCO-DA-GAMA 25
“S05 2” DABOLIM 26
“S05 2” CORTALIM 27
“S05 2” NUVEM 28
“S05 2” CURTORIM 29
“S05 2” FATORDA 30
“S05 2” MARGAO 31
“S05 2” BENAULIM 32
“S05 2” NAVELIM 33
“S05 2” CUNCOLIM 34
“S05 2” VELIM 35
“S05 2” QUEPEM 36
“S05 2” CURCHOREM 37
“S05 2” SANVORDEM 38
“S05 2” SANGUEM 39
“S05 2” CANACONA 40
GJ KACHCHH “S06 1” ABDASA 1
“S06 1” MANDVI 2
“S06 1” BHUJ 3
“S06 1” ANJAR 4
“S06 1” GANDHIDHAM 5
“S06 1” RAPAR 6
“S06 1” MORBI 65
GJ BANASKANTHA “S06 2” VAV 7
“S06 2” THARAD 8
“S06 2” DHANERA 9
“S06 2” DANTA 10
“S06 2” PALANPUR 12
“S06 2” DEESA 13
“S06 2” DEODAR 14
GJ PATAN “S06 3” VADGAM 11
“S06 3” KANKREJ 15
“S06 3” RADHANPUR 16
“S06 3” CHANASMA 17
“S06 3” PATAN 18
“S06 3” SIDHPUR 19
“S06 3” KHERALU 20
GJ MAHESANA “S06 4” UNJHA 21
“S06 4” VISNAGAR 22
“S06 4” BECHARAJI 23
“S06 4” KADI 24
“S06 4” MAHESANA 25
“S06 4” VIJAPUR 26
“S06 4” MANSA 37
GJ SABARKANTHA “S06 5” HIMATNAGAR 27
“S06 5” IDAR 28
“S06 5” KHEDBRAHMA 29
“S06 5” BHILODA 30
“S06 5” MODASA 31
“S06 5” BAYAD 32
“S06 5” PRANTIJ 33
GJ GANDHINAGAR “S06 6” GANDHINAGAR NORTH 36
“S06 6” KALOL 38
“S06 6” SANAND 40
“S06 6” GHATLODIA 41
“S06 6” VEJALPUR 42
“S06 6” NARANPURA 45
“S06 6” SABARMATI 55
GJ AHMEDABAD EAST “S06 7” DEHGAM 34
“S06 7” GANDHINAGAR SOUTH 35
“S06 7” VATVA 43
“S06 7” NIKOL 46
“S06 7” NARODA 47
“S06 7” THAKKARBAPA NAGAR 48
“S06 7” BAPUNAGAR 49
GJ AHMEDABAD WEST “S06 8” ELLISBRIDGE 44
“S06 8” AMRAIWADI 50
“S06 8” DARIAPUR 51
“S06 8” JAMALPUR – KHADIA 52
“S06 8” MANINAGAR 53
“S06 8” DANILIMDA 54
“S06 8” ASARWA 56
GJ SURENDRANAGAR “S06 9” VIRAMGAM 39
“S06 9” DHANDHUKA 59
“S06 9” DASADA 60
“S06 9” LIMBDI 61
“S06 9” WADHWAN 62
“S06 9” CHOTILA 63
“S06 9” DHRANGADHRA 64
GJ RAJKOT “S06 10” TANKARA 66
“S06 10” WANKANER 67
“S06 10” RAJKOT EAST 68
“S06 10” RAJKOT WEST 69
“S06 10” RAJKOT SOUTH 70
“S06 10” RAJKOT RURAL 71
“S06 10” JASDAN 72
GJ PORBANDAR “S06 11” GONDAL 73
“S06 11” JETPUR 74
“S06 11” DHORAJI 75
“S06 11” PORBANDAR 83
“S06 11” KUTIYANA 84
“S06 11” MANAVADAR 85
“S06 11” KESHOD 88
GJ JAMNAGAR “S06 12” KALAVAD 76
“S06 12” JAMNAGR RURAL 77
“S06 12” JAMNAGAR NORTH 78
“S06 12” JAMNAGAR SOUTH 79
“S06 12” JAMJODHPUR 80
“S06 12” KHAMBHALIA 81
“S06 12” DWARKA 82
GJ JUNAGADH “S06 13” JUNAGADH 86
“S06 13” VISAVADAR 87
“S06 13” MANGROL 89
“S06 13” SOMNATH 90
“S06 13” TALALA 91
“S06 13” KODINAR 92
“S06 13” UNA 93
GJ AMRELI “S06 14” DHARI 94
“S06 14” AMRELI 95
“S06 14” LATHI 96
“S06 14” SAVARKUNDLA 97
“S06 14” RAJULA 98
“S06 14” MAHUVA 99
“S06 14” GARIADHAR 101
GJ BHAVNAGAR “S06 15” TALAJA 100
“S06 15” PALITANA 102
“S06 15” BHAVNAGAR RURAL 103
“S06 15” BHAVNAGAR EAST 104
“S06 15” BHAVNAGAR WEST 105
“S06 15” GADHADA 106
“S06 15” BOTAD 107
GJ ANAND “S06 16” KHAMBHAT 108
“S06 16” BORSAD 109
“S06 16” ANKLAV 110
“S06 16” UMRETH 111
“S06 16” ANAND 112
“S06 16” PETLAD 113
“S06 16” SOJITRA 114
GJ KHEDA “S06 17” DASKROI 57
“S06 17” DHOLKA 58
“S06 17” MATAR 115
“S06 17” NADIAD 116
“S06 17” MEHMEDABAD 117
“S06 17” MAHUDHA 118
“S06 17” KAPADVANJ 120
GJ PANCHMAHAL “S06 18” THASRA 119
“S06 18” BALASINOR 121
“S06 18” LUNAWADA 122
“S06 18” SHEHRA 124
“S06 18” MORVA HADAF 125
“S06 18” GODHRA 126
“S06 18” KALOL 127
GJ DAHOD “S06 19” SANTRAMPUR 123
“S06 19” FATEPURA 129
“S06 19” JHALOD 130
“S06 19” LIMKHEDA 131
“S06 19” DAHOD 132
“S06 19” GARBADA 133
“S06 19” DEVGADBARIA 134
GJ VADODARA “S06 20” SAVLI 135
“S06 20” VAGHODIA 136
“S06 20” VADODARA CITY 141
“S06 20” SAYAJIGUNJ 142
“S06 20” AKOTA 143
“S06 20” RAOPURA 144
“S06 20” MANJALPUR 145
GJ CHHOTA UDAIPUR “S06 21” HALOL 128
“S06 21” CHHOTA UDAIPUR 137
“S06 21” JETPUR 138
“S06 21” SANKHEDA 139
“S06 21” DABHOI 140
“S06 21” PADRA 146
“S06 21” NANDOD 148
GJ BHARUCH “S06 22” KARJAN 147
“S06 22” DEDIAPADA 149
“S06 22” JAMBUSAR 150
“S06 22” VAGRA 151
“S06 22” JHAGADIA 152
“S06 22” BHARUCH 153
“S06 22” ANKLESHWAR 154
GJ BARDOLI “S06 23” MANGROL 156
“S06 23” MANDVI 157
“S06 23” KAMREJ 158
“S06 23” BARDOLI 169
“S06 23” MAHUVA 170
“S06 23” VYARA 171
“S06 23” NIZAR 172
GJ SURAT “S06 24” OLPAD 155
“S06 24” SURAT EAST 159
“S06 24” SURAT NORTH 160
“S06 24” VARACHHA ROAD 161
“S06 24” KARANJ 162
“S06 24” KATARGAM 166
“S06 24” SURAT WEST 167
GJ NAVSARI “S06 25” LIMBAYAT 163
“S06 25” UDHNA 164
“S06 25” MAJURA 165
“S06 25” CHORYASI 168
“S06 25” JALALPORE 174
“S06 25” NAVSARI 175
“S06 25” GANDEVI 176
GJ VALSAD “S06 26” DANGS 173
“S06 26” VANSDA 177
“S06 26” DHARAMPUR 178
“S06 26” VALSAD 179
“S06 26” PARDI 180
“S06 26” KAPRADA 181
“S06 26” UMBERGAON 182
HR AMBALA “S07 1” KALKA 1
“S07 1” PANCHKULA 2
“S07 1” NARAINGARH 3
“S07 1” AMBALA CANTT. 4
“S07 1” AMBALA CITY 5
“S07 1” MULANA 6
“S07 1” SADHAURA 7
“S07 1” JAGADHRI 8
“S07 1” YAMUNANAGAR 9
HR KURUKSHETRA “S07 2” RADAUR 10
“S07 2” LADWA 11
“S07 2” SHAHBAD 12
“S07 2” THANESAR 13
“S07 2” PEHOWA 14
“S07 2” GUHLA 15
“S07 2” KALAYAT 16
“S07 2” KAITHAL 17
“S07 2” PUNDRI 18
HR SIRSA “S07 3” NARWANA 38
“S07 3” TOHANA 39
“S07 3” FATEHABAD 40
“S07 3” RATIA 41
“S07 3” KALAWALI 42
“S07 3” DABWALI 43
“S07 3” RANIA 44
“S07 3” SIRSA 45
“S07 3” ELLENABAD 46
HR HISAR “S07 4” UCHANA KALAN 37
“S07 4” ADAMPUR 47
“S07 4” UKLANA 48
“S07 4” NARNAUND 49
“S07 4” HANSI 50
“S07 4” BARWALA 51
“S07 4” HISAR 52
“S07 4” NALWA 53
“S07 4” BAWANI KHERA 59
HR KARNAL “S07 5” NILOKHERI 19
“S07 5” INDRI 20
“S07 5” KARNAL 21
“S07 5” GHARAUNDA 22
“S07 5” ASSANDH 23
“S07 5” PANIPAT RURAL 24
“S07 5” PANIPAT CITY 25
“S07 5” ISRANA 26
“S07 5” SAMALKHA 27
HR SONIPAT “S07 6” GANAUR 28
“S07 6” RAI 29
“S07 6” KHARKHAUDA 30
“S07 6” SONIPAT 31
“S07 6” GOHANA 32
“S07 6” BARODA 33
“S07 6” JULANA 34
“S07 6” SAFIDON 35
“S07 6” JIND 36
HR ROHTAK “S07 7” MEHAM 60
“S07 7” GARHI SAMPLA-KILOI 61
“S07 7” ROHTAK 62
“S07 7” KALANAUR 63
“S07 7” BAHADURGARH 64
“S07 7” BADLI 65
“S07 7” JHAJJAR 66
“S07 7” BERI 67
“S07 7” KOSLI 73
HR BHIWANI-MAHENDRAGARH “S07 8” LOHARU 54
“S07 8” BADHRA 55
“S07 8” DADRI 56
“S07 8” BHIWANI 57
“S07 8” TOSHAM 58
“S07 8” ATELI 68
“S07 8” MAHENDRAGARH 69
“S07 8” NARNAUL 70
“S07 8” NANGAL CHAUDHRY 71
HR GURGAON “S07 9” BAWAL 72
“S07 9” REWARI 74
“S07 9” PATAUDI 75
“S07 9” BADSHAHPUR 76
“S07 9” GURGAON 77
“S07 9” SOHNA 78
“S07 9” NUH 79
“S07 9” FEROZEPUR JHIRKA 80
“S07 9” PUNAHANA 81
HR FARIDABAD “S07 10” HATHIN 82
“S07 10” HODAL 83
“S07 10” PALWAL 84
“S07 10” PRITHLA 85
“S07 10” FARIDABAD NIT 86
“S07 10” BADKHAL 87
“S07 10” BALLABHGARH 88
“S07 10” FARIDABAD 89
“S07 10” TIGAON 90
HP KANGRA “S08 1” CHURAH 1
“S08 1” CHAMBA 3
“S08 1” DALHOUSIE 4
“S08 1” BHATTIYAT 5
“S08 1” NURPUR 6
“S08 1” INDORA 7
“S08 1” FATEHPUR 8
“S08 1” JAWALI 9
“S08 1” JAWALAMUKHI 12
“S08 1” JAISINGHPUR 13
“S08 1” SULLAH 14
“S08 1” NAGROTA 15
“S08 1” KANGRA 16
“S08 1” SHAHPUR 17
“S08 1” DHARAMSHALA 18
“S08 1” PALAMPUR 19
“S08 1” BAIJNATH 20
HP MANDI “S08 2” BHARMOUR 2
“S08 2” LAHAUL & SPITI 21
“S08 2” MANALI 22
“S08 2” KULLU 23
“S08 2” BANJAR 24
“S08 2” ANNI 25
“S08 2” KARSOG 26
“S08 2” SUNDERNAGAR 27
“S08 2” NACHAN 28
“S08 2” SERAJ 29
“S08 2” DARANG 30
“S08 2” JOGINDERNAGAR 31
“S08 2” MANDI 33
“S08 2” BALH 34
“S08 2” SARKAGHAT 35
“S08 2” RAMPUR 66
“S08 2” KINNAUR 68
HP HAMIRPUR “S08 3” DEHRA 10
“S08 3” JASWAN-PRAGPUR 11
“S08 3” DHARAMPUR 32
“S08 3” BHORANJ 36
“S08 3” SUJANPUR 37
“S08 3” HAMIRPUR 38
“S08 3” BARSAR 39
“S08 3” NADAUN 40
“S08 3” CHINTPURNI 41
“S08 3” GAGRET 42
“S08 3” HAROLI 43
“S08 3” UNA 44
“S08 3” KUTLEHAR 45
“S08 3” JHANDUTA 46
“S08 3” GHUMARWIN 47
“S08 3” BILASPUR 48
“S08 3” SRI NAINA DEVIJI 49
HP SHIMLA “S08 4” ARKI 50
“S08 4” NALAGARH 51
“S08 4” DOON 52
“S08 4” SOLAN 53
“S08 4” KASAULI 54
“S08 4” PACHHAD 55
“S08 4” NAHAN 56
“S08 4” SRI RENUKAJI 57
“S08 4” PAONTA SAHIB 58
“S08 4” SHILLAI 59
“S08 4” CHOPAL 60
“S08 4” THEOG 61
“S08 4” KASUMPTI 62
“S08 4” SHIMLA 63
“S08 4” SHIMLA RURAL 64
“S08 4” JUBBAL-KOTKHAI 65
“S08 4” ROHRU 67
JK BARAMULLA “S09 1” KARNAH 1
“S09 1” KUPWARA 2
“S09 1” LOLAB 3
“S09 1” HANDWARA 4
“S09 1” LANGATE 5
“S09 1” URI 6
“S09 1” RAFIABAD 7
“S09 1” SOPORE 8
“S09 1” GUREZ 9
“S09 1” BANDIPORA 10
“S09 1” SONAWARI 11
“S09 1” SANGRAMA 12
“S09 1” BARAMULLA 13
“S09 1” GULMARG 14
“S09 1” PATTAN 15
JK SRINAGAR “S09 2” KANGAN 16
“S09 2” GANDERBAL 17
“S09 2” HAZRATBAL 18
“S09 2” ZADIBAL 19
“S09 2” EIDGAH 20
“S09 2” KHANYAR 21
“S09 2” HABBA KADAL 22
“S09 2” AMIRA KADAL 23
“S09 2” SONAWAR 24
“S09 2” BATMALOO 25
“S09 2” CHADOORA 26
“S09 2” BUDGAM 27
“S09 2” BEERWAH 28
“S09 2” KHAN SAHIB 29
“S09 2” CHRAR-I-SHARIEF 30
JK ANANTNAG “S09 3” TRAL 31
“S09 3” PAMPORE 32
“S09 3” PULWAMA 33
“S09 3” RAJPORA 34
“S09 3” WACHI 35
“S09 3” SHOPIAN 36
“S09 3” NOORABAD 37
“S09 3” KULGAM 38
“S09 3” HOM SHALI BUGH 39
“S09 3” ANANTNAG 40
“S09 3” DEVSAR 41
“S09 3” DOORU 42
“S09 3” KOKERNAG 43
“S09 3” SHANGUS 44
“S09 3” BIJBEHARA 45
“S09 3” PAHALGAM 46
JK LADAKH “S09 4” NUBRA 47
“S09 4” LEH 48
“S09 4” KARGIL 49
“S09 4” ZANSKAR 50
JK UDHAMPUR “S09 5” KISHTWAR 51
“S09 5” INDERWAL 52
“S09 5” DODA 53
“S09 5” BHADERWAH 54
“S09 5” RAMBAN 55
“S09 5” BANIHAL 56
“S09 5” GULAB GARH 57
“S09 5” REASI 58
“S09 5” GOOL ARNAS 59
“S09 5” UDHAMPUR 60
“S09 5” CHENANI 61
“S09 5” RAM NAGAR 62
“S09 5” BANI 63
“S09 5” BASOHLI 64
“S09 5” KATHUA 65
“S09 5” BILLAWAR 66
“S09 5” HIRA NAGAR 67
JK JAMMU “S09 6” SAMBA 68
“S09 6” VIJAY PUR 69
“S09 6” NAGROTA 70
“S09 6” GANDHI NAGAR 71
“S09 6” JAMMU EAST 72
“S09 6” JAMMU WEST 73
“S09 6” BISHNAH 74
“S09 6” RANBIR SINGH PURA 75
“S09 6” SUCHET GARH 76
“S09 6” MARH 77
“S09 6” RAIPUR DOMANA 78
“S09 6” AKHNOOR 79
“S09 6” CHHAMB 80
“S09 6” NOWSHERA 81
“S09 6” DARHAL 82
“S09 6” RAJOURI 83
“S09 6” KALA KOTE 84
“S09 6” SURAN KOTE 85
“S09 6” MENDHAR 86
“S09 6” POONCH HAVELI 87
KA CHIKKODI “S10 1” NIPPANI 1
“S10 1” CHIKKODI-SADALGA 2
“S10 1” ATHANI 3
“S10 1” KAGWAD 4
“S10 1” KUDACHI 5
“S10 1” RAYBAG 6
“S10 1” HUKKERI 7
“S10 1” YEMKANMARDI 10
KA BELGAUM “S10 2” ARABHAVI 8
“S10 2” GOKAK 9
“S10 2” BELGAUM UTTAR 11
“S10 2” BELGAUM DAKSHIN 12
“S10 2” BELGAUM RURAL 13
“S10 2” BAILHONGAL 16
“S10 2” SAUNDATTI YELLAMMA 17
“S10 2” RAMDURG 18
KA BAGALKOT “S10 3” MUDHOL 19
“S10 3” TERDAL 20
“S10 3” JAMKHANDI 21
“S10 3” BILGI 22
“S10 3” BADAMI 23
“S10 3” BAGALKOT 24
“S10 3” HUNGUND 25
“S10 3” NARGUND 68
KA BIJAPUR “S10 4” MUDDEBIHAL 26
“S10 4” DEVAR HIPPARGI 27
“S10 4” BASAVANA BAGEVADI 28
“S10 4” BABALESHWAR 29
“S10 4” BIJAPUR CITY 30
“S10 4” NAGTHAN 31
“S10 4” INDI 32
“S10 4” SINDGI 33
KA GULBARGA “S10 5” AFZALPUR 34
“S10 5” JEVARGI 35
“S10 5” GURMITKAL 39
“S10 5” CHITTAPUR 40
“S10 5” SEDAM 41
“S10 5” GULBARGA RURAL 43
“S10 5” GULBARGA DAKSHIN 44
“S10 5” GULBARGA UTTAR 45
KA RAICHUR “S10 6” SHORAPUR 36
“S10 6” SHAHAPUR 37
“S10 6” YADGIR 38
“S10 6” RAICHUR RURAL 53
“S10 6” RAICHUR 54
“S10 6” MANVI 55
“S10 6” DEVADURGA 56
“S10 6” LINGSUGUR 57
KA BIDAR “S10 7” CHINCHOLI 42
“S10 7” ALAND 46
“S10 7” BASAVAKALYAN 47
“S10 7” HOMNABAD 48
“S10 7” BIDAR SOUTH 49
“S10 7” BIDAR 50
“S10 7” BHALKI 51
“S10 7” AURAD 52
KA KOPPAL “S10 8” SINDHANUR 58
“S10 8” MASKI 59
“S10 8” KUSHTAGI 60
“S10 8” KANAKAGIRI 61
“S10 8” GANGAWATI 62
“S10 8” YELBURGA 63
“S10 8” KOPPAL 64
“S10 8” SIRUGUPPA 92
KA BELLARY “S10 9” HADAGALLI 88
“S10 9” HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI 89
“S10 9” VIJAYANAGARA 90
“S10 9” KAMPLI 91
“S10 9” BELLARY 93
“S10 9” BELLARY CITY 94
“S10 9” SANDUR 95
“S10 9” KUDLIGI 96
KA HAVERI “S10 10” SHIRAHATTI 65
“S10 10” GADAG 66
“S10 10” RON 67
“S10 10” HANGAL 82
“S10 10” HAVERI 84
“S10 10” BYADGI 85
“S10 10” HIREKERUR 86
“S10 10” RANIBENNUR 87
KA DHARWAD “S10 11” NAVALGUND 69
“S10 11” KUNDGOL 70
“S10 11” DHARWAD 71
“S10 11” HUBLI-DHARWAD-EAST 72
“S10 11” HUBLI-DHARWAD-CENTRAL 73
“S10 11” HUBLI-DHARWAD- WEST 74
“S10 11” KALGHATGI 75
“S10 11” SHIGGAON 83
KA UTTARA KANNADA “S10 12” KHANAPUR 14
“S10 12” KITTUR 15
“S10 12” HALIYAL 76
“S10 12” KARWAR 77
“S10 12” KUMTA 78
“S10 12” BHATKAL 79
“S10 12” SIRSI 80
“S10 12” YELLAPUR 81
KA DAVANAGERE “S10 13” JAGALUR 103
“S10 13” HARAPANAHALLI 104
“S10 13” HARIHAR 105
“S10 13” DAVANAGERE NORTH 106
“S10 13” DAVANAGERE SOUTH 107
“S10 13” MAYAKONDA 108
“S10 13” CHANNAGIRI 109
“S10 13” HONNALI 110
KA SHIMOGA “S10 14” SHIMOGA RURAL 111
“S10 14” BHADRAVATI 112
“S10 14” SHIMOGA 113
“S10 14” TIRTHAHALLI 114
“S10 14” SHIKARIPURA 115
“S10 14” SORAB 116
“S10 14” SAGAR 117
“S10 14” BYNDOOR 118
KA UDUPI CHIKMAGALUR “S10 15” KUNDAPURA 119
“S10 15” UDUPI 120
“S10 15” KAPU 121
“S10 15” KARKAL 122
“S10 15” SRINGERI 123
“S10 15” MUDIGERE 124
“S10 15” CHIKMAGALUR 125
“S10 15” TARIKERE 126
KA HASSAN “S10 16” KADUR 127
“S10 16” SHRAVANABELAGOLA 193
“S10 16” ARSIKERE 194
“S10 16” BELUR 195
“S10 16” HASSAN 196
“S10 16” HOLENARASIPUR 197
“S10 16” ARKALGUD 198
“S10 16” SAKLESHPUR 199
KA DAKSHINA KANNADA “S10 17” BELTHANGADY 200
“S10 17” MOODABIDRI 201
“S10 17” MANGALORE CITY NORTH 202
“S10 17” MANGALORE CITY SOUTH 203
“S10 17” MANGALORE 204
“S10 17” BANTVAL 205
“S10 17” PUTTUR 206
“S10 17” SULLIA 207
KA CHITRADURGA “S10 18” MOLAKALMURU 97
“S10 18” CHALLAKERE 98
“S10 18” CHITRADURGA 99
“S10 18” HIRIYUR 100
“S10 18” HOSADURGA 101
“S10 18” HOLALKERE 102
“S10 18” SIRA 136
“S10 18” PAVAGADA 137
KA TUMKUR “S10 19” CHIKNAYAKANHALLI 128
“S10 19” TIPTUR 129
“S10 19” TURUVEKERE 130
“S10 19” TUMKUR CITY 132
“S10 19” TUMKUR RURAL 133
“S10 19” KORATAGERE 134
“S10 19” GUBBI 135
“S10 19” MADHUGIRI 138
KA MANDYA “S10 20” MALAVALLI 186
“S10 20” MADDUR 187
“S10 20” MELUKOTE 188
“S10 20” MANDYA 189
“S10 20” SHRIRANGAPATTANA 190
“S10 20” NAGAMANGALA 191
“S10 20” KRISHNARAJPET 192
“S10 20” KRISHNARAJANAGARA 211
KA MYSORE “S10 21” MADIKERI 208
“S10 21” VIRAJPET 209
“S10 21” PIRIYAPATNA 210
“S10 21” HUNSUR 212
“S10 21” CHAMUNDESHWARI 215
“S10 21” KRISHNARAJA 216
“S10 21” CHAMARAJA 217
“S10 21” NARASIMHARAJA 218
KA CHAMARAJANAGAR “S10 22” HEGGADADEVANKOTE 213
“S10 22” NANJANGUD 214
“S10 22” VARUNA 219
“S10 22” T.NARASIPUR 220
“S10 22” HANUR 221
“S10 22” KOLLEGAL 222
“S10 22” CHAMARAJANAGAR 223
“S10 22” GUNDLUPET 224
KA BANGALORE RURAL “S10 23” KUNIGAL 131
“S10 23” RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR 154
“S10 23” BANGALORE SOUTH 176
“S10 23” ANEKAL 177
“S10 23” MAGADI 182
“S10 23” RAMANAGARAM 183
“S10 23” KANAKAPURA 184
“S10 23” CHANNAPATNA 185
KA BANGALORE NORTH “S10 24” K.R.PURA 151
“S10 24” BYATARAYANAPURA 152
“S10 24” YESHVANTHAPURA 153
“S10 24” DASARAHALLI 155
“S10 24” MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT 156
“S10 24” MALLESHWARAM 157
“S10 24” HEBBAL 158
“S10 24” PULAKESHINAGAR 159
KA BANGALORE CENTRAL “S10 25” SARVAGNANAGAR 160
“S10 25” C.V. RAMAN NAGAR 161
“S10 25” SHIVAJINAGAR 162
“S10 25” SHANTI NAGAR 163
“S10 25” GANDHI NAGAR 164
“S10 25” RAJAJI NAGAR 165
“S10 25” CHAMRAJPET 168
“S10 25” MAHADEVAPURA 174
KA BANGALORE SOUTH “S10 26” GOVINDRAJ NAGAR 166
“S10 26” VIJAY NAGAR 167
“S10 26” CHICKPET 169
“S10 26” BASAVANAGUDI 170
“S10 26” PADMANABA NAGAR 171
“S10 26” B.T.M LAYOUT 172
“S10 26” JAYANAGAR 173
“S10 26” BOMMANAHALLI 175
KA CHIKKBALLAPUR “S10 27” GAURIBIDANUR 139
“S10 27” BAGEPALLI 140
“S10 27” CHIKKABALLAPUR 141
“S10 27” YELAHANKA 150
“S10 27” HOSAKOTE 178
“S10 27” DEVANAHALLI 179
“S10 27” DODDABALLAPUR 180
“S10 27” NELAMANGALA 181
KA KOLAR “S10 28” SIDLAGHATTA 142
“S10 28” CHINTAMANI 143
“S10 28” SRINIVASPUR 144
“S10 28” MULBAGAL 145
“S10 28” KOLAR GOLD FIELD 146
“S10 28” BANGARAPET 147
“S10 28” KOLAR 148
“S10 28” MALUR 149
KL KASARAGOD “S11 1” MANJESHWAR 1
“S11 1” KASARAGOD 2
“S11 1” UDUMA 3
“S11 1” KANHANGAD 4
“S11 1” TRIKARIPUR 5
“S11 1” PAYYANNUR 6
“S11 1” KALLIASSERI 7
KL KANNUR “S11 2” TALIPARAMBA 8
“S11 2” IRIKKUR 9
“S11 2” AZHIKODE 10
“S11 2” KANNUR 11
“S11 2” DHARMADAM 12
“S11 2” MATTANNUR 15
“S11 2” PERAVOOR 16
KL VADAKARA “S11 3” THALASSERY 13
“S11 3” KUTHUPARAMBA 14
“S11 3” VADAKARA 20
“S11 3” KUTTIADI 21
“S11 3” NADAPURAM 22
“S11 3” QUILANDY 23
“S11 3” PERAMBRA 24
KL WAYANAD “S11 4” MANANTHAVADY 17
“S11 4” SULTHANBATHERY 18
“S11 4” KALPETTA 19
“S11 4” THIRUVANMBADI 32
“S11 4” ERNAD 34
“S11 4” NILAMBUR 35
“S11 4” WANDOOR 36
KL KOZHIKODE “S11 5” BALUSSERI 25
“S11 5” ELATHUR 26
“S11 5” KOZHIKODE NORTH 27
“S11 5” KOZHIKODE SOUTH 28
“S11 5” BEYPORE 29
“S11 5” KUNNAMANGALAM 30
“S11 5” KODUVALLY 31
KL MALAPPURAM “S11 6” KONDOTTY 33
“S11 6” MANJERI 37
“S11 6” PERINTHALMANNA 38
“S11 6” MANKADA 39
“S11 6” MALAPPURAM 40
“S11 6” VENGARA 41
“S11 6” VALLIKKUNNU 42
KL PONNANI “S11 7” TIRURANGADI 43
“S11 7” TANUR 44
“S11 7” TIRUR 45
“S11 7” KOTTAKKAL 46
“S11 7” THAVANUR 47
“S11 7” PONNANI 48
“S11 7” THRITHALA 49
KL PALAKKAD “S11 8” PATTAMBI 50
“S11 8” SHORANUR 51
“S11 8” OTTAPPALAM 52
“S11 8” KONGAD 53
“S11 8” MANNARKKAD 54
“S11 8” MALAMPUZHA 55
“S11 8” PALAKKAD 56
KL ALATHUR “S11 9” TARUR 57
“S11 9” CHITTUR 58
“S11 9” NEMMARA 59
“S11 9” ALATHUR 60
“S11 9” CHELAKKARA 61
“S11 9” KUNNAMKULAM 62
“S11 9” WADAKKANCHERY 65
KL THRISSUR “S11 10” GURUVAYOOR 63
“S11 10” MANALUR 64
“S11 10” OLLUR 66
“S11 10” THRISSUR 67
“S11 10” NATTIKA 68
“S11 10” IRINJALAKUDA 70
“S11 10” PUTHUKKAD 71
KL CHALAKUDY “S11 11” KAIPAMANGALAM 69
“S11 11” CHALAKUDY 72
“S11 11” KODUNGALLUR 73
“S11 11” PERUMBAVOOR 74
“S11 11” ANGAMALY 75
“S11 11” ALUVA 76
“S11 11” KUNNATHUNAD 84
KL ERNAKULAM “S11 12” KALAMASSERY 77
“S11 12” PARAVUR 78
“S11 12” VYPEEN 79
“S11 12” KOCHI 80
“S11 12” THRIPPUNITHURA 81
“S11 12” ERNAKULAM 82
“S11 12” THRIKKAKARA 83
KL IDUKKI “S11 13” MUVATTUPUZHA 86
“S11 13” KOTHAMANGALAM 87
“S11 13” DEVIKULAM 88
“S11 13” UDUMBANCHOLA 89
“S11 13” THODUPUZHA 90
“S11 13” IDUKKI 91
“S11 13” PEERUMADE 92
KL KOTTAYAM “S11 14” PIRAVOM 85
“S11 14” PALA 93
“S11 14” KADUTHURUTHY 94
“S11 14” VAIKOM 95
“S11 14” ETTUMANOOR 96
“S11 14” KOTTAYAM 97
“S11 14” PUTHUPPALLY 98
KL ALAPPUZHA “S11 15” AROOR 102
“S11 15” CHERTHALA 103
“S11 15” ALAPPUZHA 104
“S11 15” AMBALAPPUZHA 105
“S11 15” HARIPAD 107
“S11 15” KAYAMKULAM 108
“S11 15” KARUNAGAPPALLY 116
KL MAVELIKKARA “S11 16” CHANGANASSERY 99
“S11 16” KUTTANAD 106
“S11 16” MAVELIKKARA 109
“S11 16” CHENGANNUR 110
“S11 16” KUNNATHUR 118
“S11 16” KOTTARAKKARA 119
“S11 16” PATHANAPURAM 120
KL PATHANAMTHITTA “S11 17” KANJIRAPPALLY 100
“S11 17” POONJAR 101
“S11 17” THIRUVALLA 111
“S11 17” RANNI 112
“S11 17” ARANMULA 113
“S11 17” KONNI 114
“S11 17” ADOOR 115
KL KOLLAM “S11 18” CHAVARA 117
“S11 18” PUNALUR 121
“S11 18” CHADAYAMANGALAM 122
“S11 18” KUNDARA 123
“S11 18” KOLLAM 124
“S11 18” ERAVIPURAM 125
“S11 18” CHATHANNOOR 126
KL ATTINGAL “S11 19” VARKALA 127
“S11 19” ATTINGAL 128
“S11 19” CHIRAYINKEEZHU 129
“S11 19” NEDUMANGAD 130
“S11 19” VAMANAPURAM 131
“S11 19” ARUVIKKARA 136
“S11 19” KATTAKKADA 138
KL THIRUVANANTHAPURAM “S11 20” KAZHAKOOTTAM 132
“S11 20” VATTIYOOUKAVU 133
“S11 20” THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 134
“S11 20” NEMOM 135
“S11 20” PARASSALA 137
“S11 20” KOVALAM 139
“S11 20” NEYYATTINKARA 140
MP MORENA “S12 1” SHEOPUR 1
“S12 1” VIJAYPUR 2
“S12 1” SABALGARH 3
“S12 1” JOURA 4
“S12 1” SUMAWALI 5
“S12 1” MORENA 6
“S12 1” DIMANI 7
“S12 1” AMBAH 8
MP BHIND “S12 2” ATER 9
“S12 2” BHIND 10
“S12 2” LAHAR 11
“S12 2” MEHGAON 12
“S12 2” GOHAD 13
“S12 2” SEWDA 20
“S12 2” BHANDER 21
“S12 2” DATIA 22
MP GWALIOR “S12 3” GWALIOR RURAL 14
“S12 3” GWALIOR 15
“S12 3” GWALIOR EAST 16
“S12 3” GWALIOR SOUTH 17
“S12 3” BHITARWAR 18
“S12 3” DABRA 19
“S12 3” KARERA 23
“S12 3” POHARI 24
MP GUNA “S12 4” SHIVPURI 25
“S12 4” PICHHORE 26
“S12 4” KOLARAS 27
“S12 4” BAMORI 28
“S12 4” GUNA 29
“S12 4” ASHOK NAGAR 32
“S12 4” CHANDERI 33
“S12 4” MUNGAOLI 34
MP SAGAR “S12 5” BINA 35
“S12 5” KHURAI 36
“S12 5” SURKHI 37
“S12 5” NARYOLI 40
“S12 5” SAGAR 41
“S12 5” KURWAI 146
“S12 5” SIRONJ 147
“S12 5” SHAMSHABAD 148
MP TIKAMGARH “S12 6” TIKAMGARH 43
“S12 6” JATARA 44
“S12 6” PRITHVIPUR 45
“S12 6” NIWARI 46
“S12 6” KHARGAPUR 47
“S12 6” MAHARAJPUR 48
“S12 6” CHHATARPUR 51
“S12 6” BIJAWAR 52
MP DAMOH “S12 7” DEORI 38
“S12 7” REHLI 39
“S12 7” BANDA 42
“S12 7” MALHARA 53
“S12 7” PATHARIYA 54
“S12 7” DAMOH 55
“S12 7” JABERA 56
“S12 7” HATTA 57
MP KHAJURAHO “S12 8” CHANDLA 49
“S12 8” RAJNAGAR 50
“S12 8” PAWAI 58
“S12 8” GUNNAOR 59
“S12 8” PANNA 60
“S12 8” VIJAYRAGHAVGARH 92
“S12 8” MURWARA 93
“S12 8” BAHORIBAND 94
MP SATNA “S12 9” CHITRAKOOT 61
“S12 9” RAIGAON 62
“S12 9” SATNA 63
“S12 9” NAGOD 64
“S12 9” MAIHAR 65
“S12 9” AMARPATAN 66
“S12 9” RAMPUR-BAGHELAN 67
MP REWA “S12 10” SIRMOUR 68
“S12 10” SEMARIYA 69
“S12 10” TEONTHAR 70
“S12 10” MAUGANJ 71
“S12 10” DEOTALAB 72
“S12 10” MANGAWAN 73
“S12 10” REWA 74
“S12 10” GURH 75
MP SIDHI “S12 11” CHURHAT 76
“S12 11” SIDHI 77
“S12 11” SIHAWAL 78
“S12 11” CHITRANGI 79
“S12 11” SINGRAULI 80
“S12 11” DEVSAR 81
“S12 11” DHAUHANI 82
“S12 11” BEOHARI 83
MP SHAHDOL “S12 12” JAISINGHNAGAR 84
“S12 12” JAITPUR 85
“S12 12” KOTMA 86
“S12 12” ANUPPUR 87
“S12 12” PUSHPRAJGARH 88
“S12 12” BANDHAVGARH 89
“S12 12” MANPUR 90
“S12 12” BARWARA 91
MP JABALPUR “S12 13” PATAN 95
“S12 13” BARGI 96
“S12 13” JABALPUR PURBA 97
“S12 13” JABALPUR UTTAR 98
“S12 13” JABALPUR CANTT. 99
“S12 13” JABALPUR PASCHIM 100
“S12 13” PANAGAR 101
“S12 13” SIHORA 102
MP MANDLA “S12 14” SHAHPURA 103
“S12 14” DINDORI 104
“S12 14” BICHHIYA 105
“S12 14” NIWAS 106
“S12 14” MANDLA 107
“S12 14” KEOLARI 116
“S12 14” LAKHNADON 117
“S12 14” GOTEGAON 118
MP BALAGHAT “S12 15” BAIHAR 108
“S12 15” LANJI 109
“S12 15” PARASWADA 110
“S12 15” BALAGHAT 111
“S12 15” WARASEONI 112
“S12 15” KATANGI 113
“S12 15” BARGHAT 114
“S12 15” SEONI 115
MP CHHINDWARA “S12 16” JUNNARDEO 122
“S12 16” AMARWARA 123
“S12 16” CHURAI 124
“S12 16” SAUNSAR 125
“S12 16” CHHINDWARA 126
“S12 16” PARASIA 127
“S12 16” PANDHURNA 128
MP HOSHANGABAD “S12 17” NARSINGPUR 119
“S12 17” TENDUKHEDA 120
“S12 17” GADARWARA 121
“S12 17” SEONI-MALWA 136
“S12 17” HOSHANGABAD 137
“S12 17” SOHAGPUR 138
“S12 17” PIPARIYA 139
“S12 17” UDAIPURA 140
MP VIDISHA “S12 18” BHOJPUR 141
“S12 18” SANCHI 142
“S12 18” SILWANI 143
“S12 18” VIDISHA 144
“S12 18” BASODA 145
“S12 18” BUDHNI 156
“S12 18” ICHHAWAR 158
“S12 18” KHATEGAON 173
MP BHOPAL “S12 19” BERASIA 149
“S12 19” BHOPAL UTTAR 150
“S12 19” NARELA 151
“S12 19” BHOPAL DAKSHIN- PASCHIM 152
“S12 19” BHOPAL MADHYA 153
“S12 19” GOVINDPURA 154
“S12 19” HUZUR 155
“S12 19” SEHORE 159
MP RAJGARH “S12 20” CHACHOURA 30
“S12 20” RAGHOGARH 31
“S12 20” NARSINGHGARH 160
“S12 20” BIAORA 161
“S12 20” RAJGARH 162
“S12 20” KHILCHIPUR 163
“S12 20” SARANGPUR 164
“S12 20” SUSNER 165
MP DEWAS “S12 21” ASHTA 157
“S12 21” AGAR 166
“S12 21” SHAJAPUR 167
“S12 21” SHUJALPUR 168
“S12 21” KALAPIPAL 169
“S12 21” SONKATCH 170
“S12 21” DEWAS 171
“S12 21” HATPIPLIYA 172
MP UJJAIN “S12 22” NAGADA-KHACHROD 212
“S12 22” MAHIDPUR 213
“S12 22” TARANA 214
“S12 22” GHATIYA 215
“S12 22” UJJAIN UTTAR 216
“S12 22” UJJAIN DAKSHIN 217
“S12 22” BADNAGAR 218
“S12 22” ALOT 223
MP MANDSOUR “S12 23” JAORA 222
“S12 23” MANDSOUR 224
“S12 23” MALHARGARH 225
“S12 23” SUWASRA 226
“S12 23” GAROTH 227
“S12 23” MANASA 228
“S12 23” NEEMUCH 229
“S12 23” JAWAD 230
MP RATLAM “S12 24” ALIRAJPUR 191
“S12 24” JOBAT 192
“S12 24” JHABUA 193
“S12 24” THANDLA 194
“S12 24” PETLAWAD 195
“S12 24” RATLAM RURAL 219
“S12 24” RATLAM CITY 220
“S12 24” SAILANA 221
MP DHAR “S12 25” SARDARPUR 196
“S12 25” GANDHWANI 197
“S12 25” KUKSHI 198
“S12 25” MANAWAR 199
“S12 25” DHARAMPURI 200
“S12 25” DHAR 201
“S12 25” BADNAWAR 202
“S12 25” DR.AMBEDKARNAGAR-MHOW 209
MP INDORE “S12 26” DEPALPUR 203
“S12 26” INDORE-1 204
“S12 26” INDORE-2 205
“S12 26” INDORE-3 206
“S12 26” INDORE-4 207
“S12 26” INDORE-5 208
“S12 26” RAU 210
“S12 26” SANWER 211
MP KHARGONE “S12 27” MAHESHWAR 183
“S12 27” KASRAWAD 184
“S12 27” KHARGONE 185
“S12 27” BHAGWANPURA 186
“S12 27” SENDHAWA 187
“S12 27” RAJPUR 188
“S12 27” PANSEMAL 189
“S12 27” BADWANI 190
MP KHANDWA “S12 28” BAGALI 174
“S12 28” MANDHATA 175
“S12 28” KHANDWA 177
“S12 28” PANDHANA 178
“S12 28” NEPANAGAR 179
“S12 28” BURHANPUR 180
“S12 28” BHIKANGAON 181
“S12 28” BADWAH 182
MP BETUL “S12 29” MULTAI 129
“S12 29” AMLA 130
“S12 29” BETUL 131
“S12 29” GHORADONGRI 132
“S12 29” BHAINSDEHI 133
“S12 29” TIMARNI 134
“S12 29” HARDA 135
“S12 29” HARSUD 176
MH NANDURBAR “S13 1” AKKALKUWA 1
“S13 1” SHAHADA 2
“S13 1” NANDURBAR 3
“S13 1” NAWAPUR 4
“S13 1” SAKRI 5
“S13 1” SHIRPUR 9
MH DHULE “S13 2” DHULE RURAL 6
“S13 2” DHULE CITY 7
“S13 2” SINDKHEDA 8
“S13 2” MALEGAON CENTRAL 114
“S13 2” MALEGAON OUTER 115
“S13 2” BAGLAN 116
MH JALGAON “S13 3” JALGAON CITY 13
“S13 3” JALGAON RURAL 14
“S13 3” AMALNER 15
“S13 3” ERANDOL 16
“S13 3” CHALISGAON 17
“S13 3” PACHORA 18
MH RAVER “S13 4” CHOPDA 10
“S13 4” RAVER 11
“S13 4” BHUSAWAL 12
“S13 4” JAMNER 19
“S13 4” MUKTAINAGAR 20
“S13 4” MALKAPUR 21
MH BULDHANA “S13 5” BULDHANA 22
“S13 5” CHIKHLI 23
“S13 5” SINDKHED RAJA 24
“S13 5” MEHKAR 25
“S13 5” KHAMGAON 26
“S13 5” JALGAON (JAMOD) 27
MH AKOLA “S13 6” AKOT 28
“S13 6” BALAPUR 29
“S13 6” AKOLA WEST 30
“S13 6” AKOLA EAST 31
“S13 6” MURTIJAPUR 32
“S13 6” RISOD 33
MH AMRAVATI “S13 7” BADNERA 37
“S13 7” AMRAVATI 38
“S13 7” TEOSA 39
“S13 7” DARYAPUR 40
“S13 7” MELGHAT 41
“S13 7” ACHALPUR 42
MH WARDHA “S13 8” DHAMAMGAON RAILWAY 36
“S13 8” MORSHI 43
“S13 8” ARVI 44
“S13 8” DEOLI 45
“S13 8” HINGANGHAT 46
“S13 8” WARDHA 47
MH RAMTEK “S13 9” KATOL 48
“S13 9” SAVNER 49
“S13 9” HINGNA 50
“S13 9” UMRED 51
“S13 9” KAMTHI 58
“S13 9” RAMTEK 59
MH NAGPUR “S13 10” NAGPUR SOUTH WEST 52
“S13 10” NAGPUR SOUTH 53
“S13 10” NAGPUR EAST 54
“S13 10” NAGPUR CENTRAL 55
“S13 10” NAGPUR WEST 56
“S13 10” NAGPUR NORTH 57
MH BHANDARA – GONDIYA “S13 11” TUMSAR 60
“S13 11” BHANDARA 61
“S13 11” SAKOLI 62
“S13 11” ARJUNI-MORGAON 63
“S13 11” TIRORA 64
“S13 11” GONDIYA 65
MH GADCHIROLI-CHIMUR “S13 12” AMGAON 66
“S13 12” ARMORI 67
“S13 12” GADCHIROLI 68
“S13 12” AHERI 69
“S13 12” BRAHMAPURI 73
“S13 12” CHIMUR 74
MH CHANDRAPUR “S13 13” RAJURA 70
“S13 13” CHANDRAPUR 71
“S13 13” BALLARPUR 72
“S13 13” WARORA 75
“S13 13” WANI 76
“S13 13” ARNI 80
MH YAVATMAL-WASHIM “S13 14” WASHIM 34
“S13 14” KARANJA 35
“S13 14” RALEGAON 77
“S13 14” YAVATMAL 78
“S13 14” DIGRAS 79
“S13 14” PUSAD 81
MH HINGOLI “S13 15” UMARKHED 82
“S13 15” KINWAT 83
“S13 15” HADGAON 84
“S13 15” BASMATH 92
“S13 15” KALAMNURI 93
“S13 15” HINGOLI 94
MH NANDED “S13 16” BHOKAR 85
“S13 16” NANDED NORTH 86
“S13 16” NANDED SOUTH 87
“S13 16” NAIGAON 89
“S13 16” DEGLUR 90
“S13 16” MUKHED 91
MH PARBHANI “S13 17” JINTUR 95
“S13 17” PARBHANI 96
“S13 17” GANGAKHED 97
“S13 17” PATHRI 98
“S13 17” PARTUR 99
“S13 17” GHANSAWANGI 100
MH JALNA “S13 18” 101. JALNA 101
“S13 18” BADNAPUR 102
“S13 18” BHOKARDAN 103
“S13 18” SILLOD 104
“S13 18” PHULAMBRI 106
“S13 18” PAITHAN 110
MH AURANGABAD “S13 19” KANNAD 105
“S13 19” AURANGABAD CENTRAL 107
“S13 19” AURANGABAD WEST 108
“S13 19” AURANGABAD EAST 109
“S13 19” GANGAPUR 111
“S13 19” VAIJAPUR 112
MH DINDORI “S13 20” NANDGAON 113
“S13 20” KALWAN 117
“S13 20” CHANDVAD 118
“S13 20” YEVLA 119
“S13 20” NIPHAD 121
“S13 20” DINDORI 122
MH NASHIK “S13 21” SINNAR 120
“S13 21” NASHIK EAST 123
“S13 21” NASHIK CENTRAL 124
“S13 21” NASHIK WEST 125
“S13 21” DEVLALI 126
“S13 21” IGATPURI 127
MH PALGHAR “S13 22” DAHANU 128
“S13 22” VIKRAMGAD 129
“S13 22” PALGHAR 130
“S13 22” BOISAR 131
“S13 22” NALASOPARA 132
“S13 22” VASAI 133
MH BHIWANDI “S13 23” BHIWANDI RURAL 134
“S13 23” SHAHAPUR 135
“S13 23” BHIWANDI WEST 136
“S13 23” BHIWANDI EAST 137
“S13 23” KALYAN WEST 138
“S13 23” MURBAD 139
MH KALYAN “S13 24” AMBERNATH 140
“S13 24” ULHAS NAGAR 141
“S13 24” KALYAN EAST 142
“S13 24” DOMBIVALI 143
“S13 24” KALYAN RURAL 144
“S13 24” MUMBRA-KALWA 149
MH THANE “S13 25” MIRA BHAYANDAR 145
“S13 25” OVALA – MAJIWADA 146
“S13 25” KOPRI-PACHPAKHADI 147
“S13 25” THANE 148
“S13 25” AIROLI 150
“S13 25” BELAPUR 151
MH MUMBAI NORTH “S13 26” BORIVALI 152
“S13 26” DAHISAR 153
“S13 26” MAGATHANE 154
“S13 26” KANDIVALI EAST 160
“S13 26” CHARKOP 161
“S13 26” MALAD WEST 162
MH MUMBAI NORTH WEST “S13 27” JOGESHWARI EAST 158
“S13 27” DINDOSHI 159
“S13 27” GOREGAON 163
“S13 27” VERSOVA 164
“S13 27” ANDHERI WEST 165
“S13 27” ANDHERI EAST 166
MH MUMBAI NORTH EAST “S13 28” MULUND 155
“S13 28” VIKHROLI 156
“S13 28” BHANDUP WEST 157
“S13 28” GHATKOPAR WEST 169
“S13 28” GHATKOPAR EAST 170
“S13 28” MANKHURD SHIVAJI NAGAR 171
MH MUMBAI NORTH CENTRAL “S13 29” VILE PARLE 167
“S13 29” CHANDIVALI 168
“S13 29” KURLA 174
“S13 29” KALINA 175
“S13 29” VANDRE EAST 176
“S13 29” VANDRE WEST 177
MH MUMBAI SOUTH CENTRAL “S13 30” ANUSHAKTI NAGAR 172
“S13 30” CHEMBUR 173
“S13 30” DHARAVI 178
“S13 30” SION KOLIWADA 179
“S13 30” WADALA 180
“S13 30” MAHIM 181
MH MUMBAI SOUTH “S13 31” WORLI 182
“S13 31” SHIVADI 183
“S13 31” BYCULLA 184
“S13 31” MALABAR HILL 185
“S13 31” MUMBA DEVI 186
“S13 31” COLABA 187
MH RAIGAD “S13 32” PEN 191
“S13 32” ALIBAG 192
“S13 32” SHRIVARDHAN 193
“S13 32” MAHAD 194
“S13 32” DAPOLI 263
“S13 32” GUHAGAR 264
MH MAVAL “S13 33” PANVEL 188
“S13 33” KARJAT 189
“S13 33” URAN 190
“S13 33” MAVAL 204
“S13 33” CHINCHWAD 205
“S13 33” PIMPRI 206
MH PUNE “S13 34” VADGAOL SHERI 208
“S13 34” SHIVAJINAGAR 209
“S13 34” KOTHRUD 210
“S13 34” PARVATI 212
“S13 34” PUNE CANTONMENT 214
“S13 34” KASBA PETH 215
MH BARAMATI “S13 35” DAUND 199
“S13 35” INDAPUR 200
“S13 35” BARAMATI 201
“S13 35” PURANDAR 202
“S13 35” BHOR 203
“S13 35” KHADAKWASALA 211
MH SHIRUR “S13 36” JUNNAR 195
“S13 36” AMBEGAON 196
“S13 36” KHED ALANDI 197
“S13 36” SHIRUR 198
“S13 36” BHOSARI 207
“S13 36” HADAPSAR 213
MH AHMADNAGAR “S13 37” SHEVGAON 222
“S13 37” RAHURI 223
“S13 37” PARNER 224
“S13 37” AHMEDNAGAR CITY 225
“S13 37” SHRIGONDA 226
“S13 37” KARJAT JAMKHED 227
MH SHIRDI “S13 38” AKOLE 216
“S13 38” SANGAMNER 217
“S13 38” SHIRDI 218
“S13 38” KOPARGAON 219
“S13 38” SHRIRAMPUR 220
“S13 38” NEVASA 221
MH BEED “S13 39” GEORAI 228
“S13 39” MAJALGAON 229
“S13 39” BEED 230
“S13 39” ASHTI 231
“S13 39” KAIJ 232
“S13 39” PARLI 233
MH OSMANABAD “S13 40” AUSA 239
“S13 40” UMARGA 240
“S13 40” TULJAPUR 241
“S13 40” OSMANABAD 242
“S13 40” PARANDA 243
“S13 40” BARSHI 246
MH LATUR “S13 41” LOHA 88
“S13 41” LATUR RURAL 234
“S13 41” LATUR CITY 235
“S13 41” AHMADPUR 236
“S13 41” UDGIR 237
“S13 41” NILANGA 238
MH SOLAPUR “S13 42” MOHOL 247
“S13 42” SOLAPUR CITY NORTH 248
“S13 42” SOLAPUR CITY CENTRAL 249
“S13 42” AKKALKOT 250
“S13 42” SOLAPUR SOUTH 251
“S13 42” PANDHARPUR 252
MH MADHA “S13 43” KARMALA 244
“S13 43” MADHA 245
“S13 43” SANGOLE 253
“S13 43” MALSHIRAS 254
“S13 43” PHALTAN 255
“S13 43” MAN 258
MH SANGLI “S13 44” MIRAJ 281
“S13 44” SANGLI 282
“S13 44” PALUS-KADEGAON 285
“S13 44” KHANAPUR 286
“S13 44” TASGAON – KAVATHE MAHANKAL 287
“S13 44” JAT 288
MH SATARA “S13 45” WAI 256
“S13 45” KOREGAON 257
“S13 45” KARAD NORTH 259
“S13 45” KARAD SOUTH 260
“S13 45” PATAN 261
“S13 45” SATARA 262
MH RATNAGIRI – SINDHUDURG “S13 46” CHIPLUN 265
“S13 46” RATNAGIRI 266
“S13 46” RAJAPUR 267
“S13 46” KANKAVLI 268
“S13 46” KUDAL 269
“S13 46” SAWANTWADI 270
MH KOLHAPUR “S13 47” CHANDGAD 271
“S13 47” RADHANAGARI 272
“S13 47” KAGAL 273
“S13 47” KOLHAPUR SOUTH 274
“S13 47” KARVIR 275
“S13 47” KOLHAPUR NORTH 276
MH HATKANANGLE “S13 48” SHAHUWADI 277
“S13 48” HATKANANGLE 278
“S13 48” ICHALKARANJI 279
“S13 48” SHIROL 280
“S13 48” ISLAMPUR 283
“S13 48” SHIRALA 284
MN INNER MANIPUR “S14 1” KHUNDRAKPAM 1
“S14 1” HEINGANG 2
“S14 1” KHURAI 3
“S14 1” KSHETRIGAO 4
“S14 1” THONGJU 5
“S14 1” KEIRAO 6
“S14 1” ANDRO 7
“S14 1” LAMLAI 8
“S14 1” THANGMEIBAND 9
“S14 1” URIPOK 10
“S14 1” SAGOLBAND 11
“S14 1” KEISHAMTHONG 12
“S14 1” SINGJAMEI 13
“S14 1” YAISKUL 14
“S14 1” WANGKHEI 15
“S14 1” SEKMAI 16
“S14 1” LAMSANG 17
“S14 1” KONTHOUJAM 18
“S14 1” PATSOI 19
“S14 1” LANGTHABAL 20
“S14 1” NAORIYA PAKHANGLAKPA 21
“S14 1” WANGOI 22
“S14 1” MAYANG IMPHAL 23
“S14 1” NAMBOL 24
“S14 1” OINAM 25
“S14 1” BISHNUPUR 26
“S14 1” MOIRANG 27
“S14 1” THANGA 28
“S14 1” KUMBI 29
“S14 1” LILONG 30
“S14 1” THOUBAL 31
“S14 1” WANGKHEM 32
MN OUTER MANIPUR “S14 2” HEIROK 33
“S14 2” WANGJING TENTHA 34
“S14 2” KHANGABOK 35
“S14 2” WABGAI 36
“S14 2” KAKCHING 37
“S14 2” HIYANGLAM 38
“S14 2” SUGNU 39
“S14 2” JIRIBAM 40
“S14 2” CHANDEL (ST) 41
“S14 2” TENGNOUPAL (ST) 42
“S14 2” PHUNGYAR (ST) 43
“S14 2” UKHRUL (ST) 44
“S14 2” CHINGAI (ST) 45
“S14 2” SAIKUL (ST) 46
“S14 2” KARONG (ST) 47
“S14 2” MAO (ST) 48
“S14 2” TADUBI (ST) 49
“S14 2” KANGPOKPI (ST) 50
“S14 2” SAITU (ST) 51
“S14 2” TAMEI (ST) 52
“S14 2” TAMENGLONG (ST) 53
“S14 2” NUNGBA (ST) 54
“S14 2” TIPAIMUKH (ST) 55
“S14 2” THANLON (ST) 56
“S14 2” HENGLEP (ST) 57
“S14 2” CHURACHANDPUR (ST) 58
“S14 2” SAIKOT (ST) 59
“S14 2” SINGHAT (ST) 60
ML SHILLONG “S15 1” NARTIANG 1
“S15 1” JOWAI 2
“S15 1” RALIANG 3
“S15 1” MOWKAIAW 4
“S15 1” SUTNGA SAIPUNG 5
“S15 1” KHLIEHRIAT 6
“S15 1” AMLAREM 7
“S15 1” MAWHATI 8
“S15 1” NONGPOH 9
“S15 1” JIRANG 10
“S15 1” UMSNING 11
“S15 1” UMROI 12
“S15 1” MAWRYNGKNENG 13
“S15 1” PYNTHORUMKHRAH 14
“S15 1” MAWLAI 15
“S15 1” EAST SHILLONG 16
“S15 1” NORTH SHILLONG 17
“S15 1” WEST SHILLONG 18
“S15 1” SOUTH SHILLONG 19
“S15 1” MYLLIEM 20
“S15 1” NONGTHYMMAI 21
“S15 1” NONGKREM 22
“S15 1” SOHIONG 23
“S15 1” MAWPHLANG 24
“S15 1” MAWSYNRAM 25
“S15 1” SHELLA 26
“S15 1” PYNURSLA 27
“S15 1” SOHRA 28
“S15 1” MAWKYNREW 29
“S15 1” MAIRANG 30
“S15 1” MAWTHADRAISHAN 31
“S15 1” NONGSTOIN 32
“S15 1” RAMBRAI JYRNGAM 33
“S15 1” MAWSHYNRUT 34
“S15 1” RANIKOR 35
“S15 1” MAWKYRWAT 36
ML TURA “S15 2” KHARKUTTA 37
“S15 2” MENDIPATHAR 38
“S15 2” RESUBELPARA 39
“S15 2” BAJENGDOBA 40
“S15 2” SONGSAK 41
“S15 2” RONGJENG 42
“S15 2” WILLIAM NAGAR 43
“S15 2” RAKSAMGRE 44
“S15 2” TIKRIKILA 45
“S15 2” PHULBARI 46
“S15 2” RAJABALA 47
“S15 2” SELSELLA 48
“S15 2” DADENGGRE 49
“S15 2” NORTH TURA 50
“S15 2” SOUTH TURA 51
“S15 2” RANGSAKONA 52
“S15 2” AMPATI 53
“S15 2” MAHENDRAGANJ 54
“S15 2” SALMANPARA 55
“S15 2” GAMBEGRE 56
“S15 2” DALU 57
“S15 2” RONGARA SIJU 58
“S15 2” CHOKPOT 59
“S15 2” BAGHMARA 60
MZ MIZORAM “S16 1” HACHHEK 1
“S16 1” DAMPA 2
“S16 1” MAMIT 3
“S16 1” TUIRIAL 4
“S16 1” KOLASIB 5
“S16 1” SERLUI 6
“S16 1” TUIVAWL 7
“S16 1” CHALFILH 8
“S16 1” TAWI 9
“S16 1” AIZAWL NORTH – I 10
“S16 1” AIZAWL NORTH – II 11
“S16 1” AIZAWL NORTH-III 12
“S16 1” AIZAWL EAST – I 13
“S16 1” AIZAWL EAST II 14
“S16 1” AIZAWL WEST I 15
“S16 1” AIZAWL WEST II 16
“S16 1” AIZAWL WEST III 17
“S16 1” AIZAWL SOUTH I 18
“S16 1” AIZAWL SOUTH II (AIZAWL X) 19
“S16 1” AIZAWL SOUTH-III 20
“S16 1” LENGTENG 21
“S16 1” TUICHANG 22
“S16 1” CHAMPHAI NORTH 23
“S16 1” CHAMPHAI SOUTH 24
“S16 1” EAST TUIPUI 25
“S16 1” SERCHHIP 26
“S16 1” TUIKUM 27
“S16 1” HRANGTURZO 28
“S16 1” SOUTH TUIPUI 29
“S16 1” LUNGLEI NORTH 30
“S16 1” LUNGLEI EAST 31
“S16 1” LUNGLEI WEST 32
“S16 1” LUNGLEI SOUTH 33
“S16 1” THORANG 34
“S16 1” WEST TUIPUI 35
“S16 1” TUICHAWNG 36
“S16 1” LAWNGTLAI WEST 37
“S16 1” LAWNGTLAI EAST 38
“S16 1” SAIHA 39
“S16 1” PALAK 40
NL NAGALAND “S17 1” DIMAPUR-I 1
“S17 1” DIMAPUR-II 2
“S17 1” DIMAPUR-III 3
“S17 1” GHASPANI-I 4
“S17 1” GHASPANI-II 5
“S17 1” TENNING 6
“S17 1” PEREN 7
“S17 1” WESTERN ANGAMI 8
“S17 1” KOHIMA TOWN 9
“S17 1” NORTHERN ANGAMI-I 10
“S17 1” NORTHERN ANGAMI-II 11
“S17 1” TSEMINYU 12
“S17 1” PUGHOBOTO 13
“S17 1” SOUTHERN ANGAMI-I 14
“S17 1” SOUTHERN ANGAMI-II 15
“S17 1” PFUTSERO 16
“S17 1” CHIZAMI 17
“S17 1” CHAZOUBA 18
“S17 1” PHEK 19
“S17 1” MELURI 20
“S17 1” TULI 21
“S17 1” ARKAKONG 22
“S17 1” IMPUR 23
“S17 1” ANGETYONGPANG 24
“S17 1” MONGOYA 25
“S17 1” AONGLENDEN 26
“S17 1” MOKOKCHUNG TOWN 27
“S17 1” KORIDANG 28
“S17 1” JANGPETKONG 29
“S17 1” ALONGTAKI 30
“S17 1” AKULUTO 31
“S17 1” ATOIZU 32
“S17 1” SURUHOTO 33
“S17 1” AGHUNATO 34
“S17 1” ZUNHEBOTO 35
“S17 1” SATAKHA 36
“S17 1” TYUI 37
“S17 1” WOKHA 38
“S17 1” SANIS 39
“S17 1” BHANDARI 40
“S17 1” TIZIT 41
“S17 1” WAKCHING 42
“S17 1” TAPI 43
“S17 1” PHOMCHING 44
“S17 1” TEHOK 45
“S17 1” MON TOWN 46
“S17 1” ABOI 47
“S17 1” MOKA 48
“S17 1” TAMLU 49
“S17 1” LONGLENG 50
“S17 1” NOKSEN 51
“S17 1” LONGKHIM CHARE 52
“S17 1” TUENSANG SADAR-I 53
“S17 1” TUENSANG SADAR-II 54
“S17 1” TOBU 55
“S17 1” NOKLAK 56
“S17 1” THONOKNYU 57
“S17 1” SHAMATOR CHESSORE 58
“S17 1” SEYOCHUNG SITIMI 59
“S17 1” PUNGRO KIPHIRE 60
OR BARGARH “S18 1” PADAMPUR 1
“S18 1” BIJEPUR 2
“S18 1” BARGARH 3
“S18 1” ATTABIRA 4
“S18 1” BHATLI 5
“S18 1” BRAJARAJNAGAR 6
“S18 1” JHARSUGUDA 7
OR SUNDARGARH “S18 2” TALSARA 8
“S18 2” SUNDARGARH 9
“S18 2” BIRAMITRAPUR 10
“S18 2” RAGHUNATHPALI 11
“S18 2” ROURKELA 12
“S18 2” RAJGANGAPUR 13
“S18 2” BONAI 14
OR SAMBALPUR “S18 3” KUCHINDA 15
“S18 3” RENGALI 16
“S18 3” SAMBALPUR 17
“S18 3” RAIRAKHOL 18
“S18 3” DEOGARH 19
“S18 3” CHHENDIPADA 62
“S18 3” ATHAMALLIK 63
OR KEONJHAR “S18 4” TELKOI 20
“S18 4” GHASIPURA 21
“S18 4” ANANDAPUR 22
“S18 4” PATNA 23
“S18 4” KEONJHAR 24
“S18 4” CHAMPUA 25
“S18 4” KARANJIA 30
OR MAYURBHANJ “S18 5” JASHIPUR 26
“S18 5” SARASKANA 27
“S18 5” RAIRANGPUR 28
“S18 5” BANGRIPOSI 29
“S18 5” UDALA 31
“S18 5” BARIPADA 33
“S18 5” MORADA 34
OR BALASORE “S18 6” BADASAHI 32
“S18 6” JALESWAR 35
“S18 6” BHOGRAI 36
“S18 6” BASTA 37
“S18 6” BALASORE 38
“S18 6” REMUNA 39
“S18 6” NILGIRI 40
OR BHADRAK “S18 7” SORO 41
“S18 7” SIMULIA 42
“S18 7” BHANDARIPOKHARI 43
“S18 7” BHADRAK 44
“S18 7” BASUDEVPUR 45
“S18 7” DHAMNAGAR 46
“S18 7” CHANDABALI 47
OR JAJPUR “S18 8” BINJHARPUR 48
“S18 8” BARI 49
“S18 8” BARCHANA 50
“S18 8” DHARMASALA 51
“S18 8” JAJPUR 52
“S18 8” KOREI 53
“S18 8” SUKINDA 54
OR DHENKANAL “S18 9” DHENKANAL 55
“S18 9” HINDOL 56
“S18 9” KAMAKHYANAGAR 57
“S18 9” PARJANGA 58
“S18 9” PALLAHARA 59
“S18 9” TALCHER 60
“S18 9” ANGUL 61
OR BOLANGIR “S18 10” BIRMAHARAJPUR 64
“S18 10” SONEPUR 65
“S18 10” LOISINGHA 66
“S18 10” PATNAGARH 67
“S18 10” BOLANGIR 68
“S18 10” TITLAGARH 69
“S18 10” KANTABANJI 70
OR KALAHANDI “S18 11” NUAPADA 71
“S18 11” KHARIAR 72
“S18 11” LANJIGARH 77
“S18 11” JUNAGARH 78
“S18 11” DHARMGARH 79
“S18 11” BHAWANIPATNA 80
“S18 11” NARLA 81
OR NABARANGPUR “S18 12” UMARKOTE 73
“S18 12” JHARIGAM 74
“S18 12” NABARANGPUR 75
“S18 12” DABUGAM 76
“S18 12” KOTPAD 142
“S18 12” MALKANGIRI 146
“S18 12” CHITRAKONDA 147
OR KANDHAMAL “S18 13” BALIGUDA 82
“S18 13” G. UDAYAGIRI 83
“S18 13” PHULBANI 84
“S18 13” KANTAMAL 85
“S18 13” BOUDH 86
“S18 13” DASPALLA 121
“S18 13” BHANJANAGAR 123
OR CUTTACK “S18 14” BARAMBA 87
“S18 14” BANKI 88
“S18 14” ATHAGARH 89
“S18 14” BARABATI-CUTTACK 90
“S18 14” CHOUDWAR-CUTTACK 91
“S18 14” CUTTACK SADAR 93
“S18 14” KHANDAPADA 120
OR KENDRAPARA “S18 15” SALIPUR 94
“S18 15” MAHANGA 95
“S18 15” PATKURA 96
“S18 15” KENDRAPARA 97
“S18 15” AUL 98
“S18 15” RAJANAGAR 99
“S18 15” MAHAKALAPADA 100
OR JAGATSINGHPUR “S18 16” NIALI 92
“S18 16” PARADEEP 101
“S18 16” TIRTOL 102
“S18 16” BALIKUDA-ERSAMA 103
“S18 16” JAGATSINGHPUR 104
“S18 16” KAKATPUR 105
“S18 16” NIMAPARA 106
OR PURI “S18 17” PURI 107
“S18 17” BRAMHAGIRI 108
“S18 17” SATYABADI 109
“S18 17” PIPILI 110
“S18 17” CHILIKA 118
“S18 17” RANPUR 119
“S18 17” NAYAGARH 122
OR BHUBANESWAR “S18 18” JAYADEV 111
“S18 18” BHUBANESWAR CENTRAL (MADHYA) 112
“S18 18” BHUBANESWAR NORTH (UTTAR) 113
“S18 18” EKAMRA-BHUBANESWAR 114
“S18 18” JATANI 115
“S18 18” BEGUNIA 116
“S18 18” KHURDA 117
OR ASKA “S18 19” POLASARA 124
“S18 19” KABISURYANGAR 125
“S18 19” KHALIKOTE 126
“S18 19” ASKA 128
“S18 19” SURADA 129
“S18 19” SANAKHEMUNDI 130
“S18 19” HINJILI 131
OR BERHAMPUR “S18 20” CHHATRAPUR 127
“S18 20” GOPALPUR 132
“S18 20” BERHAMPUR 133
“S18 20” DIGAPAHANDI 134
“S18 20” CHIKITI 135
“S18 20” MOHANA 136
“S18 20” PARALAKHEMUNDI 137
OR KORAPUT “S18 21” GUNUPUR 138
“S18 21” BISSAM CUTTACK 139
“S18 21” RAYAGADA 140
“S18 21” LAXMIPUR 141
“S18 21” JEYPORE 143
“S18 21” KORAPUT 144
“S18 21” POTTANGI 145
PB GURDASPUR “S19 1” SUJANPUR 1
“S19 1” BHOA 2
“S19 1” GURDASPUR 4
“S19 1” DINA NAGAR 5
“S19 1” QADIAN 6
“S19 1” BATALA 7
“S19 1” FATEHGARH CHURIAN 9
“S19 1” DERA BABA NANAK 10
PB AMRITSAR “S19 2” AJNALA 11
“S19 2” RAJA SANSI 12
“S19 2” MAJITHA 13
“S19 2” AMRITSAR NORTH 15
“S19 2” AMRITSAR WEST 16
“S19 2” AMRITSAR CENTRAL 17
“S19 2” AMRITSAR EAST 18
“S19 2” AMRITSAR SOUTH 19
“S19 2” ATTARI 20
PB KHADOOR SAHIB “S19 3” JANDIALA 14
“S19 3” TARN TARAN 21
“S19 3” KHEM KARAN 22
“S19 3” PATTI 23
“S19 3” KHADOOR SAHIB 24
“S19 3” BABA BAKALA 25
“S19 3” KAPURTHALA 27
“S19 3” SULTANPUR LODHI 28
“S19 3” ZIRA 75
PB JALANDHAR “S19 4” TALWARA 3
“S19 4” PHILLAUR 30
“S19 4” NAKODAR 31
“S19 4” SHAHKOT 32
“S19 4” KARTARPUR 33
“S19 4” JALANDHAR WEST 34
“S19 4” JALANDHAR CENTRAL 35
“S19 4” JALANDHAR NORTH 36
“S19 4” JALANDHAR CANTT. 37
“S19 4” ADAMPUR 38
PB HOSHIARPUR “S19 5” SRI HARGOBINDPUR 8
“S19 5” BHOLATH 26
“S19 5” PHAGWARA 29
“S19 5” MUKERIAN 39
“S19 5” DASUYA 40
“S19 5” URMAR 41
“S19 5” SHAM CHAURASI 42
“S19 5” HOSHIARPUR 43
“S19 5” CHABBEWAL 44
PB ANANDPUR SAHIB “S19 6” GARHSHANKAR 45
“S19 6” BANGA 46
“S19 6” NAWAN SHAHR 47
“S19 6” BALACHAUR 48
“S19 6” ANANDPUR SAHIB 49
“S19 6” RUPNAGAR 50
“S19 6” CHAMKAUR SAHIB 51
“S19 6” KHARAR 52
“S19 6” S.A.S.NAGAR 53
PB LUDHIANA “S19 7” LUDHIANA EAST 60
“S19 7” LUDHIANA SOUTH 61
“S19 7” ATAM NAGAR 62
“S19 7” LUDHIANA CENTRAL 63
“S19 7” LUDHIANA WEST 64
“S19 7” LUDHIANA NORTH 65
“S19 7” GILL 66
“S19 7” DAKHA 68
“S19 7” JAGRAON 70
PB FATEHGARH SAHIB “S19 8” BASSI PATHANA 54
“S19 8” FATEHGARH SAHIB 55
“S19 8” AMLOH 56
“S19 8” KHANNA 57
“S19 8” SAMRALA 58
“S19 8” SAHNEWAL 59
“S19 8” PAYAL 67
“S19 8” RAIKOT 69
“S19 8” AMARGARH 106
PB FARIDKOT “S19 9” NIHAL SINGHWALA 71
“S19 9” BHAGHA PURANA 72
“S19 9” MOGA 73
“S19 9” DHARAMKOT 74
“S19 9” GIDDERBAHA 84
“S19 9” FARIDKOT 87
“S19 9” KOTKAPURA 88
“S19 9” JAITU 89
“S19 9” RAMPURA PHUL 90
PB FEROZPUR “S19 10” FIROZPUR CITY 76
“S19 10” FIROZPUR RURAL 77
“S19 10” GURU HAR SAHAI 78
“S19 10” JALALABAD 79
“S19 10” FAZILKA 80
“S19 10” ABOHAR 81
“S19 10” BALLUANA 82
“S19 10” MALOUT 85
“S19 10” MUKTSAR 86
PB BATHINDA “S19 11” LAMBI 83
“S19 11” BHUCHO MANDI 91
“S19 11” BATHINDA URBAN 92
“S19 11” BATHINDA RURAL 93
“S19 11” TALWANDI SABO 94
“S19 11” MAUR 95
“S19 11” MANSA 96
“S19 11” SARDULGARH 97
“S19 11” BUDHLADA 98
PB SANGRUR “S19 12” LEHRA 99
“S19 12” DIRBA 100
“S19 12” SUNAM 101
“S19 12” BHADAUR 102
“S19 12” BARNALA 103
“S19 12” MEHAL KALAN 104
“S19 12” MALERKOTLA 105
“S19 12” DHURI 107
“S19 12” SANGRUR 108
PB PATIALA “S19 13” NABHA 109
“S19 13” PATIALA RURAL 110
“S19 13” RAJPURA 111
“S19 13” DERA BASSI 112
“S19 13” GHANAUR 113
“S19 13” SANOUR 114
“S19 13” PATIALA 115
“S19 13” SAMANA 116
“S19 13” SHUTRANA 117
RJ GANGANAGAR “S20 1” SADULSHAHAR 1
“S20 1” GANGANAGAR 2
“S20 1” KARANPUR 3
“S20 1” SURATGARH 4
“S20 1” RAISINGH NAGAR 5
“S20 1” SANGARIA 7
“S20 1” HANUMANGARH 8
“S20 1” PILIBANGA 9
RJ BIKANER “S20 2” ANUPGARH 6
“S20 2” KHAJUWALA 12
“S20 2” BIKANER WEST 13
“S20 2” BIKANER EAST 14
“S20 2” KOLAYAT 15
“S20 2” LUNKARANSAR 16
“S20 2” DUNGARGARH 17
“S20 2” NOKHA 18
RJ CHURU “S20 3” NOHAR 10
“S20 3” BHADRA 11
“S20 3” SADULPUR 19
“S20 3” TARANAGAR 20
“S20 3” SARDARSHAHAR 21
“S20 3” CHURU 22
“S20 3” RATANGARH 23
“S20 3” SUJANGARH 24
RJ JHUNJHUNU “S20 4” PILANI 25
“S20 4” SURAJGARH 26
“S20 4” JHUNJHUNU 27
“S20 4” MANDAWA 28
“S20 4” NAWALGARH 29
“S20 4” UDAIPURWATI 30
“S20 4” KHETRI 31
“S20 4” FATEHPUR 32
RJ SIKAR “S20 5” LACHHMANGARH 33
“S20 5” DHOD 34
“S20 5” SIKAR 35
“S20 5” DANTA RAMGARH 36
“S20 5” KHANDELA 37
“S20 5” NEEM KA THANA 38
“S20 5” SRIMADHOPUR 39
“S20 5” CHOMU 43
RJ JAIPUR RURAL “S20 6” KOTPUTLI 40
“S20 6” VIRATNAGAR 41
“S20 6” SHAHPURA 42
“S20 6” PHULERA 44
“S20 6” JHOTWARA 46
“S20 6” AMBER 47
“S20 6” JAMWA RAMGARH 48
“S20 6” BANSUR 63
RJ JAIPUR “S20 7” HAWA MAHAL 49
“S20 7” VIDHYADHAR NAGAR 50
“S20 7” CIVIL LINES 51
“S20 7” KISHAN POLE 52
“S20 7” ADARSH NAGAR 53
“S20 7” MALVIYA NAGAR 54
“S20 7” SANGANER 55
“S20 7” BAGRU 56
RJ ALWAR “S20 8” TIJARA 59
“S20 8” KISHANGARH BAS 60
“S20 8” MUNDAWAR 61
“S20 8” BEHROR 62
“S20 8” ALWAR RURAL 65
“S20 8” ALWAR URBAN 66
“S20 8” RAMGARH 67
“S20 8” RAJGARH LAXMANGARH 68
RJ BHARATPUR “S20 9” KATHUMAR 69
“S20 9” KAMAN 70
“S20 9” NAGAR 71
“S20 9” DEEG-KUMHER 72
“S20 9” BHARATPUR 73
“S20 9” NADBAI 74
“S20 9” WEIR 75
“S20 9” BAYANA 76
RJ KARAULI-DHOLPUR “S20 10” BASERI 77
“S20 10” BARI 78
“S20 10” DHOLPUR 79
“S20 10” RAJAKHERA 80
“S20 10” TODABHIM 81
“S20 10” HINDAUN 82
“S20 10” KARAULI 83
“S20 10” SAPOTRA 84
RJ DAUSA “S20 11” BASSI 57
“S20 11” CHAKSU 58
“S20 11” THANAGAZI 64
“S20 11” BANDIKUI 85
“S20 11” MAHUWA 86
“S20 11” SIKRAI 87
“S20 11” DAUSA 88
“S20 11” LALSOT 89
RJ TONK-SAWAI MADHOPUR “S20 12” GANGAPUR 90
“S20 12” BAMANWAS 91
“S20 12” SAWAI MADHOPUR 92
“S20 12” KHANDAR 93
“S20 12” MALPURA 94
“S20 12” NIWAI 95
“S20 12” TONK 96
“S20 12” DEOLI – UNIARA 97
RJ AJMER “S20 13” DUDU 45
“S20 13” KISHANGARH 98
“S20 13” PUSHKAR 99
“S20 13” AJMER NORTH 100
“S20 13” AJMER SOUTH 101
“S20 13” NASIRABAD 102
“S20 13” MASUDA 104
“S20 13” KEKRI 105
RJ NAGAUR “S20 14” LADNUN 106
“S20 14” DEEDWANA 107
“S20 14” JAYAL 108
“S20 14” NAGAUR 109
“S20 14” KHINWSAR 110
“S20 14” MAKRANA 113
“S20 14” PARBATSAR 114
“S20 14” NAWAN 115
RJ PALI “S20 15” SOJAT 117
“S20 15” PALI 118
“S20 15” MARWAR JUNCTION 119
“S20 15” BALI 120
“S20 15” SUMERPUR 121
“S20 15” OSIAN 125
“S20 15” BHOPALGARH 126
“S20 15” BILARA 131
RJ JODHPUR “S20 16” PHALODI 122
“S20 16” LOHAWAT 123
“S20 16” SHERGARH 124
“S20 16” SARDARPURA 127
“S20 16” JODHPUR 128
“S20 16” SOORSAGAR 129
“S20 16” LUNI 130
“S20 16” POKARAN 133
RJ BARMER “S20 17” JAISALMER 132
“S20 17” SHEO 134
“S20 17” BARMER 135
“S20 17” BAYTOO 136
“S20 17” PACHPADRA 137
“S20 17” SIWANA 138
“S20 17” GUDHAMALANI 139
“S20 17” CHOHTAN 140
RJ JALORE “S20 18” AHORE 141
“S20 18” JALORE 142
“S20 18” BHINMAL 143
“S20 18” SANCHORE 144
“S20 18” RANIWARA 145
“S20 18” SIROHI 146
“S20 18” PINDWARA ABU 147
“S20 18” REODAR 148
RJ UDAIPUR “S20 19” GOGUNDA 149
“S20 19” JHADOL 150
“S20 19” KHERWARA 151
“S20 19” UDAIPUR RURAL 152
“S20 19” UDAIPUR 153
“S20 19” SALUMBER 156
“S20 19” DHARIAWAD 157
“S20 19” ASPUR 159
RJ BANSWARA “S20 20” DUNGARPUR 158
“S20 20” SAGWARA 160
“S20 20” CHORASI 161
“S20 20” GHATOL 162
“S20 20” GARHI 163
“S20 20” BANSWARA 164
“S20 20” BAGIDORA 165
“S20 20” KUSHALGARH 166
RJ CHITTORGARH “S20 21” MAVLI 154
“S20 21” VALLABH NAGAR 155
“S20 21” KAPASAN 167
“S20 21” BEGUN 168
“S20 21” CHITTORGARH 169
“S20 21” NIMBAHERA 170
“S20 21” BARI SADRI 171
“S20 21” PRATAPGARH 172
RJ RAJSAMAND “S20 22” BEAWAR 103
“S20 22” MERTA 111
“S20 22” DEGANA 112
“S20 22” JAITARAN 116
“S20 22” BHIM 173
“S20 22” KUMBHALGARH 174
“S20 22” RAJSAMAND 175
“S20 22” NATHDWARA 176
RJ BHILWARA “S20 23” ASIND 177
“S20 23” MANDAL 178
“S20 23” SAHARA 179
“S20 23” BHILWARA 180
“S20 23” SHAHPURA 181
“S20 23” JAHAZPUR 182
“S20 23” MANDALGARH 183
“S20 23” HINDOLI 184
RJ KOTA “S20 24” KESHORAIPATAN 185
“S20 24” BUNDI 186
“S20 24” PIPALDA 187
“S20 24” SANGOD 188
“S20 24” KOTA NORTH 189
“S20 24” KOTA SOUTH 190
“S20 24” LADPURA 191
“S20 24” RAMGANJ MANDI 192
RJ JHALAWAR-BARAN “S20 25” ANTA 193
“S20 25” KISHANGANJ 194
“S20 25” BARAN-ATRU 195
“S20 25” CHHABRA 196
“S20 25” DAG 197
“S20 25” JHALRAPATAN 198
“S20 25” KHANPUR 199
“S20 25” MANOHAR THANA 200
SK SIKKIM “S21 1” YOKSAM-TASHIDING 1
“S21 1” YANGTHANG 2
“S21 1” MANEYBUNG-DENTAM 3
“S21 1” GYALSHING-BARNYAK 4
“S21 1” RINCHENPONG 5
“S21 1” DARAMDIN 6
“S21 1” SOREONG-CHAKUNG 7
“S21 1” SALGHARI-ZOOM 8
“S21 1” BARFUNG 9
“S21 1” POKLOK-KAMRANG 10
“S21 1” NAMCHI-SINGHITHANG 11
“S21 1” MELLI 12
“S21 1” NAMTHANG-RATEYPANI 13
“S21 1” TEMI-NAMPHING 14
“S21 1” RANGANG-YANGANG 15
“S21 1” TUMEN-LINGI 16
“S21 1” KHAMDONG-SINGTAM 17
“S21 1” WEST PENDAM 18
“S21 1” RHENOCK 19
“S21 1” CHUJACHEN 20
“S21 1” GNATHANG-MACHONG 21
“S21 1” NAMCHEYBUNG 22
“S21 1” SHYARI 23
“S21 1” MARTAM-RUMTEK 24
“S21 1” UPPER TADONG 25
“S21 1” ARITHANG 26
“S21 1” GANGTOK 27
“S21 1” UPPER BURTUK 28
“S21 1” KABI LUNGCHUK 29
“S21 1” DJONGU 30
“S21 1” LACHEN MANGAN 31
“S21 1” SANGHA 32
TN THIRUVALLUR “S22 1” GUMMIDIPOONDI 1
“S22 1” PONNERI 2
“S22 1” THIRUVALLUR 4
“S22 1” POONAMALLEE 5
“S22 1” AVADI 6
“S22 1” MADAVARAM 9
TN CHENNAI NORTH “S22 2” TIRUVOTTIYUR 10
“S22 2” DR.RADHAKRISHNAN NAGAR 11
“S22 2” PERAMBUR 12
“S22 2” KOLATHUR 13
“S22 2” THIRU -VI -KA -NAGAR 15
“S22 2” ROYAPURAM 17
TN CHENNAI SOUTH “S22 3” VIRUGAMPAKKAM 22
“S22 3” SAIDAPET 23
“S22 3” THIYAGARAYANAGAR 24
“S22 3” MYLAPORE 25
“S22 3” VELACHERY 26
“S22 3” SHOLINGANALLUR 27
TN CHENNAI CENTRAL “S22 4” VILLIVAKKAM 14
“S22 4” EGMORE 16
“S22 4” HARBOUR 18
“S22 4” CHEPAUK-THIRUVALLIKENI 19
“S22 4” THOUSAND LIGHTS 20
“S22 4” ANNA NAGAR 21
TN SRIPERUMBUDUR “S22 5” MADURAVOYAL 7
“S22 5” AMBATTUR 8
“S22 5” ALANDUR 28
“S22 5” SRIPERUMBUDUR 29
“S22 5” PALLAVARAM 30
“S22 5” TAMBARAM 31
TN KANCHEEPURAM “S22 6” CHENGALPATTU 32
“S22 6” THIRUPORUR 33
“S22 6” CHEYYUR 34
“S22 6” MADURANTAKAM 35
“S22 6” UTHIRAMERUR 36
“S22 6” KANCHEEPURAM 37
TN ARAKKONAM “S22 7” TIRUTTANI 3
“S22 7” ARAKKONAM 38
“S22 7” SHOLINGUR 39
“S22 7” KATPADI 40
“S22 7” RANIPET 41
“S22 7” ARCOT 42
TN VELLORE “S22 8” VELLORE 43
“S22 8” ANAIKATTU 44
“S22 8” KILVAITHINANKUPPAM 45
“S22 8” GUDIYATTAM 46
“S22 8” VANIYAMBADI 47
“S22 8” AMBUR 48
TN KRISHNAGIRI “S22 9” UTHANGARAI 51
“S22 9” BARGUR 52
“S22 9” KRISHNAGIRI 53
“S22 9” VEPPANAHALLI 54
“S22 9” HOSUR 55
“S22 9” THALLI 56
TN DHARMAPURI “S22 10” PALACODU 57
“S22 10” PENNAGARAM 58
“S22 10” DHARMAPURI 59
“S22 10” PAPPIREDDIPPATTI 60
“S22 10” HARUR 61
“S22 10” METTUR 85
TN TIRUVANNAMALAI “S22 11” JOLARPET 49
“S22 11” TIRUPPATTUR 50
“S22 11” CHENGAM 62
“S22 11” TIRUVANNAMALAI 63
“S22 11” KILPENNATHUR 64
“S22 11” KALASAPAKKAM 65
TN ARANI “S22 12” POLUR 66
“S22 12” ARANI 67
“S22 12” CHEYYAR 68
“S22 12” VANDAVASI 69
“S22 12” GINGEE 70
“S22 12” MAILAM 71
TN VILUPPURAM “S22 13” TINDIVANAM 72
“S22 13” VANUR 73
“S22 13” VILUPPURAM 74
“S22 13” VIKRAVANDI 75
“S22 13” THIRUKOILUR 76
“S22 13” ULUNDURPETTAI 77
TN KALLAKURICHI “S22 14” RISHIVANDIYAM 78
“S22 14” SANKARAPURAM 79
“S22 14” KALLAKURICHI 80
“S22 14” GANGAVALLI 81
“S22 14” ATTUR 82
“S22 14” YERCAUD 83
TN SALEM “S22 15” OMALUR 84
“S22 15” EDAPPADI 86
“S22 15” SALEM (WEST) 88
“S22 15” SALEM (NORTH) 89
“S22 15” SALEM (SOUTH) 90
“S22 15” VEERAPANDI 91
TN NAMAKKAL “S22 16” SANKARI 87
“S22 16” RASIPURAM 92
“S22 16” SENTHAMANGALAM 93
“S22 16” NAMAKKAL 94
“S22 16” PARAMATHI-VELUR 95
“S22 16” TIRUCHENGODU 96
TN ERODE “S22 17” KUMARAPALAYAM 97
“S22 17” ERODE (EAST) 98
“S22 17” ERODE (WEST) 99
“S22 17” MODAKURICHI 100
“S22 17” DHARAPURAM 101
“S22 17” KANGAYAM 102
TN TIRUPPUR “S22 18” PERUNDURAI 103
“S22 18” BHAVANI 104
“S22 18” ANTHIYUR 105
“S22 18” GOBICHETTIPALAYAM 106
“S22 18” TIRUPPUR (NORTH) 113
“S22 18” TIRUPPUR (SOUTH) 114
TN NILGIRIS “S22 19” BHAVANISAGAR 107
“S22 19” UDHAGAMANDALAM 108
“S22 19” GUDALUR 109
“S22 19” COONOOR 110
“S22 19” METTUPPALAYAM 111
“S22 19” AVANASHI 112
TN COIMBATORE “S22 20” PALLADAM 115
“S22 20” SULUR 116
“S22 20” KAVUNDAMPALAYAM 117
“S22 20” COIMBATORE (NORTH) 118
“S22 20” COIMBATORE (SOUTH) 120
“S22 20” SINGANALLUR 121
TN POLLACHI “S22 21” THONDAMUTHUR 119
“S22 21” KINATHUKADAVU 122
“S22 21” POLLACHI 123
“S22 21” VALPARAI 124
“S22 21” UDUMALAIPETTAI 125
“S22 21” MADATHUKULAM 126
TN DINDIGUL “S22 22” PALANI 127
“S22 22” ODDANCHATRAM 128
“S22 22” ATHOOR 129
“S22 22” NILAKKOTTAI 130
“S22 22” NATHAM 131
“S22 22” DINDIGUL 132
TN KARUR “S22 23” VEDASANDUR 133
“S22 23” ARAVAKURICHI 134
“S22 23” KARUR 135
“S22 23” KRISHNARAYAPURAM 136
“S22 23” MANAPPARAI 138
“S22 23” VIRALIMALAI 179
TN TIRUCHIRAPPALLI “S22 24” SRIRANGAM 139
“S22 24” TIRUCHIRAPPALLI (WEST) 140
“S22 24” TIRUCHIRAPPALLI (EAST) 141
“S22 24” THIRUVERUMBUR 142
“S22 24” GANDARVAKOTTAI 178
“S22 24” PUDUKKOTTAI 180
TN PERAMBALUR “S22 25” KULITHALAI 137
“S22 25” LALGUDI 143
“S22 25” MANACHANALLUR 144
“S22 25” MUSIRI 145
“S22 25” THURAIYUR 146
“S22 25” PERAMBALUR 147
TN CUDDALORE “S22 26” TITTAKUDI 151
“S22 26” VRIDDHACHALAM 152
“S22 26” NEYVELI 153
“S22 26” PANRUTI 154
“S22 26” CUDDALORE 155
“S22 26” KURINJIPADI 156
TN CHIDAMBARAM “S22 27” KUNNAM 148
“S22 27” ARIYALUR 149
“S22 27” JAYANKONDAM 150
“S22 27” BHUVANAGIRI 157
“S22 27” CHIDAMBARAM 158
“S22 27” KATTUMANNARKOIL 159
TN MAYILADUTHURAI “S22 28” SIRKAZHI 160
“S22 28” MAYILADUTHURAI 161
“S22 28” POOMPUHAR 162
“S22 28” THIRUVIDAIMARUDUR 170
“S22 28” KUMBAKONAM 171
“S22 28” PAPANASAM 172
TN NAGAPATTINAM “S22 29” NAGAPATTINAM 163
“S22 29” KILVELUR 164
“S22 29” VEDARANYAM 165
“S22 29” THIRUTHURAIPOONDI 166
“S22 29” THIRUVARUR 168
“S22 29” NANNILAM 169
TN THANJAVUR “S22 30” MANNARGUDI 167
“S22 30” THIRUVAIYARU 173
“S22 30” THANJAVUR 174
“S22 30” ORATTANADU 175
“S22 30” PATTUKKOTTAI 176
“S22 30” PERAVURANI 177
TN SIVAGANGA “S22 31” THIRUMAYAM 181
“S22 31” ALANGUDI 182
“S22 31” KARAIKUDI 184
“S22 31” TIRUPPATTUR 185
“S22 31” SIVAGANGA 186
“S22 31” MANAMADURAI 187
TN MADURAI “S22 32” MELUR 188
“S22 32” MADURAI EAST 189
“S22 32” MADURAI NORTH 191
“S22 32” MADURAI SOUTH 192
“S22 32” MADURAI CENTRAL 193
“S22 32” MADURAI WEST 194
TN THENI “S22 33” SHOLAVANDAN 190
“S22 33” USILAMPATTI 197
“S22 33” ANDIPATTI 198
“S22 33” PERIYAKULAM 199
“S22 33” BODINAYACKANUR 200
“S22 33” CUMBUM 201
TN VIRUDHUNAGAR “S22 34” THIRUPARANKUNDRAM 195
“S22 34” THIRUMANGALAM 196
“S22 34” SATTUR 204
“S22 34” SIVAKASI 205
“S22 34” VIRUDHUNAGAR 206
“S22 34” ARUPPUKKOTTAI 207
TN RAMANATHAPURAM “S22 35” ARANTHANGI 183
“S22 35” TIRUCHULI 208
“S22 35” PARAMAKUDI 209
“S22 35” TIRUVADANAI 210
“S22 35” RAMANATHAPURAM 211
“S22 35” MUDHUKULATHUR 212
TN THOOTHUKKUDI “S22 36” VILATHIKULAM 213
“S22 36” THOOTHUKKUDI 214
“S22 36” TIRUCHENDUR 215
“S22 36” SRIVAIKUNTAM 216
“S22 36” OTTAPIDARAM 217
“S22 36” KOVILPATTI 218
TN TENKASI “S22 37” RAJAPALAYAM 202
“S22 37” SRIVILLIPUTHUR 203
“S22 37” SANKARANKOVIL 219
“S22 37” VASUDEVANALLUR 220
“S22 37” KADAYANALLUR 221
“S22 37” TENKASI 222
TN TIRUNELVELI “S22 38” ALANGULAM 223
“S22 38” TIRUNELVELI 224
“S22 38” AMBASAMUDRAM 225
“S22 38” PALAYAMKOTTAI 226
“S22 38” NANGUNERI 227
“S22 38” RADHAPURAM 228
TN KANNIYAKUMARI “S22 39” KANNIYAKUMARI 229
“S22 39” NAGERCOIL 230
“S22 39” COLACHEL 231
“S22 39” PADMANABHAPURAM 232
“S22 39” VILAVANCODE 233
“S22 39” KILLIYOOR 234
TR TRIPURA WEST “S23 1” SIMNA 1
“S23 1” MOHANPUR 2
“S23 1” BAMUTIA 3
“S23 1” BARJALA 4
“S23 1” KHAYERPUR 5
“S23 1” AGARTALA 6
“S23 1” RAMNAGAR 7
“S23 1” TOWN BORDOWALI 8
“S23 1” BANAMALIPUR 9
“S23 1” MAJLISHPUR 10
“S23 1” MANDAIBAZAR 11
“S23 1” TAKARJALA 12
“S23 1” PRATAPGARH 13
“S23 1” BADHARGHAT 14
“S23 1” KAMALASAGAR 15
“S23 1” BISHALGARH 16
“S23 1” GOLAGHATI 17
“S23 1” SURYAMANINAGAR 18
“S23 1” CHARILAM 19
“S23 1” BOXANAGAR 20
“S23 1” NALCHAR 21
“S23 1” SONAMURA 22
“S23 1” DHANPUR 23
“S23 1” BAGMA 30
“S23 1” RADHAKISHOREPUR 31
“S23 1” MATARBARI 32
“S23 1” KAKRABAN-SALGARH 33
“S23 1” RAJNAGAR 34
“S23 1” BELONIA 35
“S23 1” SANTIRBAZAR 36
TR TRIPURA EAST “S23 2” RAMCHANDRAGHAT 24
“S23 2” KHOWAI 25
“S23 2” ASHARAMBARI 26
“S23 2” KALYANPUR-PRAMODENAGAR 27
“S23 2” TELIAMURA 28
“S23 2” KRISHNAPUR 29
“S23 2” HRISHYAMUKH 37
“S23 2” JOLAIBARI 38
“S23 2” MANU 39
“S23 2” SABROOM 40
“S23 2” AMPINAGAR 41
“S23 2” AMARPUR 42
“S23 2” KARBOOK 43
“S23 2” RAIMA VALLEY 44
“S23 2” KAMALPUR 45
“S23 2” SURMA 46
“S23 2” AMBASSA 47
“S23 2” KARMACHHARA 48
“S23 2” CHAWAMANU 49
“S23 2” PABIACHHARA 50
“S23 2” FATIKROY 51
“S23 2” CHANDIPUR 52
“S23 2” KAILASHAHAR 53
“S23 2” KADAMTALA-KURTI 54
“S23 2” BAGBASSA 55
“S23 2” DHARMANAGAR 56
“S23 2” JUBARAJNAGAR 57
“S23 2” PANISAGAR 58
“S23 2” PENCHARTHAL 59
“S23 2” KANCHANPUR 60
UP SAHARANPUR “S24 1” BEHAT 1
“S24 1” SAHARANPUR NAGAR 3
“S24 1” SAHARANPUR 4
“S24 1” DEOBAND 5
“S24 1” RAMPUR MANIHARAN 6
UP KAIRANA “S24 2” NAKUR 2
“S24 2” GANGOH 7
“S24 2” KAIRANA 8
“S24 2” THANA BHAWAN 9
“S24 2” SHAMLI 10
UP MUZAFFARNAGAR “S24 3” BUDHANA 11
“S24 3” CHARTHAWAL 12
“S24 3” MUZAFFAR NAGAR 14
“S24 3” KHATAULI 15
“S24 3” SARDHANA 44
UP BIJNOR “S24 4” PURQAZI 13
“S24 4” MEERAPUR 16
“S24 4” BIJNOR 22
“S24 4” CHANDPUR 23
“S24 4” HASTINAPUR 45
UP NAGINA “S24 5” NAJIBABAD 17
“S24 5” NAGINA 18
“S24 5” DHAMPUR 20
“S24 5” NEHTAUR 21
“S24 5” NOORPUR 24
UP MORADABAD “S24 6” BARHAPUR 19
“S24 6” KANTH 25
“S24 6” THKURDWARA 26
“S24 6” MORADABAD RURAL 27
“S24 6” MORADABAD NAGAR 28
UP RAMPUR “S24 7” SUAR 34
“S24 7” CHAMRAUA 35
“S24 7” BILASPUR 36
“S24 7” RAMPUR 37
“S24 7” MILAK 38
UP SAMBHAL “S24 8” KUNDARKI 29
“S24 8” BILARI 30
“S24 8” CHANDAUSI 31
“S24 8” ASMOLI 32
“S24 8” SAMBHAL 33
UP AMROHA “S24 9” DHANAURA 39
“S24 9” NAUGAWAN SADAT 40
“S24 9” AMROHA 41
“S24 9” HASANPUR 42
“S24 9” GARHMUKTESHWAR 60
UP MEERUT “S24 10” KITHORE 46
“S24 10” MEERUT CANTT. 47
“S24 10” MEERUT 48
“S24 10” MEERUT SOUTH 49
“S24 10” HAPUR 59
UP BAGHPAT “S24 11” SIWAL KHAS 43
“S24 11” CHHAPRAULI 50
“S24 11” BARAUT 51
“S24 11” BAGHPAT 52
“S24 11” MONI NAGAR 57
UP GHAZIABAD “S24 12” LONI 53
“S24 12” MURADNAGAR 54
“S24 12” SAHIBABAD 55
“S24 12” GAZIABAD 56
“S24 12” DHOLANA 58
UP GAUTAM BUDDH NAGAR “S24 13” NOIDA 61
“S24 13” DADRI 62
“S24 13” JEWAR 63
“S24 13” SIKANDRABAD 64
“S24 13” KHURJA 70
UP BULANDSHAHR “S24 14” BULANDSHAHR 65
“S24 14” SYANA 66
“S24 14” ANUPSHAHR 67
“S24 14” DEBAI 68
“S24 14” SHIKARPUR 69
UP ALIGARH “S24 15” KHAIR 71
“S24 15” BARAULI 72
“S24 15” ATRAULI 73
“S24 15” KOIL 75
“S24 15” ALIGARH 76
UP HATHRAS “S24 16” CHHARRA 74
“S24 16” IGLAS 77
“S24 16” HATHRAS 78
“S24 16” SADABAD 79
“S24 16” SIKANDRA RAO 80
UP MATHURA “S24 17” CHHATA 81
“S24 17” MANT 82
“S24 17” GOVERDHAN 83
“S24 17” MATHURA 84
“S24 17” BALDEV 85
UP AGRA “S24 18” ETMADPUR 86
“S24 18” AGRA CANTT. 87
“S24 18” AGRA SOUTH 88
“S24 18” AGRA NORTH 89
“S24 18” JALESAR 106
UP FATEHPUR SIKRI “S24 19” AGRA RURAL 90
“S24 19” FATEHPUR SIKARI 91
“S24 19” KHERAGARH 92
“S24 19” FATEHABAD 93
“S24 19” BAH 94
UP FIROZABAD “S24 20” TUNDLA 95
“S24 20” JASRANA 96
“S24 20” FIROZABAD 97
“S24 20” SHIKOHABAD 98
“S24 20” SIRSAGANJ 99
UP MAINPURI “S24 21” MAINPURI 107
“S24 21” BHONGAON 108
“S24 21” KISHANI 109
“S24 21” KARHAL 110
“S24 21” JASWANTNAGAR 199
UP ETAH “S24 22” KASGANJ 100
“S24 22” AMANPUR 101
“S24 22” PATIYALI 102
“S24 22” ETAH 104
“S24 22” MARHARA 105
UP BADAUN “S24 23” GUNNAUR 111
“S24 23” BISAULI 112
“S24 23” SAHASWAN 113
“S24 23” BILSI 114
“S24 23” BUDAUN 115
UP AONLA “S24 24” SHEKHUPUR 116
“S24 24” DATAGANJ 117
“S24 24” FARIDPUR 122
“S24 24” BITHARI CHAINPUR 123
“S24 24” AONLA 126
UP BAREILLY “S24 25” MEERGANJ 119
“S24 25” GHOJIPURA 120
“S24 25” NAWABGANJ 121
“S24 25” BAREILLY 124
“S24 25” BARELLY CANTT. 125
UP PILIBHIT “S24 26” BAHERI 118
“S24 26” PILIBHIT 127
“S24 26” BARKHERA 128
“S24 26” PURANPUR 129
“S24 26” BISALPUR 130
UP SHAHJAHANPUR “S24 27” KATRA 131
“S24 27” JALALABAD 132
“S24 27” TILHAR 133
“S24 27” POWAYAN 134
“S24 27” SHAHJAHANPUR 135
“S24 27” DADRAUL 136
UP KHERI “S24 28” PALIA 137
“S24 28” NIGHASAN 138
“S24 28” GOLA GOKRANNATH 139
“S24 28” SRI NAGAR 140
“S24 28” LAKHIMPUR 142
UP DHAURAHRA “S24 29” DHAURAHRA 141
“S24 29” KASTA 143
“S24 29” MOHAMMDI 144
“S24 29” MAHOLI 145
“S24 29” HARGAON 147
UP SITAPUR “S24 30” SITAPUR 146
“S24 30” LAHARPUR 148
“S24 30” BISWAN 149
“S24 30” SEVATA 150
“S24 30” MAHMOODABAD 151
UP HARDOI “S24 31” SAWAIJPUR 154
“S24 31” SHAHABAD 155
“S24 31” HARDOI 156
“S24 31” GOPAMAU 157
“S24 31” SANDI 158
UP MISRIKH “S24 32” MISRIKH 153
“S24 32” BILGRAM-MALLANWAN 159
“S24 32” BALAMAU 160
“S24 32” SANDILA 161
“S24 32” BILHAUR 209
UP UNNAO “S24 33” BANGARMAU 162
“S24 33” SAFIPUR 163
“S24 33” MOHAN 164
“S24 33” UNNAO 165
“S24 33” BHAGWANTNAGAR 166
“S24 33” PURWA 167
UP MOHANLALGANJ “S24 34” SIDHAULI 152
“S24 34” MALIHABAD 168
“S24 34” BAKSHI KAA TALAB 169
“S24 34” SAROJINI NAGAR 170
“S24 34” MOHANLALGANJ 176
UP LUCKNOW “S24 35” LUCKNOW WEST 171
“S24 35” LUCKNOW NORTH 172
“S24 35” LUCKNOW EAST 173
“S24 35” LUCKNOW CENTRAL 174
“S24 35” LUCKNOW CANTT. 175
UP RAE BARELI “S24 36” BACHHRAWAN 177
“S24 36” HARCHANDPUR 179
“S24 36” RAE BARELI 180
“S24 36” SARENI 182
“S24 36” UNCHAHAR 183
UP AMETHI “S24 37” TILOI 178
“S24 37” SALON 181
“S24 37” JAGDISHPUR 184
“S24 37” GAURIGANJ 185
“S24 37” AMETHI 186
UP SULTANPUR “S24 38” ISAULI 187
“S24 38” SULTANPUR 188
“S24 38” SADAR 189
“S24 38” LAMBHUA 190
“S24 38” KADIPUR 191
UP PRATAPGARH “S24 39” RAMPUR KHAS 244
“S24 39” BISHWAVNATHGANJ 247
“S24 39” PRATAPGARH 248
“S24 39” PATTI 249
“S24 39” RANIGANJ 250
UP FARRUKHABAD “S24 40” ALIGANJ 103
“S24 40” KAIMGANJ 192
“S24 40” AMRITPUR 193
“S24 40” FARRUKHABAD 194
“S24 40” BHOJPUR 195
UP ETAWAH “S24 41” ETAWAH 200
“S24 41” BHARTHANA 201
“S24 41” DIBIYAPUR 203
“S24 41” AURAIYA 204
“S24 41” SIKANDRA 207
UP KANNAUJ “S24 42” CHHIBRAMAU 196
“S24 42” TIRWA 197
“S24 42” KANNAUJ 198
“S24 42” BIDHUNA 202
“S24 42” RASULABAD 205
UP KANPUR “S24 43” GOVINDNAGAR 212
“S24 43” SISHAMAU 213
“S24 43” ARYA NAGAR 214
“S24 43” DIDWAI NAGAR 215
“S24 43” KANPUR CANTT. 216
UP AKBARPUR “S24 44” AKBARPUR – RANIYA 206
“S24 44” BITHOOR 210
“S24 44” KALYANPUR 211
“S24 44” MAHARAJPUR 217
“S24 44” GHATAMPUR 218
UP JALAUN “S24 45” BHOGNIPUR 208
“S24 45” MADHAUGARH 219
“S24 45” KALPI 220
“S24 45” ORAI 221
“S24 45” GARAUTHA 225
UP JHANSI “S24 46” BABINA 222
“S24 46” JHANSI NAGAR 223
“S24 46” MAURANIPUR 224
“S24 46” LALITPUR 226
“S24 46” MEHRONI 227
UP HAMIRPUR “S24 47” HAMIRPUR 228
“S24 47” RATH 229
“S24 47” MAHOBA 230
“S24 47” CHARKHARI 231
“S24 47” TINDWARI 232
UP BANDA “S24 48” BABERU 233
“S24 48” NARAINI 234
“S24 48” BANDA 235
“S24 48” CHITRAKOOT 236
“S24 48” MANIKPUR 237
UP FATEHPUR “S24 49” JAHANABAD 238
“S24 49” BINKDI 239
“S24 49” FATEHPUR 240
“S24 49” AYAH SHAH 241
“S24 49” HUSAINGANJ 242
“S24 49” KHAGA 243
UP KAUSHAMBI “S24 50” BABAGANJ 245
“S24 50” KUNDA 246
“S24 50” SIRATHU 251
“S24 50” MANJHANPUR 252
“S24 50” CHAIL 253
UP PHULPUR “S24 51” PHAPHAMAU 254
“S24 51” SORAON 255
“S24 51” PHULPUR 256
“S24 51” ALLAHABAD WEST 261
“S24 51” ALLAHABAD NORTH 262
UP ALLAHABAD “S24 52” MEJA 259
“S24 52” KARCHHANA 260
“S24 52” ALLAHABAD SOUTH 263
“S24 52” BARA 264
“S24 52” KORAON 265
UP BARABANKI “S24 53” KURSI 266
“S24 53” RAM NAGAR 267
“S24 53” BARABANKI 268
“S24 53” ZAIDPUR 269
“S24 53” HAIDERGARH 272
UP FAIZABAD “S24 54” DARIYABAD 270
“S24 54” RUDAULI 271
“S24 54” MILKIPUR 273
“S24 54” BIKAPUR 274
“S24 54” AYODHYA 275
UP AMBEDKAR NAGAR “S24 55” GOSHAINGANJ 276
“S24 55” KATEHARI 277
“S24 55” TANDA 278
“S24 55” JALALPUR 280
“S24 55” AKBARPUR 281
UP BAHRAICH “S24 56” BALHA 282
“S24 56” NANPARA 283
“S24 56” MATERA 284
“S24 56” MAHSI 285
“S24 56” BAHRAICH 286
UP KAISERGANJ “S24 57” PAYAGPUR 287
“S24 57” KAISERGANJ 288
“S24 57” KATRA BAZAR 297
“S24 57” COLONELGANJ 298
“S24 57” TARABGANJ 299
UP SHRAWASTI “S24 58” BHINGA 289
“S24 58” SHRAWASTI 290
“S24 58” TULSIPUR 291
“S24 58” GAINSARI 292
“S24 58” BALRAMPUR 294
UP GONDA “S24 59” UTRAULA 293
“S24 59” MEHNAUN 295
“S24 59” GONDA 296
“S24 59” MANKAPUR 300
“S24 59” GAURA 301
UP DOMARIYAGANJ “S24 60” SHOHRATGARH 302
“S24 60” KAPILVASTU 303
“S24 60” BANSI 304
“S24 60” ITWA 305
“S24 60” DUMARIYAGANJ 306
UP BASTI “S24 61” HARRAIYA 307
“S24 61” KAPTANGANJ 308
“S24 61” RUDHAULI 309
“S24 61” BASTI SADAR 310
“S24 61” MAHADEWA 311
UP SANT KABIR NAGAR “S24 62” ALAPUR 279
“S24 62” MENHDAWAL 312
“S24 62” KHALILABAD 313
“S24 62” DHANGHATA 314
“S24 62” KHAJNI 325
UP MAHARAJGANJ “S24 63” PHARENDA 315
“S24 63” NAUTANWA 316
“S24 63” SISWA 317
“S24 63” MAHARAJGANJ 318
“S24 63” PANIYARA 319
UP GORAKHPUR “S24 64” CAIMPIYARGANJ 320
“S24 64” PIPRAICH 321
“S24 64” GORAKHPUR URBAN 322
“S24 64” GORAKHPUR RURAL 323
“S24 64” SAHAJANWA 324
UP KUSHI NAGAR “S24 65” KHADDA 329
“S24 65” PADRAUNA 330
“S24 65” KUSHINAGAR 333
“S24 65” HATA 334
“S24 65” RAMKOLA 335
UP DEORIA “S24 66” TAMKUHI RAJ 331
“S24 66” FAZILNAGAR 332
“S24 66” DEORIA 337
“S24 66” PATHARDEVA 338
“S24 66” RAMPUR KARKHANA 339
UP BANSGAON “S24 67” CHAURI-CHAURA 326
“S24 67” BANSGAON 327
“S24 67” CHILLUPAR 328
“S24 67” RUDRAPUR 336
“S24 67” BARHAJ 342
UP LALGANJ “S24 68” ATRAULIYA 343
“S24 68” NIZAMABAD 348
“S24 68” PHOOLPUR PAWAI 349
“S24 68” DIDARGANJ 350
“S24 68” LALGANJ 351
UP AZAMGARH “S24 69” GOPALPUR 344
“S24 69” SAGRI 345
“S24 69” MUBARAKPUR 346
“S24 69” AZAMGARH 347
“S24 69” MEHNAGAR 352
UP GHOSI “S24 70” MADHUBAN 353
“S24 70” GHOSI 354
“S24 70” MUHAMMADABAD- GOHNA 355
“S24 70” MAU 356
“S24 70” RASARA 358
UP SALEMPUR “S24 71” BHATPAR RANI 340
“S24 71” SALEMPUR 341
“S24 71” BELTHARA ROAD 357
“S24 71” SIKANDARPUR 359
“S24 71” BANSDEEH 362
UP BALLIA “S24 72” PHEPHANA 360
“S24 72” BALLIA NAGAR 361
“S24 72” BAIRIA 363
“S24 72” ZAHOORABAD 377
“S24 72” MOHAMMADABAD 378
UP JAUNPUR “S24 73” BADLAPUR 364
“S24 73” SHAHGANJ 365
“S24 73” JAUNPUR 366
“S24 73” MALHANI 367
“S24 73” MUNGRA BADSHAHPUR 368
UP MACHHLISHAHR “S24 74” MACHHLISHAHR 369
“S24 74” MARIYAHU 370
“S24 74” ZAFRABAD 371
“S24 74” KERAKAT 372
“S24 74” PINDRA 384
UP GHAZIPUR “S24 75” JAKHANIAN 373
“S24 75” SAIDPUR 374
“S24 75” GHAZIPUR 375
“S24 75” JANGIPUR 376
“S24 75” ZAMANIA 379
UP CHANDAULI “S24 76” MUGHALSARAI 380
“S24 76” SAKALDIHA 381
“S24 76” SAIYADRAJA 382
“S24 76” AJAGARA 385
“S24 76” SHIVPUR 386
UP VARANASI “S24 77” ROHANIYA 387
“S24 77” VARANASI NORTH 388
“S24 77” VARANASI SOUTH 389
“S24 77” VARANASI CANTT. 390
“S24 77” SEVAPURI 391
UP BHADOHI “S24 78” PRATAPPUR 257
“S24 78” HANDIA 258
“S24 78” BHADOHI 392
“S24 78” GYANPUR 393
“S24 78” AURAI 394
UP MIRZAPUR “S24 79” CHHANBEY 395
“S24 79” MIRZAPUR 396
“S24 79” MAJHAWAN 397
“S24 79” CHUNAR 398
“S24 79” MARIHAN 399
UP ROBERTSGANJ “S24 80” CHAKIA 383
“S24 80” GHORAWAL 400
“S24 80” ROBERTSGANJ 401
“S24 80” OBRA 402
“S24 80” DUDDHI 403
WB COOCH BEHAR “S25 1” MATHABHANGA 2
“S25 1” COOCH BEHAR UTTAR 3
“S25 1” COOCH BEHAR DAKSHIN 4
“S25 1” SITALKUCHI 5
“S25 1” SITAI 6
“S25 1” DINHATA 7
“S25 1” NATABARI 8
WB ALIPURDUARS “S25 2” TUFANGANJ 9
“S25 2” KUMARGRAM 10
“S25 2” KALCHINI 11
“S25 2” ALIPURDUARS 12
“S25 2” FALAKATA 13
“S25 2” MADARIHAT 14
“S25 2” NAGRAKATA 21
WB JALPAIGURI “S25 3” MEKLIGANJ 1
“S25 3” DHUPGURI 15
“S25 3” MAYNAGURI 16
“S25 3” JALPAIGURI 17
“S25 3” RAJGANJ 18
“S25 3” DABGRAM-PHULBARI 19
“S25 3” MAL 20
WB DARJEELING “S25 4” KALIMPONG 22
“S25 4” DARJEELING 23
“S25 4” KURSEONG 24
“S25 4” MATIGARA-NAXALBARI 25
“S25 4” SILIGURI 26
“S25 4” PHANSIDEWA 27
“S25 4” CHOPRA 28
WB RAIGANJ “S25 5” ISLAMPUR 29
“S25 5” GOALPOKHAR 30
“S25 5” CHAKULIA 31
“S25 5” KARANDIGHI 32
“S25 5” HEMTABAD 33
“S25 5” KALIAGANJ 34
“S25 5” RAIGANJ 35
WB BALURGHAT “S25 6” ITAHAR 36
“S25 6” KUSHMANDI 37
“S25 6” KUMARGANJ 38
“S25 6” BALURGHAT 39
“S25 6” TAPAN 40
“S25 6” GANGARAMPUR 41
“S25 6” HARIRAMPUR 42
WB MALDAHA UTTAR “S25 7” HABIBPUR 43
“S25 7” GAZOLE 44
“S25 7” CHANCHAL 45
“S25 7” HARISCHANDRAPUR 46
“S25 7” MALATIPUR 47
“S25 7” RATUA 48
“S25 7” MALDAHA 50
WB MALDAHA DAKSHIN “S25 8” MANIKCHAK 49
“S25 8” ENGLISHBAZAR 51
“S25 8” MOTHABARI 52
“S25 8” SUJAPUR 53
“S25 8” BAISNABNAGAR 54
“S25 8” FARAKKA 55
“S25 8” SAMSERGANJ 56
WB JANGIPUR “S25 9” SUTI 57
“S25 9” JANGIPUR 58
“S25 9” RAGHUNATHGANJ 59
“S25 9” SAGARDIGHI 60
“S25 9” LALGOLA 61
“S25 9” NABAGRAM 65
“S25 9” KHARGRAM 66
WB BAHARAMPUR “S25 10” BURWAN 67
“S25 10” KANDI 68
“S25 10” BHARATPUR 69
“S25 10” REJINAGAR 70
“S25 10” BELDANGA 71
“S25 10” BAHARAMPUR 72
“S25 10” NAODA 74
WB MURSHIDABAD “S25 11” BHAGABANGOLA 62
“S25 11” RANINAGAR 63
“S25 11” MURSHIDABAD 64
“S25 11” HARIHARPARA 73
“S25 11” DOMKAL 75
“S25 11” JALANGI 76
“S25 11” KARIMPUR 77
WB KRISHNANAGAR “S25 12” TEHATTA 78
“S25 12” PALASHIPARA 79
“S25 12” KALIGANJ 80
“S25 12” NAKASHIPARA 81
“S25 12” CHAPRA 82
“S25 12” KRISHNANAGAR UTTAR 83
“S25 12” KRISHNANAGAR DAKSHIN 85
WB RANAGHAT “S25 13” NABADWIP 84
“S25 13” SANTIPUR 86
“S25 13” RANAGHAT UTTAR PASCHIM 87
“S25 13” KRISHNAGANJ 88
“S25 13” RANAGHAT UTTAR PURBA 89
“S25 13” RANAGHAT DAKSHIN 90
“S25 13” CHAKDAHA 91
WB BANGAON “S25 14” KALYANI 92
“S25 14” HARINGHATA 93
“S25 14” BAGDA 94
“S25 14” BANGAON UTTAR 95
“S25 14” BANGAON DAKSHIN 96
“S25 14” GAIGHATA 97
“S25 14” SWARUPNAGAR 98
WB BARRACKPORE “S25 15” AMDANGA 102
“S25 15” BIJPUR 103
“S25 15” NAIHATI 104
“S25 15” BHATPARA 105
“S25 15” JAGATDAL 106
“S25 15” NOAPARA 107
“S25 15” BARRACKPUR 108
WB DUM DUM “S25 16” KHARDAHA 109
“S25 16” DUM DUM UTTAR 110
“S25 16” PANIHATI 111
“S25 16” KAMARHATI 112
“S25 16” BARANAGAR 113
“S25 16” DUM DUM 114
“S25 16” RAJARHAT GOPALPUR 117
WB BARASAT “S25 17” HABRA 100
“S25 17” ASHOKNAGAR 101
“S25 17” RAJARHAT NEW TOWN 115
“S25 17” BIDHANNAGAR 116
“S25 17” MADHYAMGRAM 118
“S25 17” BARASAT 119
“S25 17” DEGANGA 120
WB BASIRHAT “S25 18” BADURIA 99
“S25 18” HAROA 121
“S25 18” MINAKHAN 122
“S25 18” SANDESHKHALI 123
“S25 18” BASIRHAT DAKSHIN 124
“S25 18” BASIRHAT UTTAR 125
“S25 18” HINGALGANJ 126
WB JOYNAGAR “S25 19” GOSABA 127
“S25 19” BASANTI 128
“S25 19” KULTALI 129
“S25 19” JOYNAGAR 136
“S25 19” CANNING PASCHIM 138
“S25 19” CANNING PURBA 139
“S25 19” MAGRAHAT PURBA 141
WB MATHURAPUR “S25 20” PATHARPRATIMA 130
“S25 20” KAKDWIP 131
“S25 20” SAGAR 132
“S25 20” KULPI 133
“S25 20” RAIDIGHI 134
“S25 20” MANDIRBAZAR 135
“S25 20” MAGRAHAT PASCHIM 142
WB DIAMOND HARBOUR “S25 21” DIAMOND HARBOUR 143
“S25 21” FALTA 144
“S25 21” SATGACHHIA 145
“S25 21” BISHNUPUR 146
“S25 21” MAHESHTALA 155
“S25 21” BUDGE BUDGE 156
“S25 21” METIABURUZ 157
WB JADAVPUR “S25 22” BARUIPUR PURBA 137
“S25 22” BARUIPUR PASCHIM 140
“S25 22” SONARPUR DAKSHIN 147
“S25 22” BHANGAR 148
“S25 22” JADAVPUR 150
“S25 22” SONARPUR UTTAR 151
“S25 22” TOLLYGANJ 152
WB KOLKATA DAKSHIN “S25 23” KASBA 149
“S25 23” BEHALA PURBA 153
“S25 23” BEHALA PASCHIM 154
“S25 23” KOLKATA PORT 158
“S25 23” BHABANIPUR 159
“S25 23” RASHBEHARI 160
“S25 23” BALLYGUNGE 161
WB KOLKATA UTTAR “S25 24” CHOWRANGEE 162
“S25 24” ENTALLY 163
“S25 24” BELEGHATA 164
“S25 24” JORASANKO 165
“S25 24” SHYAMPUKUR 166
“S25 24” MANIKTOLA 167
“S25 24” KASHIPUR-BELGACHHIA 168
WB HOWRAH “S25 25” BALLY 169
“S25 25” HOWRAH UTTAR 170
“S25 25” HOWRAH MADHYA 171
“S25 25” SHIBPUR 172
“S25 25” HOWRAH DAKSHIN 173
“S25 25” SANKRAIL 174
“S25 25” PANCHLA 175
WB ULUBERIA “S25 26” ULUBERIA PURBA 176
“S25 26” ULUBERIA UTTAR 177
“S25 26” ULUBERIA DAKSHIN 178
“S25 26” SHYAMPUR 179
“S25 26” BAGNAN 180
“S25 26” AMTA 181
“S25 26” UDAYNARAYANPUR 182
WB SRERAMPUR “S25 27” JAGATBALLAVPUR 183
“S25 27” DOMJUR 184
“S25 27” UTTARPARA 185
“S25 27” SREERAMPUR 186
“S25 27” CHAMPDANI 187
“S25 27” CHANDITALA 194
“S25 27” JANGIPARA 195
WB HOOGHLY “S25 28” SINGUR 188
“S25 28” CHANDANNAGAR 189
“S25 28” CHUNCHURA 190
“S25 28” BALAGARH 191
“S25 28” PANDUA 192
“S25 28” SAPTAGRAM 193
“S25 28” DHANEKHALI 197
WB ARAMBAGH “S25 29” HARIPAL 196
“S25 29” TARAKESWAR 198
“S25 29” PURSURAH 199
“S25 29” ARAMBAG 200
“S25 29” GOGHAT 201
“S25 29” KHANAKUL 202
“S25 29” CHANDRAKONA 232
WB TAMLUK “S25 30” TAMLUK 203
“S25 30” PANSKURA PURBA 204
“S25 30” MOYNA 206
“S25 30” NANDAKUMAR 207
“S25 30” MAHISHADAL 208
“S25 30” HALDIA 209
“S25 30” NANDIGRAM 210
WB KANTHI “S25 31” CHANDIPUR 211
“S25 31” PATASHPUR 212
“S25 31” KANTHI UTTAR 213
“S25 31” BHAGABANPUR 214
“S25 31” KHEJURI 215
“S25 31” KANTHI DAKSHIN 216
“S25 31” RAMNAGAR 217
WB GHATAL “S25 32” PANSKURA PASCHIM 205
“S25 32” SABANG 226
“S25 32” PINGLA 227
“S25 32” DEBRA 229
“S25 32” DASPUR 230
“S25 32” GHATAL 231
“S25 32” KESHPUR 235
WB JHARGRAM “S25 33” NAYAGRAM 220
“S25 33” GOPIBALLAVPUR 221
“S25 33” JHARGRAM 222
“S25 33” GARBETA 233
“S25 33” SALBONI 234
“S25 33” BINPUR 237
“S25 33” BANDWAN 238
WB MEDINIPUR “S25 34” EGRA 218
“S25 34” DANTAN 219
“S25 34” KESHIARY 223
“S25 34” KHARAGPUR SADAR 224
“S25 34” NARAYANGARH 225
“S25 34” KHARAGPUR 228
“S25 34” MEDINIPUR 236
WB PURULIA “S25 35” BALARAMPUR 239
“S25 35” BAGHMUNDI 240
“S25 35” JOYPUR 241
“S25 35” PURULIA 242
“S25 35” MANBAZAR 243
“S25 35” KASHIPUR 244
“S25 35” PARA 245
WB BANKURA “S25 36” RAGHUNATHPUR 246
“S25 36” SALTORA 247
“S25 36” CHHATNA 248
“S25 36” RANIBANDH 249
“S25 36” RAIPUR 250
“S25 36” TALDANGRA 251
“S25 36” BANKURA 252
WB BISHNUPUR “S25 37” BARJORA 253
“S25 37” ONDA 254
“S25 37” BISHNUPUR 255
“S25 37” KATULPUR 256
“S25 37” INDUS 257
“S25 37” SONAMUKHI 258
“S25 37” KHANDAGHOSH 259
WB BARDHAMAN PURBA “S25 38” RAINA 261
“S25 38” JAMALPUR 262
“S25 38” KALNA 264
“S25 38” MEMARI 265
“S25 38” PURBASTHALI DAKSHIN 268
“S25 38” PURBASTHALI UTTAR 269
“S25 38” KATWA 270
WB BURDWAN – DURGAPUR “S25 39” BURDWAN DAKSHIN 260
“S25 39” MONTESWAR 263
“S25 39” BURDWAN UTTAR 266
“S25 39” BHATAR 267
“S25 39” GALSI 274
“S25 39” DURGAPUR PURBA 276
“S25 39” DURGAPUR PASCHIM 277
WB ASANSOL “S25 40” PANDABESWAR 275
“S25 40” RANIGANJ 278
“S25 40” JAMURIA 279
“S25 40” ASNSOL DAKSHIN 280
“S25 40” ASANSOL UTTAR 281
“S25 40” KULTI 282
“S25 40” BARABANI 283
WB BOLPUR “S25 41” KETUGRAM 271
“S25 41” MANGALKOT 272
“S25 41” AUSGRAM 273
“S25 41” BOLPUR 286
“S25 41” NANOOR 287
“S25 41” LABHPUR 288
“S25 41” MAYURESWAR 290
WB BIRBHUM “S25 42” DUBRAJPUR 284
“S25 42” SURI 285
“S25 42” SAINTHIA 289
“S25 42” RAMPURHAT 291
“S25 42” HANSAN 292
“S25 42” NALHATI 293
“S25 42” MURARAI 294
CG SARGUJA “S26 1” PREMNAGAR 4
“S26 1” BHATGAON 5
“S26 1” PRATAPPUR 6
“S26 1” RAMANUJGANJ 7
“S26 1” SAMRI 8
“S26 1” LUNDRA 9
“S26 1” AMBIKAPUR 10
“S26 1” SITAPUR 11
CG RAIGARH “S26 2” JASHPUR 12
“S26 2” KUNKURI 13
“S26 2” PATHALGAON 14
“S26 2” LAILUNDRA 15
“S26 2” RAIGARH 16
“S26 2” SARANGARH 17
“S26 2” KHARSIA 18
“S26 2” DHARAMJAIGARH 19
CG JANJGIR-CHAMPA “S26 3” AKALTARA 33
“S26 3” JAJGIR-CHAMPA 34
“S26 3” SAKRI 35
“S26 3” CHANDRAPURA 36
“S26 3” JAIJAIPUR 37
“S26 3” PAMGARH 38
“S26 3” BILAIGARH 43
“S26 3” KASDOL 44
CG KORBA “S26 4” BHARATPUR-SONHAT 1
“S26 4” MANENDRAGARH 2
“S26 4” BAIKUNTHPUR 3
“S26 4” RAMPUR 20
“S26 4” KOBRA 21
“S26 4” KATGHORA 22
“S26 4” PALI-TANAKHAR 23
“S26 4” MARWAHI 24
CG BILASPUR “S26 5” KOTA 25
“S26 5” LORMI 26
“S26 5” MUNGELI 27
“S26 5” TAKHATPUR 28
“S26 5” BILHA 29
“S26 5” BILASPUR 30
“S26 5” BELTARA 31
“S26 5” MASTURI 32
CG RAJNANDGAON “S26 6” PANDARIYA 71
“S26 6” KAWARGHA 72
“S26 6” KHAIRAGARH 73
“S26 6” DONGARGARH 74
“S26 6” RAJNANDGAON 75
“S26 6” DONGARGAON 76
“S26 6” KHUJJI 77
“S26 6” MOHALA-MANPUR 78
CG DURG “S26 7” PATAN 62
“S26 7” DURG-RURAL 63
“S26 7” DURG-CITY 64
“S26 7” DURG-NAGAR 65
“S26 7” VAISHALI NAGAR 66
“S26 7” AHIWARA 67
“S26 7” SAJA 68
“S26 7” BEMETARA 69
“S26 7” NAWAGARH 70
CG RAIPUR “S26 8” BALODA BAZAR 45
“S26 8” BHATAPARA 46
“S26 8” DHARSIWA 47
“S26 8” RAIPUR RURAL 48
“S26 8” RAIPUR CITY WEST 49
“S26 8” RAIPUR CITY NORTH 50
“S26 8” RAIPUR CITY SOUTH 51
“S26 8” ARANG 52
“S26 8” ABHANPUR 53
CG MAHASAMUND “S26 9” SARAIPALI 39
“S26 9” BASNA 40
“S26 9” KHALLARI 41
“S26 9” MAHASAMUND 42
“S26 9” RAJIM 54
“S26 9” BINDRANAWAGARH 55
“S26 9” KURUD 57
“S26 9” DHAMTARI 58
CG BASTAR “S26 10” KONDAGAON 83
“S26 10” NARAYANPUR 84
“S26 10” BASTAR 85
“S26 10” JAGDALPUR 86
“S26 10” CHITRAKOT 87
“S26 10” DANTEWARA 88
“S26 10” BIJAPUR 89
“S26 10” KONTA 90
CG KANKER “S26 11” SIHAWA 56
“S26 11” SANJARI BALOD 59
“S26 11” DONDI LAHARA 60
“S26 11” GUNDERDEHI 61
“S26 11” ANTAGARH 79
“S26 11” BHANUPRATAPPUR 80
“S26 11” KANKER 81
“S26 11” KESHKAR 82
JH RAJMAHAL “S27 1” RAJMAHAL 1
“S27 1” BORIO 2
“S27 1” BARHAIT 3
“S27 1” LITIPARA 4
“S27 1” PAKHUR 5
“S27 1” MAHESHPUR 6
JH DUMKA “S27 2” SHIKARIPARA 7
“S27 2” NALA 8
“S27 2” JAMTARA 9
“S27 2” DUMKA 10
“S27 2” JAMA 11
“S27 2” SARATH 14
JH GODDA “S27 3” JARMUNDI 12
“S27 3” MADHUPUR 13
“S27 3” DEOGHAR 15
“S27 3” POREYAHAT 16
“S27 3” GODDA 17
“S27 3” MAHAGAMA 18
JH CHATRA “S27 4” SIMARIA 26
“S27 4” CHATRA 27
“S27 4” MANIKA 73
“S27 4” LATEHAR 74
“S27 4” PANKI 75
JH KODARMA “S27 5” KODARMA 19
“S27 5” BARKATHA 20
“S27 5” DHANWAR 28
“S27 5” BAGODAR 29
“S27 5” JAMUA 30
“S27 5” GANDEY 31
JH GIRIDIH “S27 6” GIRIDIH 32
“S27 6” DUMRI 33
“S27 6” GOMIYA 34
“S27 6” BERMO 35
“S27 6” TUNDI 42
“S27 6” BAGHMARA 43
JH DHANBAD “S27 7” BOKARO 36
“S27 7” CHANDANKYARI 37
“S27 7” SINDRI 38
“S27 7” NIRSA 39
“S27 7” DHANBAD 40
“S27 7” JHARIA 41
JH RANCHI “S27 8” ICHAGARH 50
“S27 8” SILLI 61
“S27 8” KHIJRI 62
“S27 8” RANCHI 63
“S27 8” HATIA 64
“S27 8” KANKE 65
JH JAMSHEDPUR “S27 9” BAHARAGORA 44
“S27 9” GHATSHILA 45
“S27 9” POTKA 46
“S27 9” JUGASHLAI 47
“S27 9” JAMSHEDPUR EAST 48
“S27 9” JAMSHEDPUR WEST 49
JH SINGHBHUM “S27 10” SARAIKELLA 51
“S27 10” CHAIBASA 52
“S27 10” MAJHGANON 53
“S27 10” JAGANATHPUR 54
“S27 10” MANOHARPUR 55
“S27 10” CHAKRADHARPUR 56
JH KHUNTI “S27 11” KHARASAWAN 57
“S27 11” TAMAR 58
“S27 11” KHUNTI 60
“S27 11” TORPA 60
“S27 11” SIMDEGA 70
“S27 11” KOLEBIRA 71
JH LOHARDAGA “S27 12” MANDAR 66
“S27 12” SISAI 67
“S27 12” GUMLA 68
“S27 12” BISHUNPUR 69
“S27 12” LOHARDAGA 72
JH PALAMAU “S27 13” DALTONGANJ 76
“S27 13” BISHRAMPUR 77
“S27 13” CHATTARPUR 78
“S27 13” HUSSAINABAD 79
“S27 13” GARHWA 80
“S27 13” BHAWANATHPUR 81
JH HAZARIBAGH “S27 14” BARHI 21
“S27 14” BARKAGAON 22
“S27 14” RAMGARH 23
“S27 14” MANDHU 24
“S27 14” HAZARIBAGH 25
UK TEHRI GARHWAL “S28 1” PUROLA 1
“S28 1” YAMUNOTRI 2
“S28 1” GANGOTRI 3
“S28 1” GHANSHALI 9
“S28 1” PRATAPNAGAR 12
“S28 1” TEHRI 13
“S28 1” DHANOLTI 14
“S28 1” CHAKRATA 15
“S28 1” VIKASNAGAR 16
“S28 1” SAHASPUR 17
“S28 1” RAIPUR 19
“S28 1” RAJPUR ROAD 20
“S28 1” DEHRADUN CANTT. 21
“S28 1” MUSSOORIE 22
UK GARHWAL “S28 2” BADRINATH 4
“S28 2” THARALI 5
“S28 2” KARNPRAYAG 6
“S28 2” KEDARNATH 7
“S28 2” RUDRAPRAYAG 8
“S28 2” DEOPRAYAG 10
“S28 2” NARENDRANAGAR 11
“S28 2” YAMKESHWAR 36
“S28 2” PAURI 37
“S28 2” SRINAGAR 38
“S28 2” CHAUBATTAKHAL 39
“S28 2” LANSDOWNE 40
“S28 2” KOTDWAR 41
“S28 2” RAMNAGAR 61
UK ALMORA “S28 3” DHARCHULA 42
“S28 3” DIDIHAT 43
“S28 3” PITHORAGARH 44
“S28 3” GANGOLIHAT 45
“S28 3” KAPKOTE 46
“S28 3” BAGESHWAR 47
“S28 3” DWARAHAT 48
“S28 3” SALT 49
“S28 3” RANIKHET 50
“S28 3” SOMESHWAR 51
“S28 3” ALMORA 52
“S28 3” JAGESHWAR 53
“S28 3” LOHAGHAT 54
“S28 3” CHAMPAWAT 55
UK NAINITAL-UDHAMSINGH NAGAR “S28 4” LALKUWA 56
“S28 4” BHIMTAL 57
“S28 4” NAINITAL 58
“S28 4” HALDWANI 59
“S28 4” KALADHUNGI 60
“S28 4” JASPUR 62
“S28 4” KASHIPUR 63
“S28 4” BAJPUR 64
“S28 4” GADARPUR 65
“S28 4” RUDRAPUR 66
“S28 4” KICHHA 67
“S28 4” SITARGANJ 68
“S28 4” NANAK MATTA 69
“S28 4” KHATIMA 70
UK HARDWAR “S28 5” DHARAMPUR 18
“S28 5” DOIWALA 23
“S28 5” RISHIKESH 24
“S28 5” HARDWAR 25
“S28 5” B.H.E.L. RANIPUR 26
“S28 5” JWALAPUR 27
“S28 5” BHAGWANPUR 28
“S28 5” JHABRERA 29
“S28 5” PIRANKALIYAR 30
“S28 5” ROORKEE 31
“S28 5” KHANPUR 32
“S28 5” MANGLORE 33
“S28 5” LAKSAR 34
“S28 5” HARDWAR RURAL 35
AN ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ISLANDS “U01 1” ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ISLANDS 1
CH CHANDIGARH “U02 1” CHANDIGARH 1
DN DADAR & NAGAR HAVELI “U03 1” DADRA & NAGAR HAVELI 1
DD DAMAN & DIU “U04 1” DAMAN AND DIU 1
DL CHANDNI CHOWK “U05 1” ADARSH NAGAR 4
“U05 1” SHALIMAR BAGH 14
“U05 1” SHAKUR BASTI 15
“U05 1” TRI NAGAR 16
“U05 1” WAZIRPUR 17
“U05 1” MODEL TOWN 18
“U05 1” SADAR BAZAR 19
“U05 1” CHANDNI CHOWK 20
“U05 1” MATIA MAHAL 21
“U05 1” BALLIMARAN 22
DL NORTH EAST DELHI “U05 2” BURARI 2
“U05 2” TIMARPUR 3
“U05 2” SEEMA PURI 63
“U05 2” ROHTAS NAGAR 64
“U05 2” SEELAMPUR 65
“U05 2” GHONDA 66
“U05 2” BABARPUR 67
“U05 2” GOKALPUR 68
“U05 2” MUSTAFABAD 69
“U05 2” KARAWAL NAGAR 70
DL EAST DELHI “U05 3” JANGPURA 41
“U05 3” OKHLA 54
“U05 3” TRILOKPURI 55
“U05 3” KONDLI 56
“U05 3” PATPARGANJ 57
“U05 3” LAXMI NAGAR 58
“U05 3” VISHWAS NAGAR 59
“U05 3” KRISHNA NAGAR 60
“U05 3” GANDHI NAGAR 61
“U05 3” SHAHDARA 62
DL NEW DELHI “U05 4” KAROL BAGH 23
“U05 4” PATEL NAGAR 24
“U05 4” MOTI NAGAR 25
“U05 4” DELHI CANTT 38
“U05 4” RAJINDER NAGAR 39
“U05 4” NEW DELHI 40
“U05 4” KASTURBA NAGAR 42
“U05 4” MALVIYA NAGAR 43
“U05 4” R. K. PURAM 44
“U05 4” GREATER KAILASH 50
DL NORTH WEST DELHI “U05 5” NERELA 1
“U05 5” BADLI 5
“U05 5” RITHALA 6
“U05 5” BAWANA 7
“U05 5” MUNDKA 8
“U05 5” KIRARI 9
“U05 5” SULTANPUR MAJRA 10
“U05 5” NANGLOI JAT 11
“U05 5” MANGOL PURI 12
“U05 5” ROHINI 13
DL WEST DELHI “U05 6” MADIPUR 26
“U05 6” RAJOURI GARDEN 27
“U05 6” HARI NAGAR 28
“U05 6” TILAK NAGAR 29
“U05 6” JANAKPURI 30
“U05 6” VIKASPURI 31
“U05 6” UTTAM NAGAR 32
“U05 6” DWARKA 33
“U05 6” MATIALA 34
“U05 6” NAJAFGARH 35
DL SOUTH DELHI “U05 7” BIJWASAN 36
“U05 7” PALAM 37
“U05 7” MEHRAULI 45
“U05 7” CHHATARPUR 46
“U05 7” DEOLI 47
“U05 7” AMBEDKAR NAGAR 48
“U05 7” SANGAM VIHAR 49
“U05 7” KALKAJI 51
“U05 7” TUGHLAKABAD 52
“U05 7” BADARPUR 53
LD LAKSHADWEEP “U06 1” LAKSHADWEEP 1
PY PUDUCHERRY “U07 1” MANNADIPET 1
“U07 1” THIRUBUVANAI 2
“U07 1” OUSSUDU 3
“U07 1” MANGALAM 4
“U07 1” VILLIANUR 5
“U07 1” OZHUKARAI 6
“U07 1” KADIRGAMAM 7
“U07 1” INDIRA NAGAR 8
“U07 1” THATTANCHAVADY 9
“U07 1” KAMARAJ NAGAR 10
“U07 1” LAWSPET 11
“U07 1” KALAPET 12
“U07 1” MUTHIALPET 13
“U07 1” RAJ BHAVAN 14
“U07 1” OUPALAM 15
“U07 1” ORLEANPETH 16
“U07 1” NELLITHOPE 17
“U07 1” MUDALIARPET 18
“U07 1” ARIANKUPPAM 19
“U07 1” MANAVELY 20
“U07 1” EMBALAM 21
“U07 1” NETTPAKKAM 22
“U07 1” BAHOUR 23
“U07 1” NEDUNGADU 24
“U07 1” THIRUNALLAR 25
“U07 1” KARAIKAL NORTH 26
“U07 1” KARAIKAL SOUTH 27
“U07 1” NERAVY T.R. PATTINAM 28
“U07 1” MAHE 29
“U07 1” YANAM 30
January 13, 2006 — drsubrotoroy
UNACCOUNTABLE DELHI
India’s Separation Of Powers’ Doctrine
First published in The Statesman Jan 13 2006 Editorial Page Special Article,
By Subroto Roy
The Speaker does not like the fact the High Court has issued notices questioning the procedure he followed in expelling MPs from Parliament. Sonia Gandhi’s self-styled “National Advisory Council” has demanded control over disbursement of 100,000,000,000 rupees of public money. The Manmohan Singh Government plans to quietly ignore the Supreme Court’s finding that it had breached India’s Constitution in imposing President’s Rule in Bihar. All three issues have to do with application of India’s Separation of Powers Doctrine, i.e. the appropriate delimitation of Constitutional powers between our Legislature, Executive and Judiciary.
A constitutional crime was attempted in India during the Indira-Sanjay Gandhi political “Emergency” declared on 26 June 1975. On 10 November 1975 (a time of press censorship) a 13-judge Bench of the Supreme Court met to hear the Government plead for overrule of Kesavananda Bharati (A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 1461), a landmark Nani Palkhivala once called “the greatest contribution of the Republic of India to constitutional jurisprudence”. Within two days, the Government had failed in the Court, and Kesavananda held. What was upheld? That while India’s Parliament was sovereign and could amend the Constitution, the amending power may not be used to alter or destroy “the basic structure or framework of the Constitution”. And the Supreme Court decides for itself whether Parliament has exceeded its legitimate power to amend.
Basic structure
Palkhivala’s description of what constitutes the “basic structure or framework” of India’s Constitution is excellent enough: “the rule of law, the right to personal liberty and freedom from arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, the right to dissent which implies the freedom of speech and expression and a free press are… a part of the basic structure of a free democracy, and it is these priceless human freedoms which cannot be destroyed by Parliament in exercise of its amending power. Thus Kesavananda’s case ensures that tyranny and despotism shall not masquerade as constitutionalism.”
Palkhivala argued that, if anything, the aspects of Kesavananda that needed to be set aside were those that had over-ruled Golaknath (A.I.R. 1967 S.C. 1643) which said Parliament should not be held to have the power to abridge any fundamental right, indeed any amended article which abrogates any fundamental right is invalid.
Dicey said “In the principle of the distribution of powers which determines its form, the constitution of the United States is the exact opposite of the English constitution.” Kesavananda Bharati showed the midway point between the two in constitutional jurisprudence anywhere in the world. We are like the Americans and unlike the British first in being a Republic, and secondly in having an explicit written Constitution. We are like the British and unlike the Americans in being a parliamentary democracy where the Executive Branch of Government, namely the Prime Minister and his/her Cabinet is elected from within the Legislative Branch of Government, namely, Parliament, and must at all times retain the confidence of the latter, specifically the Lok Sabha, the House of the People.
The American Executive Branch has a directly-elected President who chooses his administration, and it is commonplace for him to not have the confidence of the Upper or Lower House of the Legislature, to the point that one recent president had to undergo impeachment proceedings and barely survived. There is no constitutional crisis in America if the Legislature loathes the President and wishes him out. The American President and his Executive Branch stay in office until the last minute of his fixed term.
PM answers to Parliament
In our system, the Prime Minister answers at all times to Parliament. Parliament in India’s democracy has normally meant the House of the People — where every member has contested and won a direct vote in his/her constituency. India’s current Lok Sabha has set a constitutional precedent not seen in more than a hundred years anywhere in electing an Executive led by someone not a member. The British Upper House used to have an aristocratic hereditary component which Mr Blair’s New Labour Government has removed, making it more like what the Rajya Sabha was supposed to be — except that by now our Rajya Sabha has tended to become a place for party worthies who have lost normal elections, superannuated cinematic personalities, perpetual bureaucrats still seeking office, and others who really should be at home helping to raise the grandchildren. Parliament may not have fully recovered its health ever since that constitutional crime committed against the Republic known as the Indira-Sanjay “Emergency” (and at least one member of Sanjay’s coterie wields much power today).
Crimes and misdemeanours
The Supreme Court’s finding that the Government breached the Constitution by imposing President’s Rule in Bihar is a finding not of a constitutional crime but of a constitutional misdemeanour. (For reasons given already in these columns on 20 October 2005, it has nothing to do with the President, who merely embodies the sovereignty of our Republic.) For an Executive Order or Legislative Act to be found by a competent Court as being unconstitutional means merely that it does not have to be obeyed by citizens. In the Bihar case, the Supreme Court found this consequence irrelevant because new elections were already in process, the result of which would come from the most authentic democratic voice possible, namely, the same people who elect the House of the People in the first place. India’s Executive has been found to have committed a constitutional misdemeanour, for which it needed to apologise to the Court and Parliament (who are its constitutional co-equals) and then ask the latter to renew its confidence — in which event, life goes on. If confidence was not renewed, the Government would fall and a new Government would have to be formed. But we do not have yet the idea of a backbench revolt —mainly because all the front benches themselves have tended to be in such confusion and disarray with regard to parliamentary traditions, processes and functions.
The Supreme Court as the ultimate protector of the Constitution would be well within its prerogative to oversee whether a Parliamentary Speaker has acted appropriately. Consider a hypothetical case. Once elected, a Speaker is supposed to have no party-affiliation ever more for the rest of his/her life. Suppose, hypothetically, a controlled experiment found a Speaker systematically biased in favour of his/her own former party-members and against their opponents. Where but the Courts could such arbitrariness be effectively remonstrated against? Even if the incumbent Speaker impossibly imagines himself the personal embodiment of the Legislative Branch, he is not beyond the Constitution and therefore not beyond India’s Separation of Powers’ Doctrine.
The Opposition had alleged that the Speaker failed to follow procedure which required the culprits in the expulsion case be referred to the Privileges Committee. But beyond that the Opposition was too confused and guilt-ridden to pursue the matter during the dying moments of Parliament’s Winter Session. In the clear light of day, the issue has now ended up in the Courts. If the Supreme Court eventually rules the Speaker had in fact failed to follow Parliament’s own procedures (and hence breached Constitutional practices), the Speaker would need to apologise to the Courts and the House that elected him, and perhaps offer to fall on his sword.
Finally, for the “National Advisory Council”, a wholly unelected body, to demand a say for itself over spending Rs. 100 billion in State and Union Government budget-making, would be another constitutional misdemeanour — unless its members are merely on the personal staff of the Hon’ble Member representing Rae Bareili, who may of course introduce whatever legislation on money-bills that any other Lok Sabha Member may do.
January 31, 1998 — drsubrotoroy
Transparency and Economic Policy-Making
An address by Professor Subroto Roy to the Asia-Pacific Public Relations Conference, (panel on Transparency chaired by C. R. Irani) January 30 1998.
This talk is dedicated to the memory of my sister Suchandra Bhattacharjee (14.02.1943-10.01.1998).
1. I would like to talk about transparency and economic policy-making in our country. For something to be transparent is, in plain language, for it to be able to be openly seen through, for it to not to be opaque, obscure or muddy, for it to be clear to the naked eye or to the reasonable mind. A clear glass of water is a transparent glass of water. Similarly, an open and easily comprehensible set of economic policies is a transparent set of economic policies.
The philosopher Karl Popper wrote a famous book after the Second World War titled The Open Society and its Enemies. It contained a passionate defence of liberal institutions and democratic freedoms and a bitter attack on totalitarian doctrines of all kinds. It generated a lot of controversy, especially over its likely misreading of the best known work of political philosophy since the 4th Century BC, namely, Plato’s Republic .[1] I shall borrow Popper’s terms ‘open society’ and ‘closed society’ and will first try to make this a useful distinction for modern times, and then apply it to the process of economic policy-making in India today.
2. An open society is one in which the ordinary citizen has reasonably easy access to any and all information relating to the public or social interest — whether the information is directly available to the citizen himself or herself, or is indirectly available to his or her elected representatives like MP’s and MLA’s. Different citizens will respond to the same factual information in different ways, and conflict and debate about the common good will result. But that would be part of the democratic process.
The assessment that any public makes about the government of the day depends on both good and bad news about the fate of the country at any given time. In an open society, both good news and bad news is out there in the pubic domain — open to be assessed, debated, rejoiced over, or wept about. If we win a cricket match or send a woman into space we rejoice. If we lose a child in a manhole or a busload of children in a river, we weep. If some tremendous fraud on the public exchequer comes to be exposed, we are appalled. And so on.
It is the hallmark of an open society that its citizens are mature enough to cope with both the good and the bad news about their country that comes to be daily placed before them. Or, perhaps more accurately, the experience of having to handle both good and bad news daily about their world causes the citizens in an open society to undergo a process of social maturation in formulating their understanding of the common good as well as their responses to problems or crises that the community may come to face. They might be thereby thought of as improving their civic capacities, as becoming better-informed and more discerning voters and decision-makers, and so becoming better citizens of the country in which they live.
The opposite of an open society is a closed society — one in which a ruling political party or a self-styled elite or nomenclatura keep publicly important information to themselves, and do not allow the ordinary citizen easy or reasonably free access to it. The reason may be merely that they are intent on accumulating assets for themselves as quickly as they can while in office, or that they are afraid of public anger and want to save their own skins from demands for accountability. Or it may be that they have the impression that the public is better off kept in the dark — that only the elite nomenclatura is in position to use the information to serve the national interest.
In a closed society it is inevitable that bad news comes to be censored or suppressed by the nomenclatura, and so the good news gets exaggerated in significance. News of economic disasters, military defeats or domestic uprisings gets suppressed. News of victories or achievements or heroics gets exaggerated. If there are no real victories, achievements or heroics, fake ones have to be invented by government hacks — although the suppressed bad news tends to silently whisper all the way through the public consciousness in any case.
Such is the way of government propaganda in almost every country, even those that pride themselves on being free and democratic societies. Dostoevsky’s cardinal advice in Brothers Karamasov was: “Above all, never lie to yourself”. Yet people in power tend to become so adept at propaganda that they start to deceive themselves and forget what is true and what is false, or worse still, cannot remember how to distinguish between true and false in the first place. In an essay thirty years ago titled Truth and Politics, the American scholar Hannah Arendt put it like this:
“Insofar as man carries within himself a partner from whom he can never win release, he will be better off not to live with a murderer or a liar; or: since thought is the silent dialogue carried out between me and myself, I must be careful to keep the integrity of this partner intact, for otherwise I shall surely lose the capacity for thought altogether.”[2]
3. Closed societies may have been the rule and open societies the exception for most of human history. The good news at the end of the 20th Century is surely that since November 7 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell, the closed society has officially ceased to be a respectable form of human social organization. The age of mass access to television and telecommunications at the end of the 20th Century may be spelling the permanent end of totalitarianism and closed societies in general. The Berlin Wall was perhaps doomed to fall the first day East Germans were able to watch West German television programs.
Other than our large and powerful neighbour China, plus perhaps North Korea, Myanmar, and some Islamic countries, declared closed societies are becoming hard to find, and China remains in two minds whether to be open or closed. No longer is Russia or Romania or Albania or South Africa closed in the way each once was for many years. There may be all sorts of problems and confusions in these countries but they are or trying to become open societies.
Under the glare of TV cameras in the 21st Century, horrors like the Holocaust or the Gulag or even an atrocity like Jalianwalla Bag or the Mai Lai massacre will simply not be able to take place anywhere in the world. Such things are not going to happen, or if they do happen, it will be random terrorism and not systematic, large scale genocide of the sort the 20th Century has experienced. The good news is that somehow, through the growth of human ingenuity that we call technical progress, we may have made some moral progress as a species as well.
4. My hypothesis, then, is that while every country finds its place on a spectrum of openness and closedness with respect to its political institutions and availability of information, a broad and permanent drift has been taking place as the 20th Century comes to an end in the direction of openness.
With this greater openness we should expect bad news not to come to be suppressed or good news not to come to be exaggerated in the old ways of propaganda. Instead we should expect more objectively accurate information to come about in the public domain — i.e., better quality and more reliable information, in other words, more truthful information. This in turn commensurately requires more candour and maturity on the part of citizens in discussions about the national or social interest. Closed society totalitarianism permitted the general masses to remain docile and unthinking while the nomenclatura make the decisions. Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor said that is all that can be expected of the masses. Open society transparency and democracy defines the concept of an ordinary citizen and requires from that citizen individual rationality and individual responsibility. It is the requirement Pericles made of the Athenians:
“Here each individual is interested not only in his own affairs but in the affairs of the state as well; even those who are mostly occupied with their own business are extremely well-informed on general politics – this is a peculiarity of ours: we do not say that a man who takes no interest in politics is a man who minds his own business; we say that he has no business here at all.”[3]
5. All this being said, I am at last in a position to turn to economic policy in India today. I am sorry to have been so long-winded and pedantic but now I can state my main substantive point bluntly: in India today, there is almost zero transparency in the information needed for effective macroeconomic policy-making whether at the Union or State levels. To illustrate by some examples.
(A) Macroeconomic policy-making in any large country requires the presence of half a dozen or a dozen well-defined competing models produced by the government and private agencies, specifying plausible causal links between major economic variables, and made testable against time-series data of reasonably long duration. In India we seem to have almost none. The University Economics Departments are all owned by some government or other and can hardly speak out with any academic freedom. When the Ministry of Finance or RBI or Planning Commission, or the India teams of the World Bank or IMF, make their periodic statements they do not appear to be based on any such models or any such data-base. If any such models exist, these need to be published and placed in the public domain for thorough discussion as to their specification and their data. Otherwise, whatever is being predicted cannot be assessed as being very much more reliable than the predictions obtained from the Finance Minister’s astrologer or palmist. (NB: Horse-Manure is a polite word used in the American South for what elsewhere goes by the initials of B. S.). Furthermore, there is no follow-up or critical review to see whether what the Government said was going to happen a year ago has in fact happened, and if not, why not.
(B) The Constitution of India defines many States yet no one seems to be quite certain how many States really constitute the Union of India at any given time. We began with a dozen. Some 565 petty monarchs were successfully integrated into a unitary Republic of India, and for some years we had sixteen States. But today, do we really have 26 States? Is Delhi a State? UP with 150 million people would be the fifth or sixth largest country in the world on its own; is it really merely one State of India? Are 11 Small States de facto Union Territories in view of their heavy dependence on the Union? Suppose we agreed there are fifteen Major States of India based on sheer population size: namely, Andhra, Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, MP, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, UP and West Bengal. These States account for 93% of the population of India. The average population of these 15 Major States is 58 million people each. That is the size of a major country like France or Britain. In other words, the 870 million people in India’s Major States are numerically 15 Frances or 15 Britains put together.
Yet no reliable, uniformly collected GDP figures exist for these 15 States. The RBI has the best data, and these are at least two years old, and the RBI will tell you without further explanation that the data across States are not comparable. If that is the case at State-level, I do not see how the national-level Gross Domestic Product can possibly be estimated with any meaningfulness at all.
(C) Then we hear about the Government Budget deficit as a percentage of GDP. Now any national government is able to pay for its activities only by taxation or borrowing or by using its monopoly over the domestic medium of exchange to print new money. In India today, universal money-illusion seems to prevail. It would not be widely recognised by citizens, journalists or policy-makers that, say, 100,000 Rupees nominally taxed at 10% under 20% inflation leaves less real disposable income than the same taxed at 20% with 5% inflation. This is in part because inflation figures are unknown or suspect. There is no reliable all-India or State-level consumer price index. The wholesale price index on the basis of which the Government of India makes its inflation statements, may not accurately reflect the actual decline in the purchasing power of money, as measured, say, by rises in prices of alternative stores of value like land. The index includes artificially low administered or subsidized prices for petroleum, cereals, and electricity. To the extent these prices may be expected to move towards international equilibrium prices, the index contains a strong element of deferred inflation. One urgent task for all macroeconomic research in India is construction of reliable price-data indices at both Union and State levels, or at a minimum, the testing for reliability by international standards of series currently produced by Government agencies.
Without reliable macroeconomic information being spread widely through a reasonably well-informed electorate, the Government of India has been able to wash away fiscal budget constraints by monetization and inflation without significant response from voters. The routine method of meeting deficits has become “the use of the printing press to manufacture legal tender paper money”, either directly by paying Government creditors “with new paper money specially printed for the purpose” or indirectly by paying creditors “out of loans to itself from the Central Bank”, issuing paper money to that amount. Every Budget of the Government of India, including the most recent ones of 1996 and 1997, comes to be attended by detailed Press discussion with regard to the minutae of changes in tax rates or tax-collection — yet the enormous phenomena of the automatic monetization of the Government’s deficit is ill-understood and effectively ignored. Historically, a policy of monetization started with the British Government in India during the Second World War, with a more than five-fold increase in money supply occurring between 1939 and 1945. Inflation rates never seen in India before or since were the result (Charts 0000), attended by the Great Famine of 1942/43. Though these were brought down after succession of C. D. Deshmukh as Governor of the Reserve Bank, the policy of automatic monetization did not cease and continues until the present day. Inflation “sooner or later destroys the confidence, not only of businessmen, but of the whole community, in the future value of the currency. Then comes the stage known as “the flight from the currency.” Had the Rupee been convertible during the Bretton Woods period, depreciation would have signalled and helped to adjust for disequilibrium. But exchange-controls imposed during the War were enlarged by the new Governments of India and Pakistan after the British departure to exclude convertible Sterling Area currencies as well. With the Rupee no longer convertible, internal monetization of deficits could continue without commensurate exchange-rate depreciation.
The Reserve Bank was originally supposed to be a monetary authority independent of the Government’s fiscal compulsions. It has been prevented from developing into anything more than a department of the Ministry of Finance, and as such, has become the captive creditor of the Government. The RBI in turn has utilized its supervisory role over banking to hold captive creditors, especially nationalized banks whose liabilities account for 90% of commercial bank deposits in the country. Also captive are nationalized insurance companies and pension funds. Government debt instruments show on the asset side of these balance-sheets. To the extent these may not have been held had banks been allowed to act in the interests of proper management of depositors’ liabilities and share-capital according to normal principles, these are pseudo-assets worth small fractions of their nominal values. Chart 0000 shows that in the last five years the average term structure of Government debt has been shortening rapidly, suggesting the Government is finding it increasingly difficult to find creditors, and portending higher interest rates.
General recognition of these business facts, as may be expected to come about with increasing transparency, would be a recipe for a crisis of confidence in the banking and financial system if appropriate policies were not in place beforehand.
(D) As two last examples, I offer two charts. The first shows the domestic interest burden of the Government of India growing at an alarming rate, even after it has been deflated to real terms. The second tries to show India’s foreign assets and liabilities together – we always come to know what is happening to the RBI’s reserve levels, what is less known or less understood is the structure of foreign liabilities being accumulated by the country. Very roughly speaking, in terms that everyone can understand, every man, woman and child in India today owes something like 100 US dollars to the outside world. The Ministry of Finance will tell you that this is not to be worried about because it is long-term debt and not short-term debt. Even if we take them at their word, interest payments still have to be paid on long-term debt, say at 3% per annum. That means for the stock of debt merely to be financed, every man, woman and child in India must be earning $3 every year in foreign exchange via the sale of real goods and services abroad. I.e., something like $3 billion must be newly earned every year in foreign exchange merely to finance the existing stock of debt. Quite clearly, that is not happening and it would stretch the imagination to see how it can be made to happen.
In sum, then, India, blessed with democratic political traditions which we had to take from the British against their will — remember Tilak, “Freedom is my birthright, and I shall have it” — may still be stuck with a closed society mentality when it comes to the all-important issue of economic policy. There is simply an absence in Indian public discourse of vigourous discussion of economic models and facts, whether at Union or State levels. A friendly foreign ambassador pointedly observed an absence in India of political philosophy. It may be more accurate to say that without adequate experience of a normal agenda of government being seen to be practised, widespread ignorance regarding fiscal and monetary causalities and inexperience of the technology of governance remains in the Indian electorate, as well as among public decision-makers at all levels. Our politicians seem to spend an inordinate amount of their time either garlanding one another with flowers or garlanding statues and photographs of the glorious dead. It is high time they stopped to think about the living and the future.
[1] Renford Bambrough (ed.) Plato, Popper and Politics: Some Contributions to a Modern Controversy, 1967.
[2] Philosophy, Politics and Society, 2nd Series, Peter Laslett & W. G. Runciman (eds.), 1967.
[3] Thucydides, History of the Pelopennesian War, II.40.
