Erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir Includes Chitral and Parts of Kohistan that are illegally occupied by Pakistan. New research by historians, who checked the historical records have found this information. As per a historian we spoke with, soon Indian Government will look into the claims made by Historians and will take appropriate actions including amendment in the Map of Union Territory of Ladakh, if needed, to extend to Chitral and Parts of Kohistan.

In the fog of war of 1947-48 and with the actual British control of Gilgit Agency from 1935, and due to the de facto control of parts of Jammu and Kashmir province of India, India didn’t focus much on the actual borders of the state, especially those under Pakistani territorial control. There are at least two areas where the actual position needs to be looked into – Chitral and the Southern Borders of Gilgit Agency.

The Case of Chitral

Though Chitral is considered to be an inalienable part of Pakistan and played a major role in the conquest of Gilgit Baltistan(it was the Army of Chitral, closely followed by the Pakistani Army, which spearheaded the charge against the forces of Jammu and Kashmir), the legal position of Chitral’s accession into Pakistan is not clear enough. Though Las Bela rebelled against it’s suzerain Kalat and joined Pakistan, Pakistani invasion of Kalat and it’s forced accession into Pakistan cleared the air. In fact, Chitral’s position is nothing much different from Hunza or Nagar and accepted the suzerainty of Jammu and Kashmir about ten years after Gilgit was firmly under the control of the Dogras of Jammu.

Chitral, located at at the border of Indian, Turkic and Afghan political systems was an unapproachable landmass, but coveted by all. It is understood that traditionally, Chitral was a vassal of Kashgar at least till 1871 when Afghanistan started making moves to assert it’s influence over Chitral. In 1878, the Mehtar of Chitral, Amin-ul-Mulk negotiated with the British for protection and subsequently made a vassal of Jammu and Kashmir.

The understanding is that Jammu and Kashmir as well as the British will be responsible for Chitral’s security. Why Jammu and Kashmir and not British India? Because Chitral was more accessible and controlled from Gilgit. The set up continued till 1947, though some queries were raised by the Political Department in 1938 over the status of Chitral.

Before  we  reply  to  the  passage  marked  “ A ” in  Mr.  Griffin’s  note  above,  dated  28th  February 1938,  we should be glad to know whether Chitral must  be  regarded  for  the  purposes  of  the  Government  of  India  Act,  1935  as  part  of  Kashmir State  cf.,  Clause  1  of  the Agreement  of  1914 printed  at  page  428  of   Aitchison’s   Treaties Vol.  XI  (1933  edition). W. R.  Hay 4-3-38.

(Note—It  would  also  be  interesting  to  know whether,  if  Chitral  State  is  to  be  regarded  as part  of  Kashmir,  it  will  be  impossible for it ever  to  enter  the  Federation  as a separate  unit cf.,  paragraphs  2  and  3  of  Serial  No.  (1)  on File No.  93-F./35) W. R.  Hay 11-3-38.

Reforms Office said,

2.  To  answer  Major  Hay’s  question,   there can  be  no  doubt  looking  to  the  definite  acknowledgment  of  suzerainty  in  the  Agreement   of 1914  [Aitchison,  Vol.  XI,  page  428],  attested by  the  Assistant  Political  Agent,  Chitral,  and to  the  definition  of  “ Indian  State”  in  Section 311  (1),  that  Chitral  must  be  regarded  for  the purposes  of  the  Government  of   India,   Act, 1935,  as  included  in  the  Kashmir  State.

3.  If  Kashmir  accedes  to  the  Federation,  its accession  will  according  to  what  has   so   far been  decided,  be  in  the  following  terms: —

“ *I  hereby  declare  that ……………..I  accede to  the  Federation  of  India……………..with  the intent that His Majesty  the King,  the  Governor-General  of  India,  the  Federal  Legislature  etc., shall………………exercise  in  relation  to  the State of  Jammu  and  Kashmir  such  functions  as  may be  invested  in  them  by  or  under   the   Act”

There  will  be  no  mention  of  what  is  meant  by the  State  of  Jammu  and  Kashmir.   I  do  not think  that  it  is  beyond  the  bounds  of  possibility that  some  one  (not  necessarily   the   Kashmir Darbar)  might  take  it  into  his  head  to  bring before  a  Court  the  issue  whether  Chitral  was  as a  result  of  Kashmir’s  accession   included   in Federal India.  I understand that in such  a  case the  Court would  make  a reference  to the  Executive,  in  this  case  the  Crown   Representative. The  question  put  by  the  Court  would  presumably  be  the  narrow  one  of   fact:   “Is   the Chitral  State  under  the  suzerainty  of  the  Ruler of  Jammu  and  Kashmir?”   The  only    reply which  the  Crown  Representative  could  give  to this  would  be  an  affirmative  one  and  the  Court, looking  to  the  definition  of  “ Indian  State”  in Section  311  (1),  would  be  bound,  in  spite  of  the fact  that  the  population  of  Chitral  is  not  in­cluded in the population  figures  against Kashmir in  the  Table  of  Seats  in  Schedule  I,  to   find that  Kashmir’s  accession    included   Chitral. Among the  awkward  consequences  of  this  would be  the  fact  that  Chitral  could  never  accede  to the  Federation  as  a  separate  unit  and  that  the Kashmir  Darbar,  secure  as  the result  of  Section 294  (2)  from  the  intervention  of  Paramountcy, could  send  into  Chitral  a  horde  of  officials   to perform  such  administrative  functions  in   the Federal  field  as  had  fallen  to  it  under  Section 124  or  Section  125.

4.    At any rate I do not think that we can dismiss as fanciful the possibility  of a very awkward situation arising if we take no action in the hope that  no one will notice that Kashmir’s accession has in Law included  that of Chitral with it.  We can, however, hardly hope that  Kashmir  will  at  our  request  waive  its suzerainty over Chitral. We  are  left  therefore with the alternative  of  amending the Act.

5.  The  draft  amendment  which  we  recently withdrew  is  contained  in  our  letter  No.  F. 230- Fed./36,  dated  the  2nd  September  1937.  While it  would  be  open  to  His  Majesty   under   the earlier  part  to  “ determine”  that  Chitral  was a  separate  State,  it  would  apparently  be  necessary  for  him,  in  order  that  his  determination should  take  effect,  to  ensure  that  Kashmir  in its  Instrument  of  Accession   enumerated all its  Jagirs,  Feudatory  territories,  etc.,  with  the exception  of  Chitral.   This  would  be  a  roundabout  method  of  excluding  Chitral  and  might lead to difficulties  due  to faulty  enumeration  not unlike those  in the  converse  case  of  a Feudatory whose inclusion was  desired which we mentioned to  the  India  Office  in  our letter  withdrawing  the proposed  amendment.

6.  We  anticipate  no  difficulty  under  the  Act as it stands in the  converse case  and the  amendment  which  would  fit  a  case  of    this    kind (Chitral)  would,  I  suggest,  be  the  addition  of words  on  the  following  lines  at  the  end  of  the definition  of  “ Indian  State”  in  Section  311  (1) “other  than  such  territory  declared   by   His Majesty  not  to  be  so  included” .   It  would  be preferable  not  to  lay  down  anything  as  to  the time when His Majesty should make the declaration in order to  be  in  a position to  meet  surprise cases,  but  it  is  possible  that  on  the  analogy  of Section  294  (1)  it  might  be  thought  necessary to  specify  that  previous  notice  should  be  given to  the  Ruler  of  the  Suzerain  State  and  that  the declaration  should  be  made  at  the  time  of  the acceptance  of  the  Instrument  of  Accession

L.C.L. Griffin—29-3-38

Clearly, the British tried to amend to the Government of India Act to remove Chitral from the control of Jammu and Kashmir. With no Princely State in a mood to sign the accession document coupled with a fast approaching war means that the proposal never saw the light of day leaving the 1878 agreement as valid as of 15 Aug 1947.

In effect, this makes the below reconstruction the erstwhile province of Jammu and Kashmir and that Chitral is legally Indian territory but under Pakistani control.

As events proved, Pakistan, a country only for Sunni Muslims, perpetrated untold brutalities over the people of Chitral, especially over the Ismailis and the Kalash.

The Southern Borders of Gilgit Agency

However, even this is not complete as the southern borders of Gilgit Agency extended not till Harban but till Jalkot.

AH Dani deals extensively over the borders of Gilgit Agency in his History of Northern Areas of Pakistan.

“Gilgit agency included the autonomous states of Hunza and Nagir, political districts of Ishkoman, Yasin, Punial and Koh-i-Ghizar, and also the subdivision of Chilas and tribal areas of barel and Tangir. Chilas subdivision extended from the confluence of the Astor river with the Indus to Seo on the right bank and Jalkot on the left bank of the Indus river. Today the western boundary of Chilas district is limited to Shatial bridge on the Indus. Territory beyond is incorporated in the Kohistan district of N.W. Frontier Province. This Kohistan is really the Yaghistan of the British time, where British authority was hardly felt.”

This is confirmed by the following letter No. 381 of 1913 from S.M. Fraser, Resident in Kashmir to Lt. Col. Sir George Roose-Keppel, Chief Commissioner of Peshawar, dated 24th February, 1913…

The Jalkotis, as you are aware, are a Kohistan tribe occupying a valley on the Indus of the south-west of Chilas and west of Kaghan in the Hazara district. Their country is independent territory but their political relations, so far as such relations exist, have been mainly with Gilgit Agency… Further I think it will be agreed that since Jalkot falls naturally within the sphere of the Gilgit Agency, by reasons of geographical position, race, language and intercommunication, it is politically expedient for the initiative to lie with Chilas authorities.

This position is further confirmed in a letter no. Y 103127, dated 12th January, 1928 from the Resident in Kashmir to Col. C.P. Gunter, Director of Frontier Circle, Survey of India, wherein he writes

The territory comprised within the Gilgit Agency falls into three categories – viz.

(1) Kashmir State territory, i.e. Gilgit Wazarat, comprising Gilgit Tehsil (including Bunji) with its Niabat of Astor.

(2) The political districts, i.e. Hunza, Nagir, Punial, Yasin, Kuh-Gizar, Ishakoman and the republic of Chilas.

(3) Un-administered area, i.e. Darel, Tangir, Kandia (Killi ), Jalkot, Sazin, Shatial and Harban.

This position remained until 1947 and even later in 1950, when with the constitution of Kohistan district the area was separated from Gilgit Agency.

Shinaki Republics

The territory of the Shinaki Republics of the Indus valley extends from Ramghat, where the Astor river joins the Indus to Seo on the right batik and to Jalkot on the left bank of the Indus. Within this area, the people are grouped into communities, inhabiting one or more ravines and each community comprises a republic itself. Starting from Rumghat down the Indus, these republics are :

These republics comprised the area, which was known is the Chilas sub-division of the Gilgit Agency. Besides the above, the areas below this region are detailed as under :

Clearly, this means that the territory of the erstwhile Indian Province of Jammu and Kashmir extends both West and South of Gilgit Agency – South towards Kohistan and West into Chitral. Though the fear of the Raja of Kohistan to be made a part of Jammu and Kashmir unfounded, it looks like Indian claims of territory held by Pakistan should be looked into, more closely.

As m

As per People, Gilgit-Baltistan that is part of Union Territory of Ladakh in India, is already under the illegal occupation of its neighbor Pakistan. Besides that Parts of Kashmir that belongs to Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir are also under the illegal occupation of Pakistan after the armed invasion in 1948 with the help of Tribal Terrorists and Pakistan Army. As per these new findings by Historians, who have established that erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir Includes Chitral and Parts of Kohistan that acceeded to India through the instrument of accession, it now rests with Indian Government to emphasize internationally that Jammu and Kashmir includes Chitral and parts of Kohistan.

These new findings by Historians and if accepted by the Indian Government that the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir includes Chitral and parts of Kohistan, it will raise new hopes in the people of these territories as Pakistan is continuously engaged in exterminating the native ethnic groups and involved in bringing major demographic changes by settling Radical Islamist Sunni Punjabi Muslim groups in these territories that belongs to India.

Follow us at:-
Twitter Handle: @communique_news
Parler Handle: @newscommuniquecom
Subscribe our : YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnKJQ3gFsRVWpvdjnntQoAA
Like our Facebook Page https://m.facebook.com/News-Communiquecom-103788531007438/

 2,868 total views