Voice of Commonwealth

Inheritance of ‘Enemy’ Property by Indian Citizens Is Still a Bit of Unfinished Business of Partition

Share

Numerous things about people’s life were altered by India’s partition. Inhuman violence on a scale that has never been witnessed before and memories of wonderful moments of nationalist fervor are forever ingrained in our collective psyche. Jawaharlal Nehru’s tryst with destiny midnight address was a turning point for India’s independence. We rejoiced in the fact that India maintained its identity as a plural society where members of different religions could coexist despite the tragedy of communal violence and enormous population relocation.

It is disappointing that some individuals claim that the Partition remains incomplete because of that at a time when we are commemorating the 75th anniversary of our independence. The legislation on evacuee property was a necessary result of the movement brought on by Partition, but it is debatable whether it eased the victims’ suffering or instead served to maintain the course that led to it.

The control of people’s two-way movement between the newly delineated zones was one of the administration’s first concerns after Partition. In addition to the immediate need to provide security and rehabilitation at the destination, typically within Delhi and Punjab, there was the urgent requirement to provide transportation by rail and road for several lakh of migrants. Hindu migrants from Pakistan who were referred to as refugees were able to occupy the abandoned homes of Muslim migrants who were described as evacuees.

A number of States passed legislation governing evacuee property. The custodian system was swiftly implemented at the center, initially as an ordinance that was later replaced by legislation, the Administration of Evacuee Property Act 1950, which, with a few exceptions, applied to the entire nation. Despite their trauma, the legislation’s primary goal was to maintain or foster positive ties among its residents and with the nation as a whole. However, depending on how the law was used, it may have succeeded in giving the state broad authority over private property. By 1961, property valued at 10 core was returned to its owners and displayed as India’s commitment to its citizens.

In response to the circumstances, the term “planned evacuee” was added to the Act’s definition of “evacuee,” which refers to people who are believed to be making preparations for a future migration. This was placed on anyone who wanted to send money or other resources to their immediate family members who were already living in Pakistan. Some people who traveled to Pakistan on official business have discovered upon their return that they have been labeled evacuees and that the custodian has taken possession of their property. Rich Delhi trader Chatriwala’s sons moved to Pakistan, and he visited them to help them start businesses, which caused him to be labeled as an evacuee. Anger was sparked by the custodian’s decision in his favor. The custodian’s decision in his favour raised an outcry of concern about the future of refugees.

The Enemy Property Act 1968 was introduced more recently to seize control of property owned by Pakistani residents. After going through multiple high courts and becoming a cause celebre, the Raja Mahmudabad matter is currently pending in the Supreme Court. The point of debate has been whether the’vesting’ of property with the custodian is permanent, divesting the owner of all rights, or merely while the enemy status is still in effect, or if the owner is succeeded by Indian nationals. With the most recent changes, the current administration aimed to make property vesting irrevocable and allow third-party property sales.Even as the evacuee property chapter fades into the past, this amended legislation revives the unpleasant dimensions of Partition and the shadows of 1947 reach out to mar the landscape of a modern, secular nation that cherishes equality and liberty for all.

Read more

More News