India transgressed upon the Muslim-ruled princely state of Junagadh and occupied it by force soon after the Partition of the Indo-Pak subcontinent in 1947, revealed a report released by the Kashmir Media Service.
The analytical report, released on Monday, said that Junagadh had the unique dispensation of being the second-largest among Muslim states and a rich one, ranked fifth in terms of revenue generation among the 561 British India princely states.
It was illegally occupied by India in a blatant violation of ‘Article 26’ of the ‘Vienna Convention of law on treaties, it added.
History is evident to the fact that Nawab Mohabat Khanji, the then governor of Junagadh reached an agreement with Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, Governor General of Pakistan and signed the ‘Instrument of Accession.
The report added that it was the first princely state to accede to Pakistan on September 15, 1947.
Also read: PM Imran urged to act as envoy of Junagadh
"The state is an integral part of Pakistan lawfully as there is a genuine ‘Instrument of Accession’ duly signed by Nawab of Junagadh and Quaid-i- Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah," it maintained.
According to it, when the Nawab of Junagadh visited Karachi, capital of Pakistan at that time, to discuss procedural details concerning accession, India behind his back, took it as a chance of interference and advanced its troops and occupied the state on November 9, 1947.
"The fact is India is illegally holding both Kashmir and Junagadh in violation of international laws and the Partition plan," the report remarked.
The state, it added, is an international issue as the matter had been raised at the UN in 1948 by the then Pakistan’s foreign minister.
"Pakistan is committed towards the issue of Junagadh as it has included it in its new political map and Kashmir and Junagadh both share the same fate as only the people of these states have the right to decide their political future," the report concluded.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ