[IAC#RG] Fwd: [NCPRI] Locating the Jammu and Kashmir Instrument of Accession after 69 years

To

Sarbjit

Can you give your valuable comments on this email I received from Nayak on IoA for JK ?.

RP Dalvi

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Venkatesh Nayak <nayak.venkatesh@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: [NCPRI] Locating the Jammu and Kashmir Instrument of Accession after 69 years
To: Rajinder Dalvi <rajinder.dalvi@gmail.com>
Cc: sv@thewire.in, Sanjoy Hazarika <sanjoyha@gmail.com>

Dear Shri Dalvi,

Thanks for your email. My point-wise reply to your queries is given below:

1) Nowhere in my article have I doubted the genuineness about these documents. In fact I have tried to explain why I think the copy that I obtained is of the original. My sole purpose was to place a copy of this record in the public domain. The issue of legitimacy of the accession is not something that I have dealt with at all in that article. Perhaps that can be discussed in another piece after I complete my research. What I wrote to you was that the issue of accession is much larger especially with its multiple ramifications about the manner in which it was done. Those cannot be resolved by merely putting documents in the public domain. Placing the documents in the public domain is only a step towards encouraging informed debate on these issues.

2) The standstill agreement was part of the record that the National Archives showed me. So no major feat is involved in getting a copy under their Rules.

3) I have explained in my article that all IoAs do not bear seals and stamps. In my view this cannot be made the basis for accepting or rejecting the genuineness of such documents. The National Archives staff told me that what they have is what was transferred from the MHA. I am inclined to trust them until I am shown sufficient cause otherwise. MHA did not reply to my RTI but transferred it to the NA after my first appeal. I would be surprised if more than 2 copies of any IoA were made. The law would require each signatory party to maintain a copy. If there are more copies, then MHA should clarify. Perhaps you might like to write to them or use RTI to find out. It would be interesting to see how they respond to other RTI applicants. It is not uncommon for RTIs from different sources to elicit different replies. 

4) What the J&K Law Dept. has published on its website looks like a retyped text of the IoA with spelling errors and incomplete titling of the Ruler as compared to what is in the signed original held by the NA. J&K law Dept. should explain this matter as I hold no brief for them. As for the private website, they only have a retyped version of the IoA, not a copy of the signed original that the NA gave me. So I do not think what I have placed in the public domain is the same document as that the private website has done. Thanks for mentioning the Digital Library of India. I could not locate a copy of the J&K IoA on it. Kindly send me the URL so that I may see what has been uploaded there. As you were not on my mailing list, you may not have seen a copy of the email alert that I sent out after the article was published by The Wire. I have also circulated the RTI documents and also proof of payment of fees to the NA for getting copies of the IoAs. I have forwarded that email alert to you separately. From these documents you will appreciate my correspondence with GoI on this issue.

5) I have not explored as to who held the IoAs and until when as I did not elect to research that issue. The limited purpose was to get a copy of the IoAs out of the GoI/NA and place them in the public domain and talk about about the processes involved. I am not the first person to research the subject nor should I be the last. The field is wide open for anybody to explore. Nobody should be stopped from doing so. I hope more people will explore this issue in the days to come. I believe this is how knowledge grows.

Thanks

Venkatesh Nayak

On 31 October 2016 at 09:38, Rajinder Dalvi <rajinder.dalvi@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Sh Venkatesh

I am surprised that you are doubting the documents you have released into public domain after claiming they were obtained from National Archives. I am perplexed why you disagree these documents do not 100% prove J&K acceded to India, especially since over 500 other Indian princely states signed the identical Instrument of Accession and there is no controversy over there integration in the Union of India.

Should I list 3 or 4 points regarding the document you circulated, eg.

1) The original copy of the IOA for J&K was with the Ministry of Home Affairs but without any standstill agreement. Yet you have managed a copy of the standstill agreement also. How did you manage this feat ?

2) All the documents you have circulated for J&K's IOA seem to be uncertified and lack the MHA's (ie. Ministry of State) official seal, unlike the other IOA's you obtained. Is it possible that the original IOA is still with the MHA and not transferred to Natinal Archives by them ?

3) The document you have circulated differs materially in its text from that published by the J&K Law Dept from their official website, and also from that published from the Indian Govt's "Digital library of India " but is virtually identical to the version being circulated by a Pakistani origin website "Jammu-Kashmir.com". Why is that ?

4) Is it not true that the originals of all these agreements are actually in London and only copies certified by the Dominion's "Ministry of States" were given to India and to J&K ?

I hope that an expert and researcher like yourself can clarify these issues.

RP Dalvi
नगर प्रचार प्रमुख
अखिल भारतीय बहुजन रक्षा दल
पुणे  / अहमदनगर

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Venkatesh Nayak <nayak.venkatesh@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for the good wishes sir. My objective is what is mentioned in the email alert and the article, nothing more, nothing less. The issue that you have mentioned is much larger and complex and cannot be resolved merely by putting some historical documents in the public domain.

thanks

Venkat

On 27 October 2016 at 22:58, Rajinder Dalvi <rajinder.dalvi@gmail.com> wrote:

Venkatesh

What a deed you did to extract all these documents proving Jammu and Kashmir is 100% a part of India.

Surely you are on ISI hit list for this surgical strike and must pray for your continued well being and safety.

RP Dalvi

नगर प्रचार प्रमुख
अखिल भारतीय बहुजन रक्षा दल
पुणे  / अहमदनगर

From: Venkatesh Nayak <nayak.venkatesh@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 11:29:18 +0530
Subject: Locating the Jammu and Kashmir Instrument of Accession after 69 years
To: "ncpriworkingcommittee@googlegroups.com"
<ncpriworkingcommittee@googlegroups.com>, "ncpri@googlegroups.com"
<ncpri@googlegroups.com>, rtitrainers <rtitrainers@googlegroups.com>,
odishasoochanaadhikarabhiyan
<odishasoochanaadhikarabhiyan@googlegroups.com>, KRIA KATTE
<kriakatte@gmail.com>, "IndianBureaucracy.com"
<info@indianbureaucracy.com>

Dear all,
26-27 October, 2016 mark the commencement of the 70th anniversary of the
accession of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) to India. On account of the troubled
times that J&K is passing through since July, there is little space for
celebrating this event, but a sober commemoration of this historic moment,
may not be out of place. The Instrument of Accession (IoA) signed by
Maharaja Hari Singh has become the object of a never-ending controversy,
unlike accession instruments signed by other princely States.

*Does it really exist or not?* *Yes, the J&K IoA exists for real, safe and

well preserved in the collection of the National Archives. I have elected
to place in the public domain, a copy of the J&K IoA obtained legitimately
from the National Archives, for the purpose of facilitating informed debate
amongst those interested in the subject.* I have also placed in the public
domain copies of the IoAs of* Mysore, Manipur, Tehri Garhwal *and *Udaipur*
obtained from the National Archives so that readers may compare them with
the J&K IoA for ascertaining its contents. These documents may be accessed
on *The Wire
<http://thewire.in/76079/public-first-time-jammu-kashmirs-instrument-accession-india/>
*(all
docs) and *NDTV
<http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/jammu-and-kashmirs-document-of-accession-in-public-domain-at-last-1494726>*
(J&K IoA only)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "RTI Trainers Forum" group.
To post to this group, send email to rtitrainers@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rtitrainers+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.co.in/group/rtitrainers?hl=en-GB
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "RTI Trainers Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to rtitrainers+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.