1

NOTE OF HISTORY OF SOUTH ASIA( 1765 TO 1947)

COURSE CODE: BAH-2202
Prepared by Md Kutub Uddin

DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
JAGANNATH UNIVERSITY

List of Content
1. Downfall of Mughal Empire – Later Mughals ( in a nut shell ) -----------------------2

2. The Anglo-French Rivalry ----------------------- 4

3. The Indian National Congress (INC) -----------------------7

4. Formation of All India Muslim league. (From samad sir’s book) -----------------------10

5. What is Lucknow Pact 1916-----------------------10

6. The Khilafat Movement and The Non-Cooperation Movement -----------------------13

7. Lahore Resolution-----------------------16

8. Establishing of the Trans Indian Railway (from Hridoy’s note) -----------------------

9. what were the causes of spoey mutiny 1857. Why it fails? -----------------------

10. what the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 -----------------------

 2

1. Downfall of Mughal Empire – Later Mughals ( in a nut shell )

Aurangzeb’s death had already initiated the decline of later Mughals along with that of the entire Mughal
Empire. The successors of Aurangzeb were weak rulers. They were unable to prevent the breaking up of the
empire.

The death of Bahadur Shah in 1712 again started a war of succession among his sons. Finally, Muhammad
Shah succeeded and tried to pull up the empire together. However, he was countered by the strong Sikh army
under Banda Bahadur who was adamant about establishing an independent Sikh empire.

 The Marathas were reorganizing themselves under a new system of government, that of the Brahmin
ministers—the Peshwas.
 The Afghans who had settled in Rohilkhand were also in revolt against the Mughal government. Three important
provincial governors established three kingdoms: Hyderabad, Bengal, and Avadh.
 The later Mughals also faced invasions from the northwest. The first invasion was in 1739 when Nadir Shah of
Iran, who had already taken Kabul from the Mughals swept into the Indian plains from the northwest and
invaded the city of Delhi.
 Nadir Shah’s army looted the city and left it deserted. The famous Peacock Throne of Shah Jahan and the Koh-i-
nur diamond were taken to Iran.
 The second was Ahmad Shah Abdali, who conquered Punjab and added it to his territory in Afghanistan.
 Meanwhile, the Marathas, under the Peshwas, were gaining strength and acquiring territory in western India.
Marathas came into conflict with Ahmad Shah Abdali and were drawn into battle.
 The third battle of Panipat was fought in 1761 between the Afghans and the Marathas. The Marathas were
defeated and forced to withdraw from northern India.
 The Mughal empire was now reduced to the area around Delhi. Mughal emperors continued to rule until 1857.

Factors for the Decline of Mughal Empire – European Traders

The Mughal Empire had come to an end and completely declined in the eighteenth century. With this, the rise
of new kingdoms to power started. At the same time, there were other people who were trying to establish
their hold on India – Europeans. They had the following two big advantages:

 Firstly, in place of the Mughal empire, a number of states had arisen, such as those of the Marathas, Hyderabad,
Avadh, and Bengal.
 The second advantage that the Europeans had was that they came by sea and they were all good sea fighters.
 The Mughal emperors had never thought of the importance of sea power and, therefore, had no good navy. So,
when Europeans began to capture the towns along the coast of India, neither the Mughals nor the army of the
other states could stop them.
 Taking advantage of their naval supremacy, they forced the Indian and other Asian merchant ships to pay money
for permission to carry on trade and thus, began to dominate Indian overseas trade. But in the seventeenth
century, a number of other European traders came to India, branded as trading companies.

 Internal Causes of Decline of Mughal Empire

There are a number of reasons attributed to the decline and disintegration of the Mughal Empire. The later
Mughals gradually approached their end after about 50 years of Aurangzeb’s death who had left the largest
empire in their hands. The major causes of the decline of the Mughal Empire are as follows.
 3

1. Aurangzeb’s Policy

Aurangzeb mistreated Hindus which ultimately resulted in the disintegration of the Mughal Empire. This led to
the instability of the empire. Losing the support of the Rajputs, who were the pillars of the strength of the
empire was one of the major reasons for the downfall. Akbar who was accredited for instituting religious
tolerance, had largely won the trust of the Hindus. But, Aurangzeb’s policies turned them against him. He re-
introduced the jizya policy. The conflict with the Sikhs, Jats, Marathas, and Rajputs had taken away major
resources from the Mughal Empire, leading to its weakening.

2. Weak Successors And Foreign Invasion

The successors of Aurangzeb were weak rulers. They were unable to prevent the breaking up of the empire.
The later Mughals did not follow any law of succession and each time a ruler died, another war broke out. It
weakened the Mughal Empire and the absence of a fearless ruler, an inefficient bureaucracy and a weakened
army made the Mughal Empire lose all its strength. The invasions from the northwest and other parts of the
world further drained the remaining strength and resources of the later Mughals.

3. Financial Troubles – Another Cause of Decline of Mughal Empire

Another important reason for the decline of the Mughal empire was that it was met with financial troubles. By
this time, there was neither enough money nor enough jagirs to assign to various officers. The zamindars got
dissatisfied with the control imposed upon them by the government. On occasion, the protest of the
zamindars took the form of revolts.

4. Weak Military Administration

The military administration of the Mughals had also become weaker. The proportion of high officials was far
too big. Moreover, the efficiency of the army was not maintained. The artillery arm which had once been the
pride of the Mughal army was now backward in its technology as compared to other armies.

5. Economic Failure – Major Cause of Downfall of Mughal Empire

The luxurious living of the aristocracy was another aspect of Mughal India, which consumed much of the
income from the land and from trade. If the peasants and the artisans had a difficult life, the aristocrats and
the wealthy traders in the towns had an equally easy life.

6. Size of the Empire and Threat from Regional Powers

The Mughal Empire had grown to a size that could no longer be governed from a single location, namely Delhi.
Although the Great Mughals were effective and had control over their army and ministers, the later Mughals
were ineffective administrators. The far-off regions consequently gained independence. The Mughal Empire
fell apart as a result of the emergence of independent states.

 External causes of Decline of Mughal empire

1. The invasion of Nadir shah (1739)

 4

Persian emperor Nadir sha came to know about the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb. At that time Mughal emperor had
in trouble. Nadir Sha got that chance and lead an invasion against Aurangzeb. He in the first step captured Kandahar
and then Kabul and Gazni. In 1793 Mughal emperor Muhammad Sha to stop the invasion of Nadir Sha started a
battle but in that battle, lack of military control and fighting equipment Mughal military did not succeed in that
battle. After conquering of Delhi Nadir shag granted his military to reave Delhi that’s why Delhi was destroyed and
The famous Peacock Throne of Shah Jahan and the Koh-i-nur diamond were taken to Iran. Nadir sha when went
back to Iran he carried many valuable things approximately TK 15 crore .

2. Invasion of Ahmed Sha Abdali

After the successful invasion of Panjab, he appointed his son Taimur Sha for Panjab. But after some time Marathas
repulsed his son from Punjab. For this reason, Ahmed sha Abdali in 1961 with the help of Nazib ud Dula succeeded in
repulsing the Maratha. Then he led many invasions towards Panjab and other areas but at that time Abdali failed.
After many times he succeeds against Mughal emperor Alamgir 2 . He looted many things from Delhi and India.
nd

3. Interference of Europeans
French and British started to interfere in the internal and political matters of India because of the weakness of the
Mughal Empire. They started to competition in all over India for capturing power .they created a horrible political
conditions for their betterment.

2. The Anglo-French Rivalry

The Anglo-French Struggle for Supremacy

 However the British and French arrived in India for trade, they were eventually dragged into Indian
politics. Both had ambitions to wield political influence in the region.
 The Anglo-French competition in India mirrored the customary rivalry between England and France
throughout their histories; it began with the commencement of the Austrian War of Succession and
culminated with the Seven Years' War.
 In India, the competition, which took the shape of three Carnatic wars, determined once and for all
that the English, not the French, would be the lords of India.
 South India's political status was unsettled and perplexing in 1740.
 Nizam Asaf Jah of Hyderabad was old and busy fighting the Marathas in the western Deccan, while his
subordinates speculated about the ramifications of his death.
 To the south of his dominion was the Coromandel Coast, which lacked a strong monarch to preserve
power balance.
 Instead, there was the remainder of the former Vijayanagara empire in inner Mysore, Cochin, and
Travancore on the Malabar Coast, and minor realms of Madura (Madurai), Tanjore (Thanjavur), and
Trichinopoly in the east (Thiruchirapally).
 The loss of Hyderabad signalled the end of Muslim expansionism, and the English adventurers
prepared their plans accordingly.
 In particular, in India, the rivalry, which took the shape of three Carnatic wars, determined once and
for all that the English, rather than the French, were the better candidates to establish their control
over India.

First Carnatic War (1740–48)

 5

 The Coromandel coast and its hinterland were given the name Carnatic by Europeans.
 The First Carnatic War was a European extension of the Anglo-French War triggered by the Austrian
War of Succession.
 The First Carnatic War is famous for the Battle of St. Thome (in Madras), which took place between
French forces and the forces of Anwar-ud-din, the Nawab of Carnatic, to whom the English called for
assistance.

Course of the war

 Although France, aware of its more inferior position in India, did not favour extending hostilities to
India, the English navy, led by Commodore Curtis Bennett, captured some French ships in order to
irritate France.
 The French Governor General, Marquis Joseph-François Dupleix, requested assistance from Anwar-
ud-Din, Nawab of Carnatic, who warned the British that his province was neutral territory and that no
attack on French territories would be permitted.
 In 1746, France reacted by taking Madras with the assistance of a fleet from Mauritius, the Isle of
France, led by Admiral La Bourdonnais, the French ruler of Mauritius.
 The seizure of Madras sparked a heated debate between Dupleix and La Bourdonnais.
 Dupleix desired to hand up the town to the Nawab as reparations for violating the Nawab's neutrality
edict, whilst La Bourdonnais desired to ransom the town back to the British.
 This debate continued on until October, when Anwar-ud-Din decided to step in. He dispatched an
army of 10,000 soldiers, led by his son Mahfuzz Khan, to besiege the French at Madras.

Result of the First Carnatic war

 At St.Thome on the banks of the Adyar River, a small French force led by Captain Paradise destroyed a
large Indian army led by Mahfuz Khan.
 The First Carnatic War concluded in 1748 with the signing of the Treaty of Aix-La Chapelle, which
ended the Austrian War of Succession.
 Madras was returned to the English under the provisions of this treaty, while the French received
territory in North America in exchange.
 War showed the Europeans in India that even a small disciplined force could successfully beat a much
bigger Indian army.
 Furthermore, this fight demonstrated the significance of naval might in the Anglo-French conflict in the
Deccan.

Second Carnatic War

Second Carnatic War (1749–54)

 The Anglo-French rivalry in India formed the backdrop for the Second Carnatic War.
 Even after the First Carnatic War ended, India's calm was short-lived.
 Nizam-ul-Mulk, Mughal administrator of the Deccan and semi-independent Nawab of Hyderabad,
died in 1748.
 The succession to his position was contentious, and the British and French were quickly drawn into the
squabble amongst the aspirants.
 6

 Dupleix, the French governor who led the French soldiers to victory in the First Carnatic War, aimed to
enhance his power and French political influence in southern India by meddling in local dynastic
rivalries in order to beat the English.
 The British strengthened their grip in southern India during the Second Carnatic War, which lasted
from 1749 to 1754.

Course of the war

 The death of Nizam-ul-Mulk, the founder of the independent kingdom of Hyderabad, in 1748, and the
release of Chanda Sahib, the son-in-law of Dost Ali, the Nawab of Carnatic, by the Marathas in the
same year, offered the chance.
 In Hyderabad, Muzaffar Jang, the grandson of the Nawab, challenged Nasir Jang, the son of the Nizam,
to the throne of Hyderabad, claiming that the Mughal Emperor had chosen him as governor of
Hyderabad.
 There were two contenders for the Nawabship of Carnatic, a subsidiary office formally dependent on
the Nizam, farther south.
 Muzaffar Jang's, Chanda Sahib, and the French army defeated and killed Anwar ud-din in the Battle of
Ambur (near Vellore) in 1749.
 The Nawab was assassinated early in the conflict, leaving his son Mohammed Ali to claim the
Nawabship.
 Muzaffar Jang was appointed Nizam of Hyderabad and Subahdar of Deccan, while Dupleix was made
administrator of all Mughal provinces south of the Krishna River.
 Muzaffar Jung, however, was assassinated a few months later, and the French placed Muzaffar's uncle
Salabat Jung as the new Nizam.
 After failing to give meaningful support to Muhammad Ali at Trichinopoly, the English company's
Robert Clive proposed a diversionary attack against Governor Saunders of Madras.
 After numerous fights, Muhammad Ali, who was ultimately established as the Nawab of Carnatic,
executed Chanda Sahib.

Result of the Second Carnatic war

 The French government, irritated by the large financial losses caused by Dupleix's policies, decided to
recall him in 1754.
 Dupleix was replaced as French Governor-General in India by Charles Robert Godeheu.
 Godeheu pursued a strategy of conciliation with the English, signing the Treaty of Pondicherry with
them, in which the English and French promised not to intervene in the disputes of native kings.

Third Carnatic War

Third Carnatic War (1758–63)

 When Austria sought to reclaim Silesia in 1756, the Seven Years' War (1756–63) erupted throughout
Europe.
 Britain and France were once again at odds.

Course of the war

 7

 The French army, led by Count Thomas Arthur de Lally, conquered the English forts of St. David and
Vizianagaram in 1758.
 The English then went on the attack, inflicting significant losses on the French navy led by Admiral
D'Ache at Masulipatnam.
 The English won the crucial battle of the Third Carnatic War on January 22, 1760 at Wandiwash (or
Vandavasi) in Tamil Nadu.
 The English army, led by General Eyre Coote, completely destroyed the French army led by Count de
Lally and imprisoned Marquis de Bussy.
 Lally gallantly fought Pondicherry for eight months before surrendering on January 16, 1761.

Result of the Third Carnatic War

 The Third Carnatic War turned out to be pivotal.

 The third war ended with the Treaty of Paris (1763), which restored Pondicherry and Chandannagar to
France but limited them to commercial operations.
 Despite the fact that the treaty restored the French industries in India, French political power in India
faded after the war.
 Following that, the French, like their Portuguese and Dutch rivals in India, restricted themselves to tiny
enclaves and commerce.
 The English rose to become the dominant European force in the Indian subcontinent.

Reasons for French Failure

Reasons for French Failure

 The British have greater naval strength. They might bring warriors from Europe as well as supplies
from Bengal. The French had no such option for replenishing supplies.
 The French Army had 300 European Cavalry, 2,250 European Infantry, 1,300 sepoys (soldiers), 3,000
Mahrattas, and 16 pieces of artillery, whereas the English had 80 European Horses, 250 Native Horses,
1,900 European Infantry, and 2,100 sepoys.
 Britain possessed three significant posts: Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta.
 The French, on the other hand, only possessed one strong station, Pondicherry.
 This meant that if Pondicherry was taken, the French had little chance of regaining control. However, if
one of the bases is seized, Britain may rely on either of the other two.
 The British gained access to a wealthy territory, Bengal, as a result of their victory in the Battle of
Plassey.
 The British army had numerous skilled soldiers, including Robert Clive, Stringer Lawrence, and Sir Eyre
Coote.

Conclusion

Despite the fact that the British and French came to India to trade, they were eventually entangled into India's
politics. Both had ambitions to consolidate political control in the region. The Anglo-French competition in
India mirrored England and France's long standing rivalry throughout their histories; it began with the
commencement of the Austrian War of Succession and culminated with the Seven Years War.

3. The Indian National Congress (INC)

 8

The Indian National Congress (INC) was founded in 1885 by Allan Octavian Hume, a retired British civil servant. Hume
was motivated by a number of factors, including:

 The need for a platform for Indians to express their grievances and demands to the British government.
 The desire to promote unity and cooperation among different Indian communities.
 The belief that British rule was beneficial to India, but that it needed to be reformed to be more just and
equitable.

a) Mythical Theory

This suggested that it was the humanistic approach of A.O. Hume that was cited as one of the factors that led to the
establishment of the INC. In fact, it was said that Hume was deeply moved by the political plight of the Indians, and he
wanted to establish a political platform for Indians that could serve as the ‘voice for Indians’ so that the grievances could
reach the British and the discontentment which was gradually growing between the British ruling system and the Indians
could be minimized.

The biographer of A.O. Hume, William Wedderburn, who later on also became the President of the INC as well, deeply
believed in the humanistic approach of A.O. Hume.

b) Realistic Theory:

1. The extremist elements in India like Lala Lajpat Rai, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, etc. laid down the
theory known as ‘Safety- valve’ theory.
2. Lala Lajpat Rai wrote two books, ‘Unhappy India’, and ‘Punjabi’. In these two books, he explained and criticized
the policy of the British regarding the establishment of the INC.
3. According to him, it was a conspiracy of Lord Dufferin, and A.O. Hume, that lead to the establishment of the
INC. In the second half of the 19th Century with the growing tide of nationalism, the aggression of Indians kept
on increasing against the British policies, thus the British think-tanks derived a concept by which it was said that
in between the British Government in India and the Indian public, there would be a buffer organization known
as the Indian National Congress (INC).

The goal of the Indian National Congress (INC)

The goal of the Indian National Congress (INC) is to create a strong, united India that is inclusive of all social groups. The
party works to promote national unity and social inclusion through its policies and programs.

The inc's goal is based on the following principles:

 Secularism: The INC believes that India is a secular country where all religions should be treated equally.
 Democracy: The INC is committed to democracy and believes that all Indians should have equal rights and
opportunities.
 Social justice: The INC believes in social justice and works to promote the welfare of all Indians, regardless of
their caste, religion, or gender.

Here are the goals of the INC in detail:

1. Promotion of Indian Interests: The INC aimed to promote the interests of the Indian population, particularly the
educated middle class, who felt marginalized under British colonial rule. It sought to protect and advance the
economic, social, and political interests of Indians.
 9

2. Political Representation: One of the primary goals was to secure greater political representation for Indians in
the colonial administration. The INC demanded a larger role for Indians in policymaking, legislative bodies, and
the civil service.
3. Administrative Reforms: The INC advocated for administrative reforms in the British colonial system. This
included demands for greater transparency, accountability, and efficiency in the administration. Indians wanted
a say in the governance of their own country.
4. Civil Rights: The INC sought to protect and expand civil rights and liberties for Indians. This included demands for
freedom of speech, press, and assembly, as well as the right to a fair trial and equal protection under the law.
5. Economic Reforms: Economic issues were of great concern to the INC. Indians were unhappy with the economic
exploitation by the British colonial rulers. The INC aimed to address economic disparities and protect Indian
industries and resources from British exploitation.
6. Social and Religious Reform: The INC supported social and religious reform movements that aimed to eradicate
social evils like caste discrimination, child marriage, and the mistreatment of women. Prominent leaders
associated with the INC, like Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Swami Vivekananda, were proponents of social and
religious reform.
7. Unity and Nationalism: The INC played a crucial role in fostering a sense of national unity and identity among
the diverse population of India. It aimed to unite people from different regions, languages, religions, and castes
under a common banner for the cause of national freedom.
8. Constitutional Methods: The INC emphasized the use of peaceful and constitutional methods to achieve its
goals. It believed in dialogue, negotiations, and non-violent protest as means to address grievances and push for
reforms.
9. Education and Awareness: The INC recognized the importance of education and awareness in achieving its
objectives. It encouraged education among Indians and used platforms like newspapers, pamphlets, and public
meetings to raise awareness about political and social issues.
10. Independence: While the initial goals were focused on reform within the British colonial system, over time, the
INC's ultimate goal shifted towards complete independence from British rule. This transformation was
particularly evident in the early 20th century.

The INC's goal is to achieve a strong and prosperous India where all Indians can live in peace and harmony. The party
believes that this can be achieved through a combination of economic development, social justice, and national unity.

The INC's specific goals include:

 To promote economic growth and development.

 To create jobs and reduce poverty.
 To improve education and healthcare.
 To empower women and marginalized groups.
 To protect the environment.
 To promote peace and understanding between different religions and cultures.

The INC is a centrist political party, and its policies reflect a balance between economic development and social justice.
The party is committed to a mixed economy, with a role for both the public and private sectors. The INC also supports
social welfare programs such as education, healthcare, and housing.

The INC is one of the two major political parties in India, and it has played a leading role in the country's development
since independence. The party is committed to democracy, secularism, and social justice. The INC's goal is to create a
strong, united India where all Indians can live in peace and harmony.

The Indian National Congress (INC) was called a safety valve by some because it provided a peaceful and constitutional
outlet for Indian grievances and demands. The British government hoped that the INC would help to defuse the growing
discontent among Indians and prevent it from erupting into violence.
 10

Why it is called safety valve ?

The INC was founded in 1885 by Allan Octavian Hume, a retired British civil servant. Hume was motivated by a number
of factors, including his belief that British rule in India was beneficial, but that it needed to be reformed to be more just
and equitable. He also believed that the INC would help to promote unity and cooperation among different Indian
communities.
In the early years of its existence, the INC was a moderate organization that sought to achieve reforms through
constitutional means. However, it became more radical over time, and by the early 20th century, it was leading the
Indian independence movement.
Despite its increasingly radical stance, the INC continued to be seen by some as a safety valve by the British government.
The British hoped that the INC would provide a channel for Indian dissent to be expressed in a peaceful and orderly
manner. They also hoped that the INC would help to educate Indians about the benefits of British rule and to promote
loyalty to the Crown.
However, the INC's role as a safety valve was limited. The British government was unwilling to make any meaningful
concessions to the INC, and the party's demands for self-government were ultimately met with violence and repression.
Despite its limitations, the INC played an important role in the Indian independence movement. It provided a platform
for Indians to express their grievances and demands, and it helped to unite Indians from all walks of life behind the
common goal of independence.
In conclusion, the INC was called a safety valve because it provided a peaceful and constitutional outlet for Indian
grievances and demands. The British government hoped that the INC would help to defuse the growing discontent
among Indians and prevent it from erupting into violence. However, the INC's role as a safety valve was limited, as the
British government was unwilling to make any meaningful concessions to the party.

4. Formation of All India Muslim league.

From samad sir’s book.

5. What is Lucknow Pact 1916

The Lucknow Pact 1916 represented to be a pact that was signed between the Indian National Congress and
the All India Muslim League in Lucknow in December 1916.

Mohammed Ali Jinnah was a member of both the Indian National Congress and the All-India Muslim League.
He asked people to pester the British government to facilitate more liberty for the nation and furnish its
citizens with enhanced autonomy.

Lucknow Pact 1916 created an amicable relationship between both parties heading Sarojini Naidu referred
Mohammed Ali Jinnah as the ambassador of ‘Hindu-Muslim Unity. The purpose of signing the Lucknow pact
was to bring out the common political rules made by both parties, including the demand for self-governance in
India after the war.

History of Lucknow Pact

 11

Lucknow session 1916 is important to learn as this tells us about the reason for the growing popularity of
the All India Muslim League at that time.

After the unsuccessful of Morley–Minto act 1909 Muslim communities of India was not delight about issue of British
because in that act there were a part for Muslim where it was said the Muslims could send their representative
separately by separate election but it was not happened that’s why Muslim people

To know the significance of the Lucknow Pact 1916, it is important to know its background.

1. The Muslim League came into existence in 1906, and the prime motive of the Muslim League was
to establish a cordial relationship with the British.
2. Despite this, the league changed its stance toward the British after the partition of Bengal was
announced by the Britishers.
3. During the period of the All India Muslim League and Indian National Congress coalition,
Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who was the then member of both parties, used the occasion as a joint
venture to pressure the British to reform.
4. This was the first time when both parties were together at the first joint session.
5. Hindu Muslim Unity was conceived when extremists under Bal Gangadhar Tilak and moderates
under Bhopal Krishna Gokhale met in Bombay and, together with the Muslim League, created their
constitutional seekings and discussed them mutually.
6. As a result of this, both parties’ leaders gathered at the same place with the same thoughts and
demands.
7. 19 members of both parties were elected to the legislature in Bombay in October 1916, and these
19 members presented a memorandum to the viceroy about the constitutional reforms.
8. The suggestions from the prior meeting were discussed and agreed upon at the following meeting
in Calcutta in November in the year 1916.
9. At the latter’s annual session at Lucknow in December 1916, the Muslim League and Indian
National Congress signed the Lucknow Pact 1916.

Significance of Lucknow Pact 1916

The Lucknow pact focused on creating self-government for Indian citizens. It also suggested an end to the
Indian Council. The provisions of the Lucknow Pact 1916 demanded the eligibility to vote for the president,
allowing more than 100 members, and the Central Legislative Council and council should have a 50-50 ratio of
British and Indian citizens. The nature of the Lucknow Pact was very interesting as it contained several
provisions like-

1. The Indian affair will have to be administered by the British Government and not by Indian funds.
The British Government will be accountable for crediting the pay of Secretaries of State and funds
will not be utilized for the same.
2. The members of the Legislative Assembly were considered eligible to cast a vote for the President.
3. They also sent proposals to fix the duration of the Legislative Assembly to 5 years.
4. For the Muslim communities will be possessing separate electorates unless otherwise appealed.
5. The Central Legislative Council comprises 150 members.
6. The Indian citizens must constitute at least half of the Council.
7. Nomination of ⅕ of the members will occur, and the election of the 4/5th members will also occur.
And 1/3 members are belong to Muslim communities by separation election.
 12

8. The Muslims ought to be facilitated representation in the Central Council, as they have an average
weightage of one-third of all the members.
9. The candidates apart from those who have been nominated will be elected utilizing the universal
adult franchise.
10. Minorities ought to be permitted and facilitated equal representation.
11. Congress advocated the Muslim lead positions on a different electorate, which will be regulated
unless any group seeks united electorates, even though the league was devoted to facilitating the
government with the proposition of the common constitution proposals.
12. A fixed percentage of members in both the national and provincial legislatures were allotted to
Muslims.

Main Points of Lucknow Pact 1916

There were numerous provisions enshrined in the Lucknow pact since the start. These points will illustrate the
importance of the Lucknow Pact 1916; candidates preparing for UPSC must prepare well for this topic to be
able to solve questions in the stipulated time frame. Following are some main points of the Lucknow Pact
1916:

1. The Muslim League and the Indian National Congress both assented to the idea of separate
electorates. This determined that both groups were well-versed in the essentiality of local politics
and the self-centered aspirations of numerous communities dwelling in India that might contribute
to the separation of the country in 1947.
2. The essentiality of the Muslim community’s representation was admitted. This led the way for
communal politics.
3. Before the onset of the Lucknow Pact, the league lacked any political presence.
4. It was distinct that there was a conflict between the leaders and the people. The riots among the
people of numerous communities broke out in the region of Bengal and Bihar.
5. If three-fourths of the members did not agree or dissented then the legislature could not sanction
the decision hence Indian legislature had taken into account the concept of veto communalism.
6. The agreement made it clear that all of India’s major communities had their own areas of interest.

The Outcome of the Lucknow Pact

The radical wings of the Congress and the moderates were united. At the joint meeting held between both
the Parties, the Congress Party and Muslim League assented to an agreement that is called as Lucknow Pact.
The result of the signed agreement was that the two parties assented to the agreement that religious
minorities could be represented in the provincial legislatures.

1. The Congress assented to the idea of separate electorates, which recommended that the Congress
and the Muslim League be associated together as different political entities.
2. The development of the two-nation thesis was the main remarkable point.
3. Efforts made to unify the people of varied communities were disregarded when the leaders met.

-----------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________________________________
 13

The era preceding that of the later Mughals was an era of growth, development, and increased political
strength under Aurangzeb. He had three sons; Muazzam who was the governor of Kabul, Kam-Baksh who was
the governor of Deccan, and Azam who was the governor of Gujarat. In the war of succession that broke out
after Aurangzeb’s death, Muazzam won and assumed the title of Bahadur Shah I and sometimes also called
Shah Alam I.

 Bahadur Shah I was the first and the last Mughal Emperor among the later Mughals who exercised authority.
 His short reign of four years was full of trouble. Bahadur Shah had tried to extend his control over the Rajputs
but they revolted.
 He could not do very much as meanwhile, the Sikhs had also revolted. The Maratha Raja Shahu had accepted a
mansab (rank) in the Mughal administration.

6. The Khilafat Movement and The Non-Cooperation Movement

1. Analyse the background of khilafat movement. Why did it fail? 3. Discuss the background and causes of non cooperation movement? what was result of it?
2. Discuss the causes and effects of Khilafat Movement.Why this movement was important in 4. Evaluate the role / Contribution of women in non cooperation movement. What was the
the history of India or South Asia? outcome of non cooperation movement?

The Khilafat Movement was a significant political and religious movement in India during the early 20th century. It was
initiated by Indian Muslims in response to the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire and the end of the Islamic
Caliphate, particularly after World War I and the Treaty of Sèvres in 1920, which stripped the Ottoman Sultan of his
political and territorial authority.

Here is the background and key aspects of the Khilafat Movement:

1. The Decline of the Ottoman Empire: The Ottoman Empire, based in modern-day Turkey, was seen as the center
of the Islamic world and the custodian of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. However, by the early 20th
century, the empire was in decline, and its territorial integrity was under threat from various Western powers.
2. World War I and the Caliphate: During World War I, the Ottoman Empire was part of the Central Powers, which
included Germany and Austria-Hungary. After the war, the victorious Allied powers, through the Treaty of
Sèvres, planned to dismantle the Ottoman Empire and partition its territories. This included the potential
abolition of the Islamic Caliphate.
3. Concerns among Indian Muslims: News of the possible end of the Caliphate and the disintegration of the
Ottoman Empire deeply concerned Indian Muslims, who viewed the Caliph as their religious and spiritual leader.
They feared that without a Caliph, the Muslim community would lose its unity and protection of its religious
interests.
4. Leaders of the Movement: The Khilafat Movement was led by prominent Indian Muslim leaders, including the
Ali Brothers (Muhammad Ali and Shaukat Ali) and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad. Mahatma Gandhi, the leader of the
Indian independence movement, also supported the Khilafat cause.
5. Objectives of the Movement: The primary objective of the Khilafat Movement was to exert political pressure on
the British government to protect the institution of the Caliphate and to prevent the dismemberment of the
Ottoman Empire. It aimed to unite Hindus and Muslims in a common cause against British colonialism.
6. Non-Cooperation Movement: The Khilafat Movement and the Indian National Congress, under the leadership of
Gandhi, joined forces during the Non-Cooperation Movement (1920-1922). They called for non-violent protests,
boycotts of British goods, and non-participation in British institutions to press their demands.
7. Outcome: The Khilafat Movement had a significant impact on the political landscape of India. It mobilized large
sections of the Muslim population and led to greater Hindu-Muslim unity in the struggle for independence.
However, the movement's objectives regarding the Caliphate were not achieved, as the Treaty of Sèvres was
superseded by the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923, which recognized the Republic of Turkey and abolished the
Caliphate.
8. Aftermath: While the Khilafat Movement did not achieve its immediate goals, it marked an important phase in
the Indian freedom struggle. It demonstrated the potential for Hindu-Muslim unity and the power of non-violent
 14

protest as a means of political resistance. It also set the stage for further developments in the fight against
British colonial rule, leading to India's independence in 1947.

In summary, the Khilafat Movement was a movement led by Indian Muslims to protect the Islamic Caliphate and to
unite with other communities in the struggle for India's independence from British colonial rule. Although it did not
achieve its primary objective, it had a lasting impact on the Indian freedom movement.

Why did Khilafat movement fail?

The Khilafat Movement, while significant and influential, ultimately did not achieve its primary objectives. Several
factors contributed to its failure:

1. Geopolitical Changes: The Khilafat Movement was launched in response to the disintegration of the Ottoman
Empire and the potential abolition of the Islamic Caliphate. However, by the time the movement gained
momentum, the geopolitical landscape had already shifted. The Treaty of Sèvres (1920), which threatened the
Caliphate, was superseded by the Treaty of Lausanne (1923), which recognized the Republic of Turkey and
abolished the Caliphate. These changes made it difficult for the Khilafat Movement to achieve its goal of
preserving the Caliphate.
2. Internal Divisions: The Khilafat Movement was a coalition of various Muslim groups, and it faced internal
divisions and disagreements over its objectives and tactics. Some leaders believed in pursuing non-violent civil
disobedience, while others advocated more radical methods. These internal divisions weakened the
movement's effectiveness.
3. Limited British Response: The British colonial authorities did take notice of the Khilafat Movement, but they
were more concerned with the broader Indian independence movement. While the Khilafat Movement aimed
to leverage its influence to protect the Caliphate, the British government was more focused on maintaining its
control over India.
4. Changing Dynamics: As time passed, the Khilafat Movement became intertwined with the broader Indian
independence movement, particularly during the Non-Cooperation Movement led by Mahatma Gandhi. The
movement's goals expanded beyond the Caliphate issue to include demands for India's independence, which
further complicated its objectives.
5. Global Shifts: The international political landscape was shifting rapidly after World War I. The decline of empires
and the rise of nationalism across the world led to changes in the priorities of both colonial powers and colonial
subjects. The fate of the Caliphate became less central to global politics.
6. British Repression: The British responded to the Non-Cooperation Movement with widespread repression,
arrests, and violence. This had a dampening effect on the momentum of the Khilafat Movement and other
movements advocating civil disobedience.
7. Successive Movements: The Khilafat Movement was followed by other movements and events in the struggle
for Indian independence, such as the Civil Disobedience Movement and the Quit India Movement. These later
movements took precedence, and the focus shifted away from the Khilafat Movement's original objectives.

Consequence of Khilafat Movement

The Khilafat Movement, despite not achieving its primary objective of preserving the Islamic Caliphate, had several
significant consequences in the context of Indian history and the broader struggle for independence from British colonial
rule. Some of the key consequences of the Khilafat Movement include:

1. Hindu-Muslim Unity: The Khilafat Movement marked a notable period of Hindu-Muslim unity in India. It brought
together people from different religious communities, as leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and the Ali Brothers
emphasized the importance of unity in the struggle against British colonialism. This unity laid the foundation for
future cooperation between Hindus and Muslims in the Indian independence movement.
 15

2. Non-Cooperation Movement: The Khilafat Movement and the Indian National Congress, led by Mahatma
Gandhi, joined forces during the Non-Cooperation Movement (1920-1922). This movement was a mass protest
against British colonial rule and included non-violent forms of resistance, such as boycotts of British goods, non-
participation in British institutions, and civil disobedience. The Khilafat Movement contributed significantly to
the mobilization of people during this movement.
3. Political Awakening: The Khilafat Movement played a role in awakening political consciousness among Indian
Muslims. It encouraged them to participate actively in the political sphere and engage in political activism. This
newfound political awareness contributed to the broader demand for self-governance and independence.
4. Influence on Future Movements: While the Khilafat Movement did not achieve its primary goal, it set a
precedent for using mass mobilization and non-violent resistance as powerful tools in the struggle for political
change. The strategies employed during the Khilafat Movement, including strikes, boycotts, and protests,
influenced future movements in India's fight for independence.
5. International Recognition: The Khilafat Movement drew international attention to the issues faced by Indian
Muslims and the broader Indian independence movement. It garnered sympathy and support from some
quarters, both within and outside India, and highlighted the global significance of the Indian struggle for
freedom.
6. Shift in British Policies: The British colonial authorities took note of the Khilafat Movement's impact and its
potential to disrupt their rule. While they responded with repression and arrests, the movement did prompt
some shifts in British policies and led to attempts to placate various Indian communities to maintain control.
7. Legacy of Unity: The sense of unity and cooperation between different religious communities that emerged
during the Khilafat Movement continued to influence the Indian political landscape. It provided a counter-
narrative to divisive forces and communal tensions, although these tensions would resurface in the later years.

The Non-Cooperation Movement

The Non-Cooperation Movement was a nationwide campaign of civil disobedience launched in India in 1920–
22 against the British rule. Led by Mahatma Gandhi, the movement aimed to exert pressure on the British
government to grant self-rule to India.

The movement was based on the principle of non-violence and civil disobedience. Participants were asked to
boycott British goods and institutions, resign from government jobs, and refuse to pay taxes. The movement
also called for the promotion of swadeshi (indigenous goods) and the revival of traditional Indian industries.

The Non-Cooperation Movement gained widespread support across India, and it was one of the most
significant events in the Indian independence movement. The movement forced the British government to
take notice of the growing demands for independence in India, and it helped to lay the foundation for the
eventual achievement of independence in 1947.

Causes of the Non-Cooperation Movement

The Non-Cooperation Movement was caused by a number of factors, including:

 The growing discontent among Indians over British rule, which was seen as repressive and exploitative.
 The British government's failure to meet the demands of Indians for self-rule.
 The repressive measures taken by the British government against Indian nationalists, such as the
Rowlatt Acts.
 The influence of Mahatma Gandhi and his philosophy of non-violence and civil disobedience.

Impact of the Non-Cooperation Movement

 16

The Non-Cooperation Movement had a significant impact on India, both politically and socially. Politically, the
movement forced the British government to take notice of the growing demands for independence in India. It
also helped to unite Indians from different religious and social backgrounds behind the common goal of
independence. Socially, the movement helped to promote the spread of education and the revival of
traditional Indian industries.

The Non-Cooperation Movement was ultimately unsuccessful in achieving its goal of immediate independence
for India. However, it was a major turning point in the Indian independence movement. It helped to lay the
foundation for the eventual achievement of independence in 1947.

The Non-Cooperation Movement also had a number of other long-term impacts, including:

 It helped to popularize the use of non-violence as a form of political resistance.

 It inspired other independence movements around the world.
 It helped to shape India's national identity and values.

The Non-Cooperation Movement was a significant event in Indian history, and its impact continues to be felt
today.

7. Lahore Resolution
PREVIOUS QUESTION
1. (Exam- 2021): What is the Lahore Resolution? Analyze the background of this resolution. Was it proposal for Pakistan?
2. (Exam- 2020): Discuss the features of the Lahore resolution. Was it a Pakistan proposal?

INTRODUCTION: The Lahore Resolution commonly known as the Pakistan resolution was a formal political statement
adopted by the Muslim league at the occasion of its three-days general session on 22-24 March 1940 that called for greater
Muslim autonomy in British India, was presented by A.K Fazlul Haq , the chief minister of undivided Bengal at Minto park
(now renamed Iqbal park) in Lahore. It was largely interpreted as a demand for a separate and single Muslim state, called
Pakistan. The Lahore resolution was a remarkable event embodying hopes and aspirations of the Muslims of India.

Background of the Lahore resolution and reason behind the declaration: The Muslim League goal since its inception in
December 1906 was to protect and advance Muslim socio-cultural identity, rights and interests in British India’s socio-
political and constitutional context. Initially the Muslim league demanded separate electorate for the Muslims so that
they could elect their representatives. Later, it sought adequate Muslim representation in the cabinets and state services.
It also demanded constitutional safeguards and guarantees for the Muslims. It supported federalism with autonomy for
provinces, hoping that the Muslims would be able to exercise power effectively in the Muslim majority provinces which
would not only boost the Muslim community but also provide greater opportunity for advancement of Muslim rights and
interests.
The changes of the political strategy by Muslim league was one of the major reasons for the failure of the prospect of
Hindu-Muslim unity of the Bengal pact in 1926. The effort suggested by Nehru to make negotiations between the Hindus
and the Muslims also failed in 1928 on the issue of election for the minorities. Failing in his efforts to establish a Hindu-
Muslim harmony Jinnah presented his famous 14 point formula in 1929, where Muslim interests had special priority.
Under these circumstance all political parties refused the Symon Commission report in 1930. Three consecutive
roundtable conferences in London between 1930 to 1932 ended without any decision. This time leaders of different
communities created pressure on the British Prime Minister Ramsey Macdonald declared the “communal Award” to solve
the crisis. Afterwards the British parliament accepted the India Rule Act in 1935 which included federal system of
government and provincial autonomy. Though the act was an important document in the administrative history of India,
 17

the federal government system could not be enacted according to it. Both the parties demanded extended legislative and
political reforms. On the other hand, Hindu Mohasova opposed the Act. In 1937, despite the adverse reactions of the
political parties the proposed provincial autonomy became effective under Indian act. In 1938 in a meeting of the
provincial Muslim League in Sindh Jinnah termed the Muslims and the Hindus two different nation.
Thus before the Lahore resolution was presented, the view that the Muslims and the Hindus were two different nations
created the idea of creating two separate states for them. The practical example of this view was the Lahore Resolution.

The five points and Demand of Lahore Resolution: For which Lahore resolution take a significance body in the South Asian
History, are the some important features of Lahore Resolution.

1. The areas in which the Muslims are numerically in a majority, as in the north-western and eastern zones of India, should
be grouped to constitute "Independent States" in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign.

2. The rest of the areas, which are inhabited by a mixed population, should be demarcated into regions which should be
so constituted, with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary, that the areas in which the Muslims are in a
majority should be grouped to constitute "Independent States"
3. The Constituent Assembly of each State should be so constituted as to ensure that it shall be able to function effectively
and take decisions by a majority vote.
4. In the event of any dispute or difference arising as to the interpretation of this Resolution, it shall be referred to the
Arbitration of the Muslim League.
5. No change shall be made in the above principles without the previous approval of the Muslim League.

The Lahore Resolution was a major turning point in the history of the Indian subcontinent. It gave the Muslim League a
clear goal to work towards, and it galvanized the Muslim community in their demand for a separate state. The resolution
also led to a period of intense political and social upheaval in India, as the two major communities, Hindus and Muslims,
clashed over the future of the country. In 1947, after years of negotiations, the British finally granted independence to
India. However, the country was partitioned into two dominions, Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan. The
partition was a bloody and chaotic process, and millions of people were displaced from their homes. The Lahore Resolution
is a controversial document, and its legacy is still debated today. Some people believe that it was a necessary step towards
the creation of Pakistan, while others believe that it was a mistake that has led to decades of conflict in the region.
Regardless of one's opinion on the Lahore Resolution, it is clear that it was a major turning point in the history of the
Indian subcontinent. It is a document that continues to be studied and debated today, and it is a reminder of the complex
and often painful history of the region.

IS THE LAHORE PROPOSAL A PAKISTAN PROPOSAL OR Not ?: Is the Lahore proposal a Pakistan proposal or not: The
Lahore proposal called for the formation of multiple independent states with the Muslim majority regions in the north,
west and east. Nowhere is it said that independent Pakistan will form a state. But later when the name Pakistan gained
more popularity, it tried to be known as Pakistan Movement. A discussion on whether the Lahore proposal is a Pakistan
proposal or not is presented:

1. Campaign called Pakistan Resolution: The Lahore Resolution called for the creation of multiple independent states in
India comprising the Muslim-majority regions of the North, West and East. Nowhere in this proposal was there a mention
of a Muslim state or the word Pakistan. But the day after the acceptance of this resolution, Congress-dominated
newspapers published the demands of the League's resolution under the title of Pakistan Resolution. Great Britain's
newspapers also later reported it as the "Lahore Proposal". However, there was an adverse reaction among Congress
leaders to Lahore's proposal. Congress-backed newspapers reported Pakistan for criticism. Because Congress leaders
believed in integral Indian nationalism.
 18

2. Indirect Pakistan Proposal: Muhammad Ali Jinnah, in his presidential address at the Muslim League session held in
Delhi in April 1943, said that the word Pakistan was not invented by him or by the Muslim League. He said that everyone
knows that the word Pakistan has been imposed on them by some Hindu and British newspapers. However, it is more
popular in the name of Pakistan.

Jinnah also said that how long or how big words can be used. That's why he thanked everyone for calling the proposal in
just one word. His meaning in Jinnah's words is that although the proposal was initially called the Lahore proposal, he had
in mind the dream of establishing a united Pakistan. And so he supported the Pakistan proposal for the sake of
newspapers. Since then the name Pakistan is known among the masses. But then Pakistan did not mean a state. According
to the Lahore proposal, multiple states were understood.

REACTIONS OF OTHER PARTIES AFTER THE DECLARATION OF LAHORE RESOLUTION:

Congress and Hindu Reaction:
Many of the historians think that the Hindu reaction was as quick as bitter. They called the "Pakistan" demand "anti-
national." They characterized it as vivisection; above all, they denounced it as imperialist - inspired to obstruct India's
march to freedom. Gandhi penetrated the resolution in a way that if it would be executed then both Punjab and Bengal
were supposed to be separate and independent nations. He termed the partition of India as a great sin and a suicidal
decision. Jawaharlal Nehru referred the resolution an artificial and impractical scheme. He also claimed and compared the
plan as the Balkan crisis of Europe. Congress leaders thought that the plan was the brainchild of revengeful Jinnah to
secure his leadership.
British Reaction: The British were equally hostile to the Muslim demand for at least two important reasons. First, they
had long considered themselves as the architects of the unity of India and of an Indian nation. Second, they had long
regarded the super-imposed unity under tax Britannica as their greatest achievement and lasting contribution in history.
And the Pakistan demand threatened to undo these presumed achievements on which the British had long prided.
However, despite the Hindu denunciation and the British alarm, the course of Muslim, indeed Indian, politics was from
now on firmly set towards Pakistan. In fact the British government showed their mixed reaction.

Bengal Muslims' Reactions: The feelings of the Muslims of Bengal are reflected in the speech of Abul Mansur Ahmed in
the Constituent Assembly. He said, "The Lahore Resolution was drafted by a divine hand-the hand that grove the pen that
drafted the resolution, was really that of God. It set the fate of Pakistan. Even if, Pakistan were created after the entire
demand of the All India Muslim League were conceded but the Congress and the British Government, still Pakistan would
have remained divided into two widely separated parts. That was visualized in the Lahore resolution.

Reactions from the Indian Muslims: Unlike the British government the Indian Muslims showed their mixed reaction vis-
à-vis the Lahore Resolution. Congress president Maulana Abul Kalam Azad vehemently opposed the scheme.

SIGNIFICANCE OF LAHORE RESOLUTION IN THE BACKGROUND OF INDEPENDENT BANGLADESH

The passing of the Lahore Resolution is one of the most important events after the formation of the Muslim League in the
long struggle of Indian Muslims from a separate identity to a separate status with specific safeguards to a separate state
with a specific territory

Name Pakistan goes Viral: The name Pakistan was not used in the resolution and the official name of the resolution was
Lahore Resolution. It was the Hindu newspapers including Partap, Bande Matram, Milap, Tribune, etc., who ironically
coined the name Pakistan Resolution. However, the idea was appreciated by the Muslim masses and the Resolution is
more known as Pakistan Resolution.
 19

Legitimacy of Demand: It was the first formal demand of the Indian Muslims, politically articulated by a representative
party and presented in a formal platform-of-two nation theory. It was now an official demand of the Indian Muslims
presented by their representative organization to counter the demand of the Indian National Congress of a united India
after the British left India. Muslim League was thus able to win the 1945 elections based on this Resolution
Leadership Transformation: Muhammad Ali Jinnah’s address to the Lahore conference was, according to Stanley Wolpert,
the moment when Jinnah, a former proponent of Hindu-Muslim unity, irrevocably transformed himself into the leader of
the fight for an independent Pakistan. He becomes from Mohammed Ali Jinnah to Quaid-e- Azam
Vision and Roadmap: Lahore Resolution not only gave a vision to the Indian Muslims but also provided them with a
roadmap for achieving this vision. It gave new energy and courage to the Muslims of the region who gathered around
Quaid-i-Azam from the platform of the Muslim League to struggle for their freedom. The dynamic leadership of the Quaid
and the commitment and devotion of the followers made it possible for them to achieve an independent state within
seven years of their struggle, and that too when the odds were against them.
From the upper point it is considered that Lahore resolution is an significant event in the history of India and Pakistan. If
the resolution isn't happened Muslim's sense of entitlement will remain dormant. Lahore resolution is the pioneer of the
Foundation of the two independent state India and Pakistan. If it is not happened we didn’t got our independent
Bangladesh. We will remain dependent.
From the above discussion it is clear that Lahore resolution is an important event in the history of
independent Bangladesh.

EVALUATION OF LAHORE RESOLUTION : The British permanent passed the Indian independence act on 18,1947.The act
created two dominions, Indian union and Pakistan. It also provided for the complete end of British control over Indian
affairs from August 15,1947. the Muslim of the sub continent had finally achieved their goal to have an independent state
for themselves. The Muslim faced a gamut of problems immediately after independent. However keeping true to their
traditions, they overcome them after a while.
The boundaries of Pakistan emerged on the map of the world in 1947. The British were hostile to the Muslim demand.
They had long considered themselves as the architects of the unity of India and of on Indian nation. They had long regarded
the super-imposed unity under tax tritannica as their greatest achievement and lasting contribution of history. And the
Pakistan demand threatened to undo these presumed achievements on which the British had long period. However,
despite the Hindu denunciation and the British alarm, the course of must, indeed Indian, politics was from now on firmly
set towards Pakistan.

*The all India Muslim league resolution on march 1940 commonly known as the Pakistan resolution, is undoubtedly the
most important event that changed to course of Indian history and left mark on the world history.

* with the passage of resolution, the Muslim of the subcontinent changed their demand from separate electorates to a
separate state. The resolution rejected the idea of a united India and the creation of an independent Muslim state was
set as their unlimited goal. It gave new energy and courage to the Muslim of the region who gathered around Quaid-e -
azam from the platform of Muslim league to struggle for their freedom.

* The dynamic leadership of the Quaid and the commitment and devotion of the followers made it possible for them to
achieve an independent state within seven years of their struggle and that too when the odds were against their.
The resolution repudiated the concept of united India.
The resolution was seconded by Mailana Zafar from Punjab, Sardar Aurangzeb sir Abdul Harun and Quzi Easa. The
resolution was passed on march 24. It laid down only the principle with the details left to be worked out at the future
date.
The resolution did not specify any demarcation of the territory but it defined the future plan of struggle for the
establishment of the Muslim state. In the northwestern and Eastern areas where the Muslims were in overwhelming
 20

majority. It also intended to give importance to the autonomy of the State. There was no use of the word Pakistan but
Pakistan was Kamal of the resolution.

CONTROVERSIES AND LIMITATION: Strategically the words 'Independent states' and sovereign were kept ambiguous so
that it was tough to find the meanings out. The Lahore Resolution made a fundamental departure from the original
resolution in using the word state in the singular replacing the term state. Even the word Pakistan was not existed in the
resolution. In this regard, some two states were supposed to be originated. Jinnah at first took the plurals of the Lahore
Resolution as an obvious printing mistake. The Lahore Resolution was a proposal to get the demands and rights of Indian
Muslims. The Lahore proposal said that the states would be autonomous and sovereign, but the states can not be
completely independent and sovereign. some ambiguous and limitations were observed in the Lahore proposal.

1. Independent sovereign states: The Lahore Resolution called for the formation of multiple independent states .But the
Lahore proposal did not mention any clear idea about which provinces would be formed. There was no clear explanation
as to how the provinces of Bengal and Panjab would be divided. It is one of the limitations of the Lahore proposal.
2. Ambiguity of sovereign: The Lahore Resolution states that the member states shall be Independent and sovereign. The
contradiction in the proposal is obvious. It is said that the states will be Independent and sovereign which is the limitation
of the Lahore Resolution.
3. Creation of the state of Pakistan: The state of Pakistan was created based on the Lahore Resolution. In April 1946, the
legislative convention of the Muslim league adopted a resolution in favor of a united Pakistan. But the Lahore Resolution
called for the formation of several independent states.
In conclusion, the Lahore proposal had several ambiguities and limitations. The Muslim league and Jinnah, instead of
creation multiple states to protect their own interests, made it possible to form an integral independent Pakistan. So it
can be said without doubt that there were ambiguities and limitations in Lahore proposal which paved the way for the
establishment of an independent state of Pakistan.

CONCLUSION: The All India Muslim League Resolution of March 1940, commonly known as the Pakistan Resolution, is
undauntedly the most important event that changed the course of Indian history and left deep marks on the world history.
This solution rejected the idea of a United India and the creation of an independent Muslim state was set as their ultimate
goal. The dynamic leadership of the Quaid and the commitment and devotion of the followers made it possible for them
to achieve an independent state within seven years of their struggle, and that too when the odds were against them.

10 .What do you mean by Aligarh movement ?

The Aligarh Movement refers to a significant movement in the 19th century that was inspired by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan,
his colleagues, and Muslim students of M.A.O College (later Aligarh University). It aimed to address the challenges faced
by Muslims in India, particularly after the failure of the War of Independence in 1857. The movement sought to revive the
economic, social, and political status of Muslims by promoting education, modern sciences, and maintaining their Islamic
identity. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan played a crucial role as the chief architect of this movement, working tirelessly to uplift the
Muslim community and bridge the gap between Muslims and the British rulers. The Aligarh Movement brought about a
renaissance for Muslims and played a significant role in shaping their national identity.