With reference to Janab Syed Sahabuddin's contention in his letter 'Muslims' birthright' (April 24) his claim to birthright is questionable on several counts. First, he calls himself a Muslims Indian instead of an Indian Muslim. This prioritisation of religion over the motherland dilutes a child's right to occupy pride of place in its mother's lap. While I do not question his right to extra-territorial loyalty. I cannot concede to him an absolute privilege for shelter in this territory.
Second, Syed Sahabuddin himself wrote in his letter, 'Question of quarantine' (April 10) that the Muslim position is negotiable, provided they are compensated with once-eight land and resources of India. I excuse him for overlooking before he wrote the letter, that the Partition package included the compensation. In fact, Jinnah and several League leaders had claimed that an exchange of population was an integral part of the vivisection of India.
Third, the then Muslim electorate across the sub-continent had voted over-whelmingly for the League whose single point agenda in 1946 was partition. The moving figures behind the League's demand at the time were those, who today would claim to Muslim Indians and Muslim Pakistanis. The Punjabis, the Sindhis and the Bengalis were quite secure in their majority areas. Bihar, Bombay and the UP Muslims were the one most keen on the division of the country.
Fourth, like lakhs of others, my
family had to evacuate home and hearth with fires raging all around the
locality. Mind was a tragic tale like so many others, but I do not wish
to inflame passions by narrating it here. We were citizens of Lahore since
time immemorial and my religion was not above my matribhoomi. Despite all,
I remain an Indian Hindu, not a Hindu Indian.