Uttar Pradesh Land Auctioned Under Enemy Property Act: Former Pakistan President Musharraf’s Family Land to Be Sold

Uttar Pradesh Land Auctioned Under Enemy Property Act: Former Pakistan President Musharraf’s Family Land to Be Sold

A parcel of land in Uttar Pradesh, once owned by the family of former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, is set for auction under The Enemy Property Act. The Union Home Affairs Ministry has announced that approximately 13 bighas of land in Kotana Bangar village, Baghpat district, will be sold through e-auction until midnight on September 12.

The Enemy Property Act

The Enemy Property Act, enacted in 1968, enables the Indian government to control properties owned by individuals or entities that have taken nationality of a country hostile to India. This includes properties left behind by people who migrated to Pakistan or China following the wars between these countries and India.

Historical Context

  • 1965 and 1971 India-Pakistan Wars: Following these conflicts, individuals who migrated from India to Pakistan had their properties taken over by the Indian government under the Defence of India Rules.
  • Sino-Indian War of 1962: Similar measures were applied to properties of individuals who moved to China.

Tashkent Declaration

The Tashkent Declaration of January 10, 1966, included a clause for discussions between India and Pakistan on the return of properties seized during the conflicts. However, Pakistan disposed of these properties in 1971.

Amendments to The Enemy Property Act

  • 2017 Amendments: The Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2016, expanded the definitions of “enemy subject” and “enemy firm” to include legal heirs and successors, regardless of nationality.
  • Custodian Powers: The amendments ensured that enemy property remains with the Custodian even if the enemy or their heirs are no longer enemies.

Legal Challenges and Legislative Responses

  • Raja of Mahmudabad Case: In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Raja’s son, allowing claims on enemy properties. This led to numerous court cases by individuals claiming ownership of such properties.
  • 2010 Ordinance: To counteract the Supreme Court’s ruling, the UPA government promulgated an Ordinance to prevent courts from ordering the divestment of enemy properties from the Custodian. This ordinance was later challenged and a related bill was introduced but not passed.

Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs):

  1. What is the size of the land parcel being auctioned in Uttar Pradesh?
    • A) 10 bighas
    • B) 13 bighas
    • C) 15 bighas
    • D) 20 bighas
    Answer: B) 13 bighas
  2. Which legislation allows the Indian government to control “enemy property”?
    • A) The Enemy Property Act, 1968
    • B) The Defence of India Act, 1962
    • C) The Public Premises Act, 1971
    • D) The Tashkent Declaration
    Answer: A) The Enemy Property Act, 1968
  3. What significant change did The Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2016 introduce?
    • A) It allowed enemy property to be returned to original owners.
    • B) It expanded the definitions of “enemy subject” and “enemy firm”.
    • C) It abolished the Custodian of Enemy Property for India.
    • D) It limited the Custodian’s power to dispose of enemy properties.
    Answer: B) It expanded the definitions of “enemy subject” and “enemy firm”.
  4. What was the effect of the Supreme Court ruling on the estate of Raja of Mahmudabad in 2005?
    • A) The estate was returned to Pakistan.
    • B) The ruling favored the Custodian of Enemy Property.
    • C) The ruling allowed the Raja’s Indian citizen son to claim the property.
    • D) The estate was sold to a private buyer.
    Answer: C) The ruling allowed the Raja’s Indian citizen son to claim the property.
  5. What action did the UPA government take in response to the 2005 Supreme Court ruling?
    • A) The government returned the properties to Pakistan.
    • B) The government introduced an Ordinance to prevent divestment of enemy properties.
    • C) The government sold the properties to private individuals.
    • D) The government dissolved the Custodian of Enemy Property.
    Answer: B) The government introduced an Ordinance to prevent divestment of enemy properties.