Ministry Of Foreign Affairs
Office of the Spokesperson
Pakistan wins against the Indian bid in the Hyderabad Fund Case
The English High Court rejected Indian attempt to strike out Pakistan’s claim to
the Hyderabad Fund, on 21 June 2016.
1. The Seventy Five (75 page) judgment of Henderson J. is a clear vindication
of Pakistan’s principled stance, and the effective legal strategy being pursued
by the new legal team.
1. India failed to persuade the Court that Pakistan’s position was untenable and
that it could show no legal entitlement to the 35 million GBP sitting in a bank
account in the name of the High Commissioner of Pakistan, since 20th September
1948. The Judge accepted that there was good evidence in support of Pakistan’s
claim to the monies, which needed to be fully considered at a trial. The Judge
also accepted that there were good legal arguments which were supportive of
1. India will face a substantial costs claim, as a result of losing its
1. The legal team led by Khawar Qureshi QC advanced strong legal arguments and
placed cogent evidence before the Judge, which defeated the Indian argument that
Pakistan’s claim to the monies was not valid.
1. The Judge heard arguments advanced by Pakistan’s Leading Counsel and
considered evidence which included the following;
* India and the Princes could not assert that Pakistan’s claim to the monies was
* Events in 1947-1948 were very tense. The State of Hyderabad (which the Judge
accepted was a Sovereign state at the time) was in danger of being attacked and
taken over by India, and had called upon Pakistan for assistance. The UK
Government archive documents, record growing concern voiced by British
Government officials at the conduct of India towards the State of Hyderabad and
its people, which included imposing a blockade, preventing supplies of medicines
and food from entering the State of Hyderabad, all designed to force the Nizam
to join India. When Quaid-i-Azam passed away, India seized the opportunity to
invade and quickly subjugated the VIIth Nizam.
* Pakistan had emerged from partition with only 3% of the weapons it was
entitled to. Nevertheless, it came to the aid of Muslims when India sought to
annex the State of Jammu and Kashmir – a bloody conflict ensued which is still
costing innocent lives.
* The evidence of assistance that was placed before the Court came from the
official British archives. They uncovered contemporaneous British intelligence
reports and British Government documents, which recorded in great detail the
knowledge on the part of the British Government, of this assistance.
1. India dismissed these materials (even though they came from British
intelligence sources) and argued that because the VIIth Nizam had asked for the
return of the monies within days of its transfer to Pakistan, he must be taken
not to have consented to it being handed over to Pakistan. The Judge observed
that it might be naïve to expect the VIIth Nizam to have been acting of his own
free will after India had invaded his country, and forced him to surrender/hand
1. The case will now proceed to trial, unless settled. Pakistan had offered to
mediate in front of retired Law Lords Lord Hoffman or Lord Hope in July 2015,
but India had refused on the basis that it believed Pakistan’s claim was not
1. Pakistan remains committed to resolving all disputes by negotiation and
believes that the path to peace and progress lies in dialogue.
1. If the case does not settle, Pakistan is fully confident that its legal team
21 June 2016