Martyrs' Day in Kashmir: A look at its history and the BJP's indifference
'The unelected government tried to block my way forcing me to walk from Nawhatta chowk. They blocked the gate to Naqsbandh Sahib shrine forcing me to scale a wall. They tried to physically grapple me but I was not going to be stopped today,' posted Mr. Abdullah. Highlighting the July 13 massacre as J&K's 'Jallianwala Bagh', Mr. Omar Abdullah said, 'True heroes who fought against British rule in all its forms are today projected as villains only because they were Muslims.'
This is the physical grappling I was subjected to but I am made of sterner stuff & was not to be stopped. I was doing nothing unlawful or illegal. In fact these "protectors of the law" need to explain under what law they were trying to stop us from offering Fatiha pic.twitter.com/8Fj1BKNixQ — Omar Abdullah (@OmarAbdullah) July 14, 2025
While Mr. Abdullah was able to visit the shrine, no other leader was able to do so. NC leaders such as Showkat Mir, Imran Nabi Dar, Shafqat Watali, Nasir Aslam Wani and Tanvir Sadiq were either detained or put under house arrest. PDP president Mehbooba Mufti, J&K Apni Party (JKAP) president Altaf Bukhari and and J&K Peoples Conference (JKPC) president Sajad Lone, were also detained in their homes or offices.
BJP has refused to mark the event as a 'martyrdom', maintaining that the slain civilians were 'rioters' and not national heroes.
Here's a look at why J&K observes this day and its changed nature since 2019
What happened on July 13, 1931?
In 1931, Kashmir was in turmoil due to a series of incidents that had led to revolt by the Muslims citizens against the ruling Dogra administration.
In Jammu's Udhampur — a Hindu-majority area, a landholder had converted to Islam, resulting in him losing his property rights.
A Hindu police officer had interrupted a sermon led by Mufti Muhammad Ishaque, accusing the seer of transgressing the law. In retaliation, the crowds condemned the interference into religious matters and a public protest was held. While a case was filed against the police officer for interfering in religious matters, a local magistrate dismissed the case.
Two other incidents, which had created resentment among the Muslims were — a Muslim jail attendant being reprimanded by his Hindu superior and a pages of the Holy Quran being found in a public latrine.
The final incident which led to the clash between the citizens and the Dogra police was the arrest of one Abdul Qadeer — a Kashmiri employee serving Major Butt of the British Army. In a public meeting, Qadeer had allegedly urged Muslims to retaliate to the Dogra king's oppression by attacking the palace. Accusing Qadeer of sedition, the Dogra police arrested him and placed him in Srinagar's Central Jail.
On July 13, 1931, when trial started in Srinagar, a huge crowd had assembled outside the jail, raising slogans to seeking Qadeer's freedom. As the protestors urged the judge to imprison them instead, police began to hit them with batons. In retaliation, the crowds pelted the Dogra police with stones and sticks. On the Governor's orders, police opened fire at the protestors killing 17 Muslims on the spot, while five succumbed to injuries later. The slain civilians were buried in compound of Kanqah-i-Maula, three days later. The spot has since then been renamed as Mazar-i-Shuhada.
Observing Martyrs' day
The incident gave impetus to calls for Jammu-Kashmir's freedom from Maharaja Hari Singh's rule. The Reading Room party, founded by Sheikh Abdullah, established the Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference with the sole aim to protect Muslim rights. His demands for self-rule of the Kashmiri people too gained traction and a Legislature was set up by the Maharaja in 1934.
In 1947, after Maharaja Hari Singh fled to Jammu after acceding Kashmir to India, Sheikh Abdullah was appointed as J&K's first Prime Minister. He declared July 13 as 'J&K Martyr's day' and has been observed by consequent governments. Pakistan also observes the same day to honour Kashmiri civilian martyrs. Qadeer is believed to be born in Swat, which falls currently in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
Through the years, Martyrs' day has seen 'house arrest' of Opposition leaders whenever the State has been put under President's rule. In 1986, then CM Farooq Abdullah threatened to launch a fresh struggle if the Governor's rule was not ended by September 7 that year. While most other Opposition leaders like G. M. Shah, Ghulam Nabi Kochak, Moulvi Abbas Ansari, Abdul Gani Lone were placed under 'house arrest', Dr. Farooq Abdullah and his ally, Mirwaiz Moulvi Farooq, were allowed to pay tributes to the martyrs.
BJP's indifference
BJP has never officially recognised or observed 'Martyr's day', maintaining, 'People killed then are those who broke the law and the State forces did what was required under the law. We neither believe in martyr's day, nor do we approve it'.
On September 13, 1989, Kashmiri Pandit leader and BJP member Tika Lal Taploo was slain by Kashmiri militants. BJP and Kashmiri Pandits across India began observing September 13 as 'Martyr's Day', holding rallies and shraads (death anniversary) to honour Taploo. Through the years, BJP has used this event to voice the concerns of the Hindu minority in Kashmir and the targetted attacks on the community by militants.
In 2015, when BJP allied with J&K People's Democratic Party to form a coalition government, the saffron party 'boycotted' the July 13 Martyrs' Day event — a first for a ruling J&K party. 'The 1931 martyrs have no relevance for our party. If Kashmir-based political parties do not attend the functions we hold in memory of our leaders like Syama Prasad Mookerjee, why should we attend their Martyrs' Day,' said BJP's Kashmir spokesperson Khalid Jehangir. Since then, it has continuously boycotted the event.
Before Article 370 was abrogated in August 2019, then Governor Satya Pal Malik skipped the official state event, along with his Chief Secretary and four non-local advisors. Post-abrogation, the L-G has delisted 'Martrys' day' as an official holiday and scrapped the event observing it.
After the election of the Union territory's first CM, Mr. Omar Abdullah, the ruling National Conference and other J&K parties this year, sought permission for their delegations to be allowed to visit the graveyard and pay tributes. However, the J&K Police denied permission to all regional parties to hold any commemoration functions at the graveyard.
'The District Administration Srinagar has denied permission to all applicants intending to proceed towards Khawaja Bazar, Nowhatta on 13th July 2025 (Sunday). The General Public is hereby advised to strictly comply with these instructions. Any violation of these orders shall invite strict legal action under relevant provisions of law,' warned the police.
As politicians were put under house arrest, Mr. Omar Abdullah posted, 'Today the unelected nominees of New Delhi locked up the elected representatives of the people of J&K. All to stop people from visiting a historically important grave yard containing the graves of people who laid down their lives to give Kashmiris a voice & to empower them,' echoing hurt sentiments of Kashmiri Muslims.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
41 minutes ago
- Indian Express
What will it take to restore J&K statehood
Six years after the Centre's unprecedented decision to reorganise the erstwhile state of Jammu & Kashmir into two Union Territories — J&K and Ladakh — calls to restore statehood have been getting louder. Last month, J&K Chief Minister Omar Abdullah made a forceful plea to the Centre for restoring statehood. 'We're not asking for something that is not our due. Statehood is the right, it was promised to the people,' he had said on July 20. What would restoration of statehood mean for J&K? What would it take for that to happen? Statehood will empower CM The J&K Reorganisation Act was passed in Parliament on August 6, 2019. It gave the Centre, through the Lieutenant Governor, a heightened legislative role in J&K, and put the bureaucratic apparatus in the UT under the Union Home Minister. Both policing and public order were placed within control of the Centre. Subjects on the Concurrent List in the Constitution were taken off the plate of the legislative Assembly as well. The Act also barred the UT's legislature from introducing bills with any fiscal, monetary or taxation implications without the recommendation of the L-G. This is particularly limiting since virtually every policy decision requires taxation, expenditure or revenue adjustments. So a restoration of statehood would effectively empower the elected government in J&K and vastly reduce the powers of the L-G, who, according to Section 53 of the Reorganisation Act, has the 'final' say on almost every administrative and legislative decision. '…The decision of the Lieutenant Governor in his discretion shall be final, and the validity of anything done by the Lieutenant Governor shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion…,' Section 53 states. Act of Parliament will be needed The J&K Reorganisation was without precedent — no state had ever been reduced to a UT before. But granting statehood would not be without precedent. Five UTs have previously been granted statehood by Parliament: Himachal Pradesh in 1971, Manipur and Tripura in 1972, and Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram in 1987. Additionally, the state of Goa was carved out of the then UT of Goa, Daman and Diu in 1987. For statehood to be restored to J&K, the Reorganisation Act would have to be repealed, and the Centre would have to introduce a fresh bill in Parliament, which then would have to be passed in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. Article 3 of the Constitution empowers Parliament to form a new state out of the territory of any other state or UT, as well as to change the area or name of a state. But a bill to this effect can only be introduced on the recommendation of the President. Since the President acts only on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers — led by the Prime Minister — this essentially means that it is up to the Centre to recommend the introduction of the bill for restoration of statehood.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
41 minutes ago
- Business Standard
6 years of abrogation of Article 370: Why it matters and what has changed?
On August 5, 2019, India's Parliament witnessed a moment of historic consequence. Home Minister Amit Shah rose in the Rajya Sabha to introduce a resolution to abrogate Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) of its special constitutional status under Article 370. Moving the resolution, Shah had then said, 'There should not be a delay of even a second to remove Article 370 from the Constitution.' Simultaneously, the government imposed a complete communication blackout in Kashmir — shutting down the internet and telephone services. There was a heavy deployment of security forces, political leaders were detained, and Section 144 was imposed. Tracing the origins of Article 370 Article 370 originated from the special circumstances after India's partition in 1947. J&K acceded to India by signing the Instrument of Accession, with Maharaja Hari Singh as ruler. At that time, Sheikh Abdullah was appointed as the head of an interim government. Later, intense discussions between Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Sheikh Abdullah led to Article 370, which entered the Constitution in October 1949. What changed on August 5, 2019 On August 5, 2019, the government revoked Article 370 through a Presidential order and reorganised the state. J&K was split into two Union Territories (UTs): J&K (with legislature) and Ladakh (without legislature), effective October 31, 2019. The region was put under a strict security lockdown, with leaders from major political parties detained and communication suspended. As J&K was under President's Rule, the Centre acted through the Governor in the absence of an elected Assembly. Govt's justification for abrogation of Article 370 The union government justified the act on several grounds: • Security: To curb terrorism and separatism that plagued the valley. • The government believed Article 370 hindered Jammu and Kashmir's integration with the rest of India and limited its development. • Supporters argued its abrogation would promote socio-economic development. • They said it would help ensure equal rights and opportunities for the people of the region. • Better governance was another expected benefit cited by supporters. • The move was also seen as a way to apply national laws and programs that were earlier not fully enforceable in Jammu and Kashmir. Reactions and political fallout of the decision • Domestic: The ruling BJP and its allies celebrated the move as 'historic', while Congress, National Conference (NC), People's Democratic Party (PDP), and Left parties called it undemocratic. • International: Pakistan immediately condemned the move, calling it illegal and a violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions. The country argued that India's actions had 'no legal value' under international law, and insisted that Kashmir is an internationally recognised dispute, whose final status should be determined in accordance with UN resolutions and the wishes of the Kashmiri people. China expressed its 'serious concern', particularly regarding the reorganisation of Ladakh as a Union Territory, saying that it undermined China's territorial sovereignty claims over parts of Ladakh. Legal challenges to abrogation of Article 370 Over 20 petitions challenged the Centre's move in the Supreme Court, raising critical questions: Can Article 370 be removed unilaterally by Parliament? Is the process under the President's Rule constitutional? The matter went to a five-judge Constitution Bench, which ultimately upheld the abrogation in December 2023, calling Article 370 a temporary provision. On the ground: What has changed? There have been both positive and negative developments. While the government claims improved law and order, incidents like targeted attacks in Pahalgam highlight ongoing security concerns. However, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah has said that the region's infrastructure development is not connected to the abrogation of Article 370 on August 5, 2019. Speaking to India Today TV, he urged people not to politicise development, adding, 'Let's not link the infrastructure projects in Jammu and Kashmir to the politics surrounding Article 370.' He clarified that these initiatives were planned earlier and would have progressed regardless of the constitutional change. On security, Abdullah acknowledged a drop in terrorism and stone-pelting but attributed it partly to strict government actions, which he said, 'go against the principles of natural justice". The road ahead for J&K Restoration of J&K's statehood remains a major demand. The Modi government has promised to restore it 'at the right time', but petitions in the Supreme Court urge faster action for statehood restoration, emphasising the need to uphold federal principles. Article 370's abrogation marked a turning point in India's constitutional history, with its full impact still unfolding across J&K.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
A year after Sheikh Hasina's ouster, hope fast fading in Bangladesh
DEHRADUN: As Bangladesh marks one year of the ouster of Sheikh Hasina 's Awami League govt on Tuesday, some of its citizens TOI talked to expressed disappointment over the trajectory the country has taken in the past year. Many, including students, businesspersons and members of the Hindu community, said their expectations of social reforms and justice were far from being met and hoped elections would be held soon for stability. Tanbirul Miraj Ripon, who works with human rights organisations, expressed his concern about the 'drastic deterioration of communal harmony'. "Attacks on minorities that started after the ouster of Hasina govt are still happening. Another cause for concern is the rising mob culture," he said. A trader, Dhrubo, claimed minorities were "living in constant fear." "The intensity of attacks against minorities is not the same as it was last year, but is still happening. About a week ago, around 20-30 families in Rungpur city were attacked by a mob over allegations of blasphemous posts on social media. The mob indulged in arson and violence," he said. "It is like a fight for survival for us as the country is also witnessing an unchecked rise of radical organisations like Hizb-ut-Tahrir and Jamaat-e-Islami," he added. The country is also facing economic challenges, with unemployment increasing. Samir-ul-Hasan, who runs a software firm with 10 employees in Dhaka, said, "Our firm used to mainly cater to govt departments, but now business is not even 50% of what it used to be. We are unable to give salaries." Bilateral relations are also in troubled waters with growing anti-India sentiment among the public. "They believe it was India which supported Hasina's oppressive regime, and now not agreeing to the interim govt's demand of sending her back to face justice. One can see graffiti all around Dhaka giving calls to 'boycott India'. Hasina taking refuge in India remains a bone of contention," said Ferdous Alamgir, a student at Dhaka University. Despite challenges, Ripon claimed there was now more accountability in those in power. "They are now more sensitive towards public criticism of any of their policies. Another positive change is the rising political awareness among youths," said Ripon. A young media professional, Tanvir Hasan, meanwhile, had high hopes for the country's future. 'We have been overcoming challenges for the betterment of country ever since we got independent in 1971. We will overcome this too and ensure justice and equal rights for all the citizens irrespective of religion or creed,' said Hasan.
