When Muslims Conference also had pro Kashmir leaders among them, they made the following statement:

When Muslims Conference also had pro Kashmir leaders among them, they made the following statement:


Choudhry Hameedullah Khan as the acting President of the Muslim Conference, addressing a press Conference in a leading hotel in Jammu on 28th May 1947 declared:

‘Accession to Pakistan would be unpleasant to Hindus while accession to India will disturb Muslims. Therefore, we have decided not to enter into any controversy either with India or Pakistan. The second thing we have decided in that we should try to acquire independence for the State. The third question now before us is, what would be the position of the Maharaja? We have never been lacking in showing loyalty and resects for him and it is because of this attachment that we did not support the Quit Kashmir Movement, although in one way it was a natural movement. We, therefore, felt that we should try to find out a solution which will maintain the position of the Maharaja Bahadur, while at the same time; it should also satisfy the praja. The best solution that we have found is that the Maharaja should become a constitutional King, as is the position in many other countries. The fourth thing that we have decided is that we should have a Constituent Assembly of our own to draft our constitution. The Muslim League has already boycotted the Constituent Assembly (British Assembly). Therefore its proposed constitution cannot satisfy Muslims because it must have been prepared by hundred per cent Hindus. If our four representatives sat in this Assembly, they would just be wasting their time.'

The statement further said: ‘I have the support of all important leaders of the Muslim Conference and Choudhry Ghulam Abbass Khan has himself expressed agreement with this proposal. A representative convention of the Muslim Conference will be called within a month, where the proposal will be unanimously adopted. This solution, therefore, should be considered as the official policy of the Muslim Conference. The Muslim League has not given us this solution, nor are we presenting it to deceive the Hindus. We have arrived at this solution in all honesty and after taking into account the local situation. The only connection that the Muslim league has with it is that its past and present policy of non-intervention in Indian States has strengthened us. I would like to say in all honesty that we have had no talks in this connection with any leader or worker of the Muslim League, and that Hindus should also give up being led by the Congress. The best thing for us all is that the League and the Congress should leave us undisturbed and that we should give up both the parties. When we say that we want to separate ourselves from Hindustan and Pakistan, we mean that we want to be friends with both of them, but we do not want to be influenced by either of them. We should have political as well as economic relations with both. We think that we will have good relations with Pakistan and, in the presence of the ruling Hindu dynasty, we will also have good relations with India.’1