Dogra Rule: State of Jammu And Kashmir (1846-1952)

International Journal of Trend in Scientific
Research and Development (IJTSRD)
International Open Access Journal

ISSN No: 2456 - 6470 | www.ijtsrd.com | Volume -1 | Issue - 6

♦

♦

Dogra Rule: State of Jammu and Kashmir (1846-1952)

Dr. Syed Damsaz Ali Andrabi

College Teacher, History, Department of Higher Education, J&K

ABSTRACT

The occupation of Kashmir by Gulab Singh on 1846,
was a landmark in the socio-religious and cultural
history. As for the first time the state of Jammu and
Kashmir is having its own identity provided by the
treaty of Amritsar. But the intervention of foreign
elements as British proved very harmful for
Kashmiris. Nodoubt different developmental
measures were taken, but actually they were taken to
fulfill their own pockets. Kashmir as such was very
rich in resources but every time were exploited by
them for their personal benefits. Harsh taxation policy
resulted in the migration of artisans towards other
areas. Each and every industry was at first instance
patronized but later on was put under the burden of
illegal taxes. The revenue earned activities of arts and
crafts for which Kashmir valley was famous were
completely ruined. Skilled section cut their fingers
and thumbs in order to have disability. Whatever was
earned was taken forcibly and were left with the
mercy of God. People raised their voice against the
atrocities of Dogras that resulted in mascare of
innocents

Keywords: Occupation, Illiteracy, Harsh Taxation,
Illegalities

INTRODUCTION

The Jammu and Kashmir state came in to existence in
1846, under the treaty of Amritsar signed between the
Maharaja Gulab Singh on the one hand and the British
Government on the other side, after the first Anglo-
Sikh war of, 1845-46,and Maharaja Gulab Singh 1 was
nominated as its first ruler. On the eve of, 1846
Kashmir, Jammu as well as Ladakh were under the
control of Lahore Darbar of Sikh Kingdom ,while as

Kashmir was ruled by a Subedar deputed by the
Lahore Darbar. Jammu and Ladakh were under a
Jammu Dogra, Gulab Singh, who too was under the
dominance of Lahore Darbar. The three distinctive
geographical, cultural and political entities namely
Kashmir valley, Jammu and Ladakh were merged into
one political entity for the first time in history. The
territories of the state had constituted a part of the
Sikh Kingdom and being ruled by different dynasties
at different time’s .It is only the valley of Kashmir
which has retained the position of an empire the
position it enjoyed for centuries together. On the
contrary Jammu and Ladakh regions were fragmented
into petty states, each under a local potentate.

The colonial expansion policy had a direct bearing on
the political situation of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh.
The Britishers had a covetous eye on Punjab which
led Anglo-Sikh wars. Since Gulab Singh was a very
influential member of Lahore darbar. The Britishers in
a bit to create defection among the Sikh generals to
ensure their success and succeeded in wooing in
Gulab Singh to their side. This proved fatal for the
Sikhs and Punjab fell in the hands of the Britishers. At
the end of the war a treaty known as treaty of Lahore
was concluded on 9 th March 1846, between the British
Government and the Darbar of Sikhs at Lahore 2 under
which Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh regions were
snatched away from the Sikhs. On 16 th March 1846
another treaty commonly known as Treaty of
Amritsar was concluded. Because the treaty was
enunciated at Amritsar between the British
Government and the Maharaja Gulab Singh of Jammu
who until the conclusion of the war was a feudatory of
the Sikhs, by virtue of the aforementioned treaty,
Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh were transferred to

@ IJTSRD I Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com I Volume - 1 I Issue - 6 I Sep-Oct 2017

Page: 123

International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) ISSN: 2456-6470

Gulab 3 Singh. After the treaty Gulab Singh received
the legal title over the territories but not their
possession that the company itself have only, the part
that he held earlier as a feudatory of Sikh sovereign
was under his actual control. The rest had to be
consolidated by Gulab Singh himself. In the process,
exchange of certain territories was made with the
mediation of the British government. The British aid
and assistance was also sought to redeem Kashmir
from the Sikh Nazim, Sheikh Imamu’d-din, who was
resisting its occupation. The British intervention put
an end to this and led to the return of Sikhs from
Srinagar on 23 October, 1846. Gulab Singh entered
Kashmir as the first Dogra Maharaja of the state on
1st November 1846.Contrary to general belief that the
state was not an independent one, for independence,
unlike sovereignty, cannot be divided. The various
articles in the treaty are sufficiently supporting the
fact that Gulab Singh accepted the supremacy of the
British government. Nor was it a feudatory, a status to
which it was reduced later in 1860. Juridically, it was
a sovereign state and certain restrictions were put on
its external sovereignty otherwise, it was left
autonomous. This is what K.M Panikkar, rightly
conveys when he uses the expression “totally
independent in its internal affairs”. No control was
exercised by the British government in the
administration and no resident was appointed till,
1885. In fact the political position in the Punjab has
not made any such intervention impossible at that
crucial juncture.

The state was not a personnel creation of Gulab Singh
but was rather the outcome of an agreement between
him and the representatives of the British East India
Company. The prospect for such an eventuality was
first envisaged in the treaty that laid down the terms
for the conclusion of first Anglo-Sikh 4 war 1845. The
agreement stipulated the creation of a new state by
transferring the territories between the River Ravi and
Indus and makes over for ever independent possession
to Gulab Singh and his natural male 5 descendents. In
return Gulab Singh agreed to pay the British 6
Government 75, lakhs of rupees (Nanak Shahi). The
momentous decision was to serve the colonial
interests of the British government. Undoubtly the
J&K state was strategically a very important state
considering the un-pending threat of Russia and
China. But to maintain this state at that crucial
juncture was very expensive, because of the absence
of effective means of communication to keep a hold
over the state. Therefore, Lord Harding found it

politically unwise and militarily impossible to
maintain grip on the administrative measures of state
Jammu and Kashmir 7 . At the same time, he also found
it necessary to snatch it from the Sikhs 8 to reduce their
position to a weaker level . There was no local ruling
family with which any arrangement could be made. In
fact there had existed none after its annexation by the
Great Mughals in 1586. It was fully recognized policy
of the British government then not to have a Muslim
political power on this side of the Indus 9 . Evidently it
was the immediate need of the British imperial
interests in 1846 and not Gulab Singhs perfidy
towards his masters, as F.M. Hassnain believes 10 ,
which dictated that Kashmir be juxtaposed with its
adjoining territories to form the new state. Therefore
the Britishers thought it better to hand over it to a
loyalist who would rule over the state on their behalf,
so that two purposes would be simultaneously served.
One that a buffer state would be created to save the
British India from the Russian and Chinese
advancements and secondly they would not have to
made any investigations of it, as it was not possible
for them to do it in the then given financial
conditions. Since Gulab Singh had proved loyal to
them during their struggle to annex Punjab, it was
thought better to hand over the state to him. At the
time of treaty of Amritsar the Britishers had some
misunderstanding regarding Russian and Chinese
advancements and as well as economic potential of
the state. They had probably not realised the much
needed control over the state in relation to Russian
and Chinese forward policy. Because after a short
time we find them on keeping a control over the
Kashmir when Russia was making rapid advances in
Central Asia. From the statements of British
diplomats and opinion makers it seems that they had
realised the folly of surrendering the state to Gulab
Singh immediately after the signing of treaty. That is
why they subsequently, compelled the Maharaja to
accept the British person as an officer on special duty
in Kashmir, actually an agent at Gilgit and
subsequently in 1885, they appointed a British
Resident. Another important reason which compelled
the British government to bestow the emblem of
sovereignty on Gulab Singh was primarily to weaken
the Sikhs by driving a permanent wedge between
them and the Dogra Rajput 11 of the hills. A policy that
had been toyed with by the British 12 decision makers
earlier. This had now become an urgent necessity
because the Sikh 13 army though defeated in the war
had proved itself too strong to be completely beaten

@ IJTSRD I Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com I Volume - 1 I Issue - 6 I Sep-Oct 2017

Page: 124

International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) ISSN: 2456-6470

and the British found it difficult to annex Punjab
immediately.

Provisions of the Treaty

The British Government has demanded from the
Lahore, as indemnification for the war expenses. The
payment of one and a half crore of rupees and the
Lahore government being unable to pay the whole of
sum at this time, or to give security satisfactory to the
British government for its eventual payment. The
Maharaja cedes to the Company in perpetual
sovereignty, as equivalent for one crore of rupees, all
his forts, territories, rights and interests, which are
situated between the rivers Beas and Indus, including
the provinces of Kashmir and Hazara. In
consideration of the services rendered by Raja Gulab
Singh of Jammu to the Lahore state, towards
procuring the restoration of the relations of amity
between the Lahore and British government, the
Maharaja hereby agrees to recognize the independent
sovereignty of Raja Gulab Singh, in such territories
and districts in the hills as may be made over to the
Raja Gulab Singh by separate agreement between him
and the British Government, with the dependencies,
thereof, which may have been in the Raja’s
possession since the time of the late Maharaja
Kharrak Singh and the British Government, in
consideration of the good conduct of Raja Gulab
Singh, also agrees to recognize his independence in
such territories and admit him to the privileges of a
separate treaty with the British government.

Article: i, The British Government transfers and
makes over, forever in independent possession, to
Maharaja Gulab Singh and heir males of his body, all
the hilly or mountainous country, with its
dependencies situated to the Eastward of the river,
Indus and Westward of the river Ravi, including
Chamba and excluding Lahol, being part of the
territories ceded to the British government by the
Lahore Darbar.

Article: ii, The Eastern boundary of the tract
transferred by the foregoing Article to Maharaja
Gulab Singh shall be laid down by commissioners
appointed by the British government and Maharaja
Gulab Singh respectively for that purpose and shall be
defined in a separate engagement after survey.

Article: iii, In consideration of the transfer made to
him and his heirs by the provisions of the foregoing
Articles, Maharaja Gulab Singh will pay to the British
Government the sum of seventy five lakhs of rupees

(Nanakshahi), fifty Lakhs to be paid on ratification of
this treaty and twenty-five lakhs on or before the 1st
October of the current year, 1846 A.D.

Article: iv, The limits of the territories of Maharaja
Gulab Singh shall not be at any time changed without
the concurrence of the British Government.

Article: v, Maharaja Gulab Singh will refer to the
arbitration of the British government any disputes or
questions that may arise between him and the
government of the Lahore or any other neighbouring
state and will abide by the decision of the British
government.

Article: vi, Maharaja Gulab Singh engages for himself
and his heirs to join with the whole of his military
forces, the British troops when employed in the hills
or in the territories adjoining his possessions.

Article: vii, Maharaja Gulab Singh engages never to
take or retain in his service neither any British subject
nor the subject of any European or American state
without the consent of the British government.

Article: viii, Maharaja Gulab Singh engages to
respect, in regard to the territory transferred to him,
the provisions of the Articles, v, vi, vii, of the separate
engagement between the British government and the
Lahore Darbar, dated, 11th March, 1846 A.D.

Article: ix, The British government will give its aid to
Maharaja Gulab Singh in protecting his territories
from external enemies.

Article: x, Maharaja Gulab Singh acknowledges the
supremacy of the British government and will in
token of such supremacy present annually to the
British government one horse, twelve perfect shawl
goats of approved breed (six male and six female) and
three pairs of Kashmiri Shawls.

This treaty 14 consisting of the above articles has been
this day settled by Frederic Currie Esq. and Brevet-
Major Henry Montgomery Lawrence, acting under the
directions of the Right Honourable Sir Henry
Harding, and by Maharaja Gulab Singh in person and
the treaty has been this day ratified by the seal of the
Right Honourable Sir Henry Harding, G.C.B.,
Governor General, done at Amritsar this sixteenth day
of March in the year, 1846.A.D, corresponding with
the seventeenth day Rabi-ul-Awwal 1264 Hijri.

State of Jammu and Kashmir was having the separate
identity of its own. Still the overall position of

@ IJTSRD I Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com I Volume - 1 I Issue - 6 I Sep-Oct 2017

Page: 125

International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) ISSN: 2456-6470

Kashmiris under Dogras remained very hostile. No
doubt some developmental measures were taken to
benefit the residents by providing them security
through different acts like the state subject and
various others. After the death of Gulab Singh in,
1857, the later Dogra rulers showed positive attitude
towards developments. Ranbir Singh, 1857-
1885,Pratap Singh, 1885-1925,Hari Singh, 1925-1949,
and Karan Singh, 1949-1952,Karan Singh as Sadari
Riyasat, 1952-1965, and as governor, 1965-67.No
doubt number of initiatives were taken to develop the
economy of state and to connect Kashmir with other
parts through different routes like, Banihal cart road,
Jehlum valley cart road, Zojilla pass etc. Health and
educational facilities were provided to people, so that
they could think in terms of change. But on other side
number of illegal taxes were imposed to reduce their
position like medieval" Balhars". The skilled workers
of famous and revenue earned industries Shawl and
Silk were taxed severely. Even a Shawl weaver earns
only four paisa in a day. While as the authorities used
to exploit them as much they could. With the result
they lost interest in their art that resulted in the
downfall of art and craft centers. Besides the legalized
tax on their crafts they have to pay other taxes also.
Keeping in view their problems they cut their thumbs
and fingers in order to have disability. They also
drowned into different streams of Zaldagar Srinagar
on, 1865.One can realize the cruelity of Dogra rulers
through the imposition of taxes like, Revenue tax as
traki, (tax on rice), shaqdar tax(grain watchers),
malikana tax (paid to Maharaja as owner of land),
patwari tax (related with land records), nazrana,
rasum, mandri/ashgal, (construction and maintenance
of temples),sathrashahi (marriage tax), rassudar(house
tax), tax on graves (grave digger), zari chopan(tax on
sheeps), tax on chinars (chinar leaves), plough tax,
zari meva(fruit tax), rassdart (annual tax on house),
horse tax, rasum(village exactions),shawl tax (tax on
weavers), silk tax(tax on workers), tax on wine
,beggar (forced labour) and others etc. The taxation
was so heavy that more than ninety percent of total
income was snatched by Dogra 15 rulers only less than
ten percent was left with them. The people managed
to save their life with the help of fruits. All was taxed,
looks like that only air was left without taxation.

Ultimately the people of state remained silent just the
cattles. As they were sold for a petty amount.As stated
by G.M.D.Sufi, "each Kashmiri was thus sold for Rs.7
(seven) by a handful of British officials to Gulab
Singh.

Their fields,their crops,their streams,

Even the peasants in the vale
They sold,they sold all ,alas!

How cheap was the sale!

And thus the Kashmiri became,a stranger in his own
country"

To see and to understand the character of people
especially of Kashmiris, it is very very difficult. On
one side they will look for better profitable options
and on another side they raise their voice against the
administration. Actually their desires are limitless,
rather uncontrolled and without proper guidance. The
leaders have never tried to work for the benefit of
commoners irrespective of faith. The role of leader is
actually just like the head of family. Every time the
masses have been deceived and the people too are
equally responsible for having the tendency of
resistance and that silence has ultimately shown it's
result.

CONCLUSION

On the whole every one suffered a lot under the Dogra
rule. With the result people raised their voices against
the mismanagement that resulted in the emergence of
social, political and religious movements with an aim
to liberate themselves from onslaughts of Dogras.

REFERENCES

1) U.K.Zutshi, Emergence of Political Awakening in
Kashmir, Ramesh Jain Publications New Delhi
1986, P.19.

2) All about Sikhs The Lahore Treaty of 1846. ‘or’
The British Library, India Office Records.

3) Bawa Satinder Singh, The Jammu Fox: A
Biography of Maharaja Gulab Singh of Kashmir,
1792-1857.

4) Charles Viscount Harding, Viscount Harding,
Oxford, 1891, p.133.

5) F.M. Hassnain, British Policy Towards Kashmir,
1846-1921.

P.17.

6) Khushwant Singh and Sarjit Singh Bal, British
Policy Towards the Punjab (Calcutta, 1971), p.80.

7) Bi kr ama Jit Hasrat, Anglo-Sikh Relations, 1799-
1849: A Reapraisal of the rise and Fall of the
Sikhs, Hoshiarpur, 1968, pp.247-48.

8) F.M.Hassnain,British policy towards

Kashmir, 1974,pp. 140-41.

@ IJTSRD I Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com I Volume - 1 I Issue - 6 I Sep-Oct 2017

Page: 126

International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) ISSN: 2456-6470

9) Administration reports of the Jammu and Kashmir
state,1872-1965.

10) Mohammad din Fouq, Tarikhi Aqwami
Kashmir, 1978.pp.232-33.

11) Mohammad Saleem Khan,Medieval Kashmir,
Srinagar, 2006, pp. 232-33.

12) G. M.D. Sufi,Islamic Culture in

Kashmir,Srinagar,2007,pp.369-70.

13) G. M.D.Sufi, Kashir being a History of Kashmir,
vol,ii, Srinagar, pp.766-67.

@ IJTSRD I Available Online @ www.ijtsrd.com I Volume - 1 I Issue - 6 I Sep-Oct 2017

Page: 127