Religious Persecution of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community
Recommend UsEmail this PagePersecution News RSS Blog
Introduction & Updates
<< ... Worldwide ... >>
Monthly Newsreports
Annual Newsreports
Media Reports
Press Releases
Facts & Figures
Individual Case Reports
Pakistan and Ahmadis
Critical Analysis/Archives
Persecution - In Pictures
United Nations, HCHR
Amnesty International
US States Department
Urdu Section
Feedback/Site Tools
Related Links

Author: Sir Muhammad Zafarullah Khan
Description: This book provides a translation by Sir Muhammad Zafarullah Khan of the Riyad as-Salihin, literally "Gardens of the Rightous", written by the Syrian Shafi'i scholar Muhyi ad-din Abu Zakariyya' Yahya b. Sharaf an-Nawawi (1233-78), who was the author of a large number of legal and biographical work, including celebrated collection of forty well-known hadiths, the Kitab al-Arba'in (actually containing some forty three traditions.), much commented upon in the Muslim countries and translated into several European languages. His Riyad as-Salihin is a concise collection of traditions, which has been printed on various occasions, e.g. at Mecca and Cairo, but never before translated into a western language. Hence the present translation by Muhammad Zafarullah Khan will make available to those unversed in Arabic one of the most typical and widely-known collection of this type.
US$14.99 [Order]
A revised edition of this excellent thesis which, on the basis of detailed research proves beyond a shadow of doubt that Jesus survived crucifixion and later died in India. US$5.99 [Order]
Author: Hadhrat Mirza Tahir Ahmadra, 4th Caliph of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community
Description: Murder in the name of Allah is a general review, with special emphasis on the subject of freedom of expression in Islam. This book is a reminder that purpose of any religion is the spread of peace, tolerance, and understanding. It urges that meaning of Islam - submission to the will of God - has been steadily corrupted by minority elements in the community. Instead of spreading peace, the religion has been abused by fanatics and made an excuse for violence and the spread of terror, both inside and outside the faith.
Regular price: US$12.99 | Sale price: US$9.99 [Order]

Home Critical Analysis/Archives Report on Punjab Disturbances of 1953
Report of The Court of Inquiry
(14TH JULY 1952 TO 27TH FEBRUARY 1963)


The Sargodha cases for contravention of orders under section 144 were prosecuted vigorously and as we have already pointed out one of them resulted in conviction. The case pending at Gujranwala and the other which was pending at Sargodha were subsequently withdrawn and the persons who had been, convicted in the Sargodha case were ordered to be released.

There are two notes by the Home Secretary, one dated 17th July 1952, on page 7 of file No. 16(2)99, Volume I, and the other, dated 18th July 1952, on page 46 of file No. 16(2)93, Volume I, which show that the decision to withdraw the Gujranwala case must have been under the orders of the Chief Minister. The former note reads :

“As decided at the meeting held on the 15th July 1952, I sent the attached signal to D. M., Gujranwala, who saw me yesterday. I told him that in view of the fact that the two ringleaders of the Ahrar, namely, Master Taj-ud-Din and Sheikh Husam-ud-Din, had been convicted in the Sargodha case, Government have decided to withdraw the Gujranwala case. The case must have been withdrawn by him either yesterday on return to Gujranwala or today.”

The other note reads :

“The Gujranwala case was withdrawn yesterday. I sent for the Deputy Commissioner on the 15th immediately after our meeting with H. C. M. and communicated to him the decision of Government when he came to see me on the 16th.”

Though Mr. Daultana does not admit that the decision to withdraw the case was his, it seems to be perfectly clear from the two notes mentioned above that the decision to withdraw was taken at a meeting of officers in which he was present, and the despatch with which the decision to withdraw was communicated to the District Magistrate, coupled with the fact that a decision of such importance could not have been taken by any officer on his own responsibility, clearly shows that the decision to withdraw the case was, in fact, that of the Chief Minister himself. The file shows that on 15th July 1952 the Home Secretary suddenly sent a wireless message to the District Magistrate, Gujranwala, asking him to see the Home Secretary on the following day and that the Deputy Commissioner came and saw the Home Secretary on 16th July when he was communicated the decision of the Government to withdraw the case. The only inference from all this is that the case was withdrawn under the orders of the Chief Minister.

We have mentioned that Maulana Akhtar Ali Khan and Maulvi Ghulam Ghaus Sarhaddi, the new President of Majlis-i-Ahrar, had come to Mr. Anwar Ali on 5th July 1952 and attempted to assure him that if the persons who had been arrested for defying orders under section 144 were released and the orders under section 144 withdrawn, the Ahrar as a party would make a public statement declaring that no speeches would be made by them which were liable to disturb the peace and tranquillity of the Province. The offer was subsequently repeated to the Chief Minister who directed Mir Nur Ahmad, D. P. R., to contact the Ahrar leaders to ascertain from them their wishes. Mir Nur Ahmad informed the Chief Minister that the Ahrar leaders were anxious to avoid a conflict with the Government and to carry on their agitation in a constitutional manner. Accordingly some of the Ahrar leaders met the Chief Minister on 19th July and agreed to issue a public statement giving an assurance not to resort to lawlessness or violence or to commit any breach of the law. On his part the Chief Minister agreed that if such a statement were issued, he would sympathetically consider the question of lifting restrictions on their meetings under section 144 and releasing their leaders who had bean convicted. In accordance with these arrangements, a statement on behalf of Amir-i-Shari’at Sayyad Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari, Maulvi Muhammad Ali Jullundri, Nazim-i-A’la, Majlis-i-Ahrar, Sahibzada Faiz-ul-Hasan, member, Working Committee, Majlis-i-Ahrar, and Maulana Muhammad Hussain Ghazi, Salar-i-A’la, Juyush-i-Ahrar-i-Islam, was published in the ‘Afaq’ of 21st July 1952. This statement was to the effect that in their struggle to have the Ahmadis declared a non-Muslim minority and to have Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan removed from the office of Foreign Minister, the Ahrar had in the past done nothing illegal, that they did not intend to do anything in future which might give grounds for an apprehension of violence, disorder or breach of law, that they considered the Punjab Government as their own Government, that the responsibility with which that Government, had been entrusted to maintain law and order was the Ahrar’s own responsibility to discharge which they would fully co-operate with the Government, and that it was not only the civic but religious obligation of the Ahrar to defend the life, property, honour and freedom of all citizens of Pakistan irrespective of their religious beliefs. On publication of this statement, the Chief Minister issued the following statement in the ‘Civil & Military Gazette’ of 22nd July 1952 :

“I welcome the latest declaration of policy by leaders of the Majlis-i-Ahrar, Punjab and their assurance that they would give my Government full co-operation in the maintenance of law and order.

As they have rightly emphasised it is not only the national but also a religious duty of the Muslim majority in Pakistan to guarantee full protection for the life, property, honour and civil rights of every citizen of this country irrespective of his or her creed or caste.

For sometime past there have been restrictions in various districts of the Punjab on the holding of public meetings or demonstrations by Ahrar workers. The sole object of the orders imposing these restrictions was preservation of public peace and order in the Province. In view of the declaration made by Ahrar leaders it does not seem necessary to continue the restrictions as far as members of their organisation are concerned. Instructions are, therefore, being issued to the district officers concerned to withdraw or suitably modify their orders under section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code.”

Simultaneously a telegraphic message went from the Home Secretary to all District Magistrates informing them on 21st July 1952 that in view of the assurances given, by the Majlis-i-Ahrar-i-Pakistan to the Chief Minister and his acceptance of the assurances, orders under section 144, Criminal Procedure Code, prohibiting public meetings were to be withdrawn. And on 26th July the Home Secretary sent a wireless message to the District Magistrate and the Superintendent Jail, Mianwali, informing them that Government had remitted the unexpired sentence of Master Taj-ud-Din Ansari and that he should be released forthwith. On the same day a similar message was sent to the District Magistrate and. the Superintendent Jail, Jhang, directing the release of Sheikh Husam-ud-Din.

Just as the decisions taken in the conference of 5th July were a confession of helplessness to face and solve the issue whether Muslims were entitled publicly to speak in mosques on khatm-i-nubuwwat, the decision to withdraw orders under section 144 and pending cases arising from contraventions thereof and to release persons who had been found guilty of contravening those orders, had the effect of nullifying earlier decisions that the Ahrar had to be isolated and that eases against them which had been declared to be cognizable and non-bailable were to be vigorously pursued. The decisions of 5th July had restricted the District Magistrates’ powers to make arrests in or disperse meetings inside or outside the mosques and the decision of 2lst July amounted to an official recognition of the position that, provided the Ahrar did not assault the Ahmadis or rob their property or otherwise violate their honour, they were at full liberty to do whatever they liked to popularise the demands and to speak in whatever strain they liked against Ahmadis, their leaders and their beliefs. Hereafter there was no question of suppressing the spate of hatred that had been let loose against them or of doing anything to stop the gathering storm.

There is some difference in the evidence as to the date on which the undertaking by the Ahrar, which was published in the newspapers of 21st July, was given. According to Mr. Daultana, a deputation of the Ahrar led by Maulvi Muhammad Ali Jullundri met him in his office, probably on 18th July, in the presence of some officers. But from a question put by Mr. Yaqub Ali to Mir Nur Ahmad, it appears that the deputation waited on the Chief Minister on 19th July. An understanding between the Government and the members of the deputation having been arrived at, the question was taken up of drafting an appropriate statement. According to Mir Nur Ahmad and Mr. Ibrahim Ali Chishti, the draft of the terms in which the undertaking was to be published was considered in a meeting of the Ahrar leaders and themselves and was later published in the newspapers. Maulana Muhammad Bakhsh Muslim states that present in that conference were Maulana Abul Hasanat, Sayyad Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari, Sahibzada Faiz-ul-Hasan, Maulana Ghulam Muhammad Tarannum and Maulana Muhammad Bakhsh Muslim himself, and that the date of this conference was after the Multan firing, namely, on or after the 19th July. The conference was held at the premises of a workshop in Badami Bagh. As there is no record either of the leaders’ interview with the Chief Minister or of the subsequent conference and Mr. Daultana himself is not definite about, the date, we are inclined to accept the statement of Maulana Muhammad Bakhsh Muslim that this conference of the leaders with Mir Nur Ahmad and Maulvi Ibrahim Ali Chishti took place after the Multan firing and this is not only more likely but confirmed by a letter of the Punjab Government sent in reply to an inquiry by the Prime Minister about the incident. That being so, the announcement of the settlement with the Ahrar, coming as it did after the Kup incident, amounted to a public declaration that the Government was anxious to come to an understanding with the Ahrar at any cost.

Previous -> The Department of Islamiat Table of Contents Top of Page Next -> The Kup incident