Bhopal: The fate of thousands of acres of land in Bhopal belonging to actor Saif Ali Khan’s family hangs in the balance after the Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed a petition against the government takeover of the property under the Enemy Property Act, 1968, asking the actor to make a representation before the appellant authority.
On 8 January, Saif Ali Khan and his family—descendants of Hamidullah Khan, the last Nawab of Bhopal—filed an appeal before the joint secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), which is the designated appellate authority under The Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2017.
Among the ancestral properties Saif Ali Khan and his family inherited from his great-grandfather, Hamidullah Khan are Bhopal’s Flag Staff House and the Noor-Us-Sabah Palace as well as 5,796 acres of prime land in Bhopal and 1,370 acres of land outside of Bhopal.
The high court said in its order dated 13 December that an amendment in the Enemy Property Act provides a remedy for transfer of enemy property in certain cases and directed the parties concerned to approach the appellate authority within 30 days.
The court noted that the issue of limitation—a period specified by law beyond which the rights to a property stand defeated—may arise and that the “appellate authority shall not advert to the aspect of limitation and shall deal with the appeal on its own merit”.
A source close to the actor’s family told The Print that the “matter is yet to come up for hearing”.
Also Read: Ancient ‘Vedic city’ under Bhopal’s Upper Lake? BJP MP seeks exploration in House panel meet
The Nawab’s disputed properties
The Enemy Property Act, 1968, was passed in Parliament in the aftermath of the India-Pakistan war (1965) to regulate properties left behind in India by those who emigrated to Pakistan, which was recognised as an enemy country.
Saif Ali Khan’s great-grandfather, Nawab Hamidullah Khan Bahadur, who ruled Bhopal from 1926 until 1949, signed an Instrument of Accession in 1949 to merge Bhopal into India.
Revenue records dating back to 1955 show that the Bhopal administration then recognised 5,739 acres of land—including the 830-acre Firzdaus Farms, 3,087-acre Chiklod Retreat, 36-acre Rizwan farms, shooting ranges and permanent shooting grounds—along with 1,370 acres of land in 13 other villages outside of Bhopal, as private property of the Nawab.
The Nawab had three daughters: Abida Sultan, Sajida Sultan and Rabia Sultan. He named Abida Sultan, his eldest daughter, as his successor. But, her right to the properties became contentious after Abida Sultan relinquished her claim and moved to Pakistan.
This prompted Hamidullah Khan to name his second daughter Sajida Sultan as his successor. Sajida was Saif Ali Khan’s grandmother. After the Nawab died in 1960, the government through an order dated 12 January, 1962, recognised Sajida as his successor.
Sajida was married to the Nawab of Pataudi, Iftikhar Ali Khan, and after her demise in 1995, the properties that belonged to her were inherited by her three children—Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi and his sisters Saleha Sultan, Sabiha Sultan—under Muslim personal law.
Properties inherited by Mansur Ali Khan were then inherited by his three children, Saif Ali Khan, Soha Ali Khan and Sabah Ali Khan.
The long-standing property dispute, previously confined to family factions, became a national issue and reached the Madhya Pradesh High Court when the Custodian of Enemy Property in India (CEPI) issued a notice on 24 February 2015. The notice declared the properties belonging to the erstwhile Nawab, and later inherited by his family, as enemy property on the grounds that his initial successor, Abida Sultan, had moved to Pakistan.
The order was passed by the then Custodian of Enemy Property in India, Utpal Chakraborty. After issuing the order declaring the Nawab’s properties as enemy property, CEPI further directed the state revenue department to take over his properties vested with the custodian, but it did not give exact details of the number or extent of properties.
Over the years, several properties belonging to Sajida Sultan changed hands and were sold off, many ended up as disputed with cases pending in court, and some were acquired by government and utilised in the construction of dams and lakes.
Revenue records seen by ThePrint show the following recorded under the name of Sajida Sultan: 1.56 hectare of Riyaz Manzil at the upscale Kohefiza locality; another 310 hectare of land in Kohefiza of which nearly 270 hectare was submerged under the Upper Lake; 5.30 hectare of Ahmedabad Palace also known as Flag House; another 6.14 hectare of land in Behta village and finally 9.76 hectare of land in Laukhedi village.
“We have so far not received any intimation from the government or the courts in this matter. If there is any court order or instructions issued, we will abide by it,” Bhopal District Magistrate Kaushlendra Vikram Singh told ThePrint.
Saif Ali Khan’s 2015 petition
Under the amended Enemy Property Act, heirs of those who emigrated to Pakistan and China during Partition or thereafter would have no claim over properties left behind in India by their ancestors. The amendment vested all rights, titles and interests over enemy property with the Custodian of the Enemy Property for India. It also declared the transfer of enemy property by the “enemy” to be void retrospectively from 1968 and barred civil courts and other authorities from entertaining disputes related to enemy property.
Actor Saif Ali Khan moved the Madhya Pradesh High Court in 2015 on the ground that the action was “illegal” and violated the terms of the original merger agreement, lacked jurisdiction, and was both void and “utterly misconceived”.
According to the petition filed by him in the Madhya Pradesh High Court, a certificate dated 12 January, 1962, issued by the Government of India through the secretary of the Ministry of Home Affairs in New Delhi recognised Mehr Taj Sajida Sultan Begum as the successor to her father, Nawab Hamidullah Khan, and the ruler of Bhopal.
This certificate, the petition noted, recognised Sajida as the “sole successor” to all properties, movable and immovable, held by the Nawab. It declared that the Union of India has no objection to such properties being transferred to her. “Sajida Sultan was recognised as the ‘successor’ and Nawab of Bhopal by the Union of India after Nawab Hamidullah Khan. The Nawab and his successors will enjoy ‘full ownership’ of such properties. These were some of the basic conditions upon which the then Nawab Hamidullah Khan had agreed to merge his Bhopal State into the Union of India in the year 1949,” it said.
The petition further contended that there is no mention of Abida Sultan, who had emigrated to Pakistan during his lifetime, in the certificate. It added that only Sajida, an Indian citizen, was recognised as the Nawab’s successor.
The petition also stated that the notice incorrectly alleged that Abida Sultan Begum was the successor to the estate of the Nawab of Bhopal and as she migrated to Pakistan in 1950, the estate vested with the custodian.
“It was to the utter shock, dismay and bewilderment of the petitioner when the respondent (CEPI) without applying his mind over the salient and remarkable feature of the matter, without considering the plea and objection of the petitioner, without providing him the requisite document, asked for and overriding even the Constitutional Provisions and brazenly breaking the solemn promises of the Union of India and by stating false and misconceived facts, issued the impugned order dated 24.02.2015 holding that the Estate of Nawab Hamidullah Khan of Bhopal vests in the Custodian in accordance with the certificate under Section 12 of the Enemy Property Act, 1968,” the petition further stated.
Adding, “Suddenly out of the blue, the Custodian of the Enemy Property (‘Custodian’) for India issued a notice.”
The petition alleged that the order and notice were issued in “hot haste” since neither the order nor the certificate specify which properties are declared as enemy property.
(Edited by Sugita Katyal)
Also Read: To boost disinvestment receipts, Modi govt is using wartime law to sell ‘enemy property’