Shining Pakistan

LAHORE - The first-ever bio-fertilizer plant in the country with capacity of producing over 5,000 bags daily is being opened in City on Saturday (today), it was learnt.

Punjab Assembly Speaker Rana Iqbal will inaugurate the plant, which is equipped with the latest technology of 21st century, agricultural experts said and added that though this technology is available in advanced countries including China and India yet this plant is of its first kind being set up in Pakistan.

Pakistan Agricultural Scientists Chairman Jamshaid Iqbal Cheema while talking to The Nation said that bio-fertilizer will enhance the efficiency of DAP and other fertilizers, as most of their quantity is wasted in the fields.

He said that DAP or phosphorus usage efficiency is 15 to 20 percent. In the same way urea or nitrogen effectiveness is up to 40 percent, he said and added that use of bio-fertilizer will make the fertilizers more efficient, besides increasing the production up to 70 percent. He revealed that when a farmer uses DAP, 80 percent quantity is wasted in the soil. The usage of bio-fertilizer will enable this 80 percent wasted DAP to work, he stated.

Jamshaid Cheema told The Nation that the Auriga Group has itself made the design of the plant, as it had been working on the project for the last 5 years. He said that first year target of bio-fertilizer production is around 1 million bag which will fulfil the requirement of 1 million acres of fields in the country.

He expressed his hope the company will be able to export its production within five years period.

It is to be noted that in a shameless move to fleece farmers, the urea fertiliser manufacturers increased the price of 50kg bag by a whopping Rs190, pushing it from Rs850 to Rs1,040 in one go defying fertiliser price control committee, which is mandated to pre-empt cartelisation by manufacturers. In the same way last month, when DAP was needed for wheat sowing, its price was increased by Rs1,500 per bag.

The move will cost the farmers an additional Rs22.80 billion on the urea head alone every year as they use around 120 million bags in one year.

To put the urea price in regional context, India provides it to its farmers at mere Rs434 per bag. By those calculations, the Pakistani farmers are paying Rs72 billion extra to urea manufacturers, a crippling blow to local agriculture.

The federal government provides Rs70 billion subsidy to the manufacturers on the gas head alone, experts said. Out of these Rs70 billion, the manufacturers are returning only Rs19 billion to farmers, they added.

They said that imported urea cost Rs1,200 per bag at the current international price. The flood-hit farmers, who were already struggling to get back on their feet, could hardly afford such a severe blow to their livelihood and farming, they said.

The First Islamic Republic


The role of Islam in politics was not at the center of Muslim politics during the struggle for Pakistan but was brought into the political debate after the nation was created. The issue proved to be the beginning of a decades long quest and debate over just what Pakistan's Islamic character should be. The Ulama identified their own political recognition with the Islamic constitution.


Ulema did not wait long to demand their share of power in running the new state. Soon after independence, Jamat-i-Islami made the achievement of an Islamic constitution its central goal.


Maulana Mawdudi, after the creation of Pakistan, revised the conception of his mission and that of the rationale of the Pakistan movement, [1] arguing that its sole object had been the establishment of an Islamic state and that his party alone possessed the understanding and commitment needed to bring that about. [2] Jamat-i-Islami soon evolved into a political party, demanding the establishment of an Islamic state in Pakistan.


It declared that Pakistan was a Muslim state and not an Islamic state since a Muslim State is any state which is ruled by Muslims while an Islamic State is one which opts to conduct its affairs in accordance with the revealed guidance of Islam and accepts the sovereignty of Allah and the supremacy of His Law, and which devotes its resources to achieve this end. [3]


According to this definition, Pakistan was a Muslim state ruled by secular minded Muslims. Hence the Jamat-i-Islami and other religious leaders channeled their efforts to make Pakistan an "Islamic State."


Maulana Mawdudi argued that from the beginning of the struggle for Pakistan, Moslems had an understanding that the center of their aspirations, Pakistan, would be an Islamic state, in which Islamic law would be enforced and Islamic culture would be revived. Muslim League leaders, in their speeches, were giving this impression. Above all, Quaid-i-Azam himself assured the Muslims that the constitution of Pakistan would be based on the Quran. [4]


This contrasts to his views about the Muslim League leaders before independence: Not a single leader of the Muslim League, from Quad-i-Azam, downwards, has Islamic mentality and Islamic thinking or they see the things from Islamic point of view. [5] To declare such people legible for Muslim leadership, because they are expert in western politics or western organization system and have concern for the nation, is definitely ignorance from Islam and amounts to an un-Islamic mentality. [6]


On another occasion, Maulana Maududi said it was not clear either from any resolution of the Muslim League or from the speeches of any responsible League leaders, that the ultimate aim of Pakistan is the establishment of an Islamic government.....Those people are wrong who think that if the Muslim majority regions are emancipated from the Hindu domination and a democratic system is established, it would be a government of God. As a matter of fact, in this way, whatever would be achieved, it would be only a non-believers government of the
Muslims or may be more deplorable than that. [7]


When the question of constitution-making came to the forefront, the Ulema, inside and outside the Constitutional Assembly and outside demanded that the Islamic Shariah shall form the only source for all legislature in Pakistan.


In February 1948, Maulana Maududi, while addressing the Law College, Lahore, [8] demanded that the Constitutional Assembly should unequivocally declare:
That the sovereignty of the state of Pakistan vests in God Almighty and that the government of Pakistan shall be only an agent to execute the Sovereign's Will.
That the Islamic Shariah shall form the inviolable basic code for all legislation in Pakistan.
That all existing or future legislation which may contravene, whether in letter or in spirit, the Islamic Shariah shall be null and void and be considered ultra vires of the constitution; and
That the powers of the government of Pakistan shall be derived from, circumscribed by and exercised within the limits of the Islamic Shariah alone.


On January 13, 1948, Jamiat-al-Ulema-i-Islam, led by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, passed a resolution in Karachi demanding that the government appoint a leading Alim to the office of Shaikh al Islam, with appropriate ministerial and executive powers over the qadis throughout the country. [9] The Jamiat submitted a complete table of a ministry of religious affairs with names suggested for each post. It was proposed that this ministry be immune to ordinary changes of government. It is well known that Quaid-i-Azam was the head of state at this time and that no action was taken on Ulema's demand. [10] On February 9, 1948, Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani, addressing the Ulema-i-Islam conference in Dacca, demanded that the Constituent Assembly "should set up a committee consisting of eminent ulema and thinkers... to prepare a draft ... and present it to the Assembly.[11]


It was in this background that Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan, on March 7, 1949, moved the Objectives Resolution in the Constituent Assembly, according to which the future constitution of Pakistan was to be based on " the principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice as enunciated by Islam."


While moving the Resolution, he said: "Sir, I consider this to be a most important occasion in the life of this country, next in importance only to the achievement of independence, because by achieving independence we only won an opportunity of building up a country and its polity in accordance with our ideals. I would like to remind the house that the Father of the Nation, Quaid-i-Azam, gave expression of his feelings on this matter on many an occasion, and his views were endorsed by the nation in unmistakable terms, Pakistan was founded because the Muslims of this sub-continent wanted to build up their lives in accordance with the teachings and traditions of Islam, because they wanted to demonstrate to the world that Islam provides a panacea to the many diseases which have crept into the life of humanity today."[12]


The resolution was debated for five days. The leading members of the government and a large number of non-Muslim members, especially from East Bengal, took a prominent part. Non-Muslim members expressed grave apprehensions about their position and role in the new policy.


Hindu members of the Constitutional Assembly argued that the Objectives Resolution differed with Jinnah's view in all the basic points. Sris Chandra Chattopadhyaya said: "What I hear in this (Objectives) Resolution is not the voice of the great creator of Pakistan - the Quaid-i-Azam, nor even that of the Prime Minister of Pakistan the Honorable Mr. Liaquat Ali Khan, but of the Ulema of the land." [13] Birat Chandra Mandal declared that Jinnah had "unequivocally said that Pakistan will be a secular state." [14] Bhupendra Kumar Datta went a step further: ...were this resolution to come before this house within the life-time of the Great Creator of Pakistan, the Quaid-i-Azam, it would not have come in its present shape...." [15]


The leading members of the government in their speeches not only reassured the non-Muslims that their position was quite safe and their rights were not being impaired but also gave clarifications with regard to the import of the Resolution. Sardar Abdur Rab Nishtar, the Deputy Leader of the House, while defending the Resolution said: "It was remarked by some honorable members that the interpretation which the mover of this Resolution has given is satisfactory and quite good, but Mr. B.C. Mandal says: "Well tomorrow you may die, I may die, and the posterity may misinterpret it." First of all, I may tell him and those who have got some wrong notions about the interpretation of this resolution that this resolution itself is not a constitution. It is a direction to the committee that will have to prepare the draft keeping in view these main features. The matter will again come to the House in a concrete form, and all of us will get an opportunity to discuss it." [16]


In his elucidation of the implications of the Objectives Resolution in terms of the distribution of power between God and the people, Omar Hayat Malik argued: "The principles of Islam and the laws of Islam as laid down in the Quran are binding on the State. The people or the state cannot change these principles or these laws...but there is a vast field besides these principles and laws in which people will have free play...it might be called by the name of 'theo-cracy', that is democracy limited by word of God, but as the word 'theo' is not in vogue so we call it by the name of Islamic democracy. [17]


Ishtiaq Hussain Qureshi further elaborated the concept of Islamic democracy: Since Islam admits of no priest craft, and since the dictionary meaning of the term "secular" is non-monastic -- that is, "anything which is not dependent upon the sweet will of the priests," Islamic democracy, far from being theocracy, could in a sense be characterized as being "secular." [18] However, he believed that if the word "secular" means that the ideals of Islam, that the fundamental principles of religion, that the ethical outlook which religion inculcates in our people should not be observed, then, I am afraid,...that kind of secular democracy can never be acceptable to us in Pakistan.[19]


During the heated debate, Liaquat Ali Khan stressed: the Muslim League has only fulfilled half of its mission (and that) the other half of its mission is to convert Pakistan into a laboratory where we could experiment upon the principles of Islam to enable us to make a contribution to the peace and progress of mankind.[20] He was hopeful that even if the body of the constitution had to be mounted in the chassis of Islam, the vehicle would go in the direction he had already chosen. Thus he seemed quite sure that Islam was on the side of democracy. "As a matter of fact it has been recognized by non-Muslims throughout the world that Islam is the only society where there is real democracy." [21] In this approach he was supported by Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani: " The Islamic state is the first political institution in the world which stood against imperialism, enunciated the principle of referendum and installed a Caliph (head of State) elected by the people in place of the king." [22]


The opposite conclusion, however, was reached by the authors of the Munir Report (1954) [23] who said that the form of government in Pakistan cannot be described as democratic, if that clause of the Objectives Resolution reads as follows: " Whereas sovereignty over the entire Universe belongs to Allah Almighty alone, and the authority which He has delegated to the state of Pakistan through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him is a sacred trust." Popular sovereignty, in the sense that the majority of the people has the right to shape the nation's institutions and policy in accordance with their personal views without regard to any higher law, cannot exist in an Islamic state, they added.


The learned authors of the Munir Report felt that the Objectives Resolution was against the concept of a sovereign nation state. Corroboration of this viewpoint came from the Ulema themselves, (whom the Munir Committee interviewed) "including the Ahrar" and erstwhile Congressites with whom before the partition this conception of a modern national state as against an Islamic state was almost a part of their faith. [24] The Ulema claimed that the Quaid-i-Azam's conception of a modern national state....became obsolete with the passing of the Objectives Resolution on 12th March 1949. [25]


Justice Mohammad Munir, who chaired the committee, says that "if during Quaid-i-Azam's life, Liaquat Ali Khan, Prime Minister had even attempted to introduce the Objectives resolution of the kind that he got through the Assembly, the Quaid-i-Azam would never have given his assent to it.[26]


In an obvious attempt to correct the erroneous notion that the Objectives Resolution envisaged a theocratic state in Pakistan, Liaquat Ali Khan repeatedly returned to the subject during his tour of the United States (May-June 1950). In a series of persuasive and eloquent speeches, he argued that "We have pledged that the State shall exercise its power and authority through the chosen representatives of the people. In this we have kept steadily before us the principles of democracy, freedom equality, tolerance and social justice as enunciated by Islam. There is no room here for theocracy, for Islam stands for freedom of conscience, condemns coercion, has no priesthood and abhors the caste system. It believes in equality of all men and in the right of each individual to enjoy the fruit of his or her efforts, enterprise, capacity and skill -- provided these be honestly employed." [27]


The Objectives Resolution was approved on March 12, 1949. Its only Muslim critic was Mian Iftikhar-ud-din, leader of the Azad Pakistan Party, although he believed that "the Islamic conception of a state is, perhaps as progressive, as revolutionary, as democratic and as dynamic as that of any other state or ideology." [28]


According to Munir, the terms of the Objectives Resolution differ in all the basic points of the Quaid-i-Azam's views e.g: [29]
The Quaid-i-Azam has said that in the new state sovereignty would rest with the people. The Resolution starts with the statement that sovereignty rests with Allah. This concept negates the basic idea of modern democracy that there are no limits on the legislative power of a representative assembly.
There is a reference to the protection of the minorities of their right to worship and practice their religion, whereas the Quaid-i-Azam had stated that there would be no minorities on the basis of religion.
The distinction between religious majorities and minorities takes away from the minority, the right of equality, which again is a basic idea of modern democracy.
The provision relating to Muslims being enabled to lead their life according to Islam is opposed to the conception of a secular state.


It was natural that with the terms of the Resolution, the Ulema should acquire considerable influence in the state. On the strength of the Objectives Resolution they made the Ahmadis as their first target and demanded them to be declared a minority.[30] After the adoption of Objectives Resolution, Liaquat Ali Khan moved a motion for the appointment of a Basic Principles Committee consisting of 24 members, including himself and two non-Muslim members, to report the house on the main principles on which the constitution of Pakistan is to be framed. A Board of Islamic Teaching was set up to advise the Committee on the Islamic aspects of the constitution.

In the course of constitutional debates, a number of very crucial issues were raised that caused much controversy, both inside and outside the Constituent Assembly over specific questions such as the following:
The nature of the Islamic state: the manner in which the basic principles of Islam concerning state, economy, and society were to be incorporated into the constitution.
The nature of federalism: questions of provincial autonomy vis-a-vis federal authority with emphasis on the problems of representation on the basis of population and the equality of the federating units; the structure of the federal legislature -- unicameral or bicameral.
The form of government: whether it was to be modeled on the British or the U.S. pattern -- parliamentary or presidential.
The problem of the electorate: serious questions of joint (all confessional groups vote in one election) versus separate (each confessional group votes separately for its own candidates) electorate.
The question of language both national and regional. These very fundamental issues divided the political elites of Pakistan into warring factions that impeded the process of constitution-making. The Basic Principles Committee submitted two interim reports; one in September, 1950 and the other in December 1952. Neither of them could be adopted. The first one was withdrawn in the wake of a storm of protests in East Pakistan [31] while the second one was amended during the debates in the Constituent Assembly. However, the second report proved more productive and was adopted on 6th Oct. 1954.


The second report was widely criticized by the Ulema. A convention of Ulema was convened in Karachi in January 1953 to discuss the report. The convention, attended by 33 Ulema of different schools of thought, suggested more than two dozen amendments to accept the report.[32] Earlier in January 1951, almost the same Ulema had agreed unanimously on 22 points on the fundamental principles of an Islamic state.


The main features of the Committee's second report regarding the place of Islam in the future constitution were: that the Objectives Resolution 1949 should form the Preamble of the future constitution; that the Directives Principles of state should be the preservation of democracy within the limits prescribed by the Quran and the Sunnah; that the state should take steps to bring the existing laws in conformity with the Islamic principles XE "Islamic principles"; that no legislation be made which was repugnant to the Quran and the Sunnah: that the Islamic moral standards be promoted and maintained.


In response to considerable pressure, the Report of the Basic Principles Committee contained a proposal that no law passed by any legislature in Pakistan should be valid if it were repugnant to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah. To prevent passage of legislation repugnant to the Quran and the Sunnah, the Committee recommended the appointment (by the head of state) of a board consisting of not more than five persons well versed in Islamic law. This Board of Ulema should act in an advisory capacity and determine whether the laws that the Assembly passed were in conformity with or repugnant to Islam. The Committee also recommended that the Head of State should be a Muslim; and that separate electorates should be maintained for Muslims and non-Muslims.


When the Committee's report was considered by the Constituent Assembly, the Islamic character of the recommendations was severely criticized. There was not, however, much discussion on such matters as making the Objectives Resolution 1949, as part of the Preamble, or including the Directive Principles of State policy in the future constitution. It was argued that these provisions were not legally enforceable and were merely 'pious hopes.' But recommendations - that the Head of the state should be a Muslim, that separate electorates should be maintained, and that a Board of Ulema should be appointed to supervise the legislative activity of the Assembly were opposed during the constituent assembly debates. During the debate that the Head of state should be a Muslim, Sardar Shawkat Hayat Khan pointed out that the provision was against the fundamental rights. He remarked: " I imagine that the population of this country will be 85 percent Muslim. If a Muslim cannot be returned as Head of the State with 85 percent Muslims population and a Hindu is returned with a population of only 15 percent that Hindus must be saint......" [33]


The recommendation of the Basic Principles Committee that a board of five Ulema be appointed to determine whether the laws passed by the Assembly were in conformity with or repugnant to Islam, also came under sharp criticism. It was, therefore, argued that since the proposal to form a board of Ulema had received support only from a section of the people, it should be dropped and the Supreme Court of Pakistan should be given the necessary jurisdiction to judge whether the laws passed by the Assembly were in conformity with or repugnant to the Quran and the Sunnah. This was agreed to by the first Constituent Assembly but later dropped by the second.

During the discussion in the first Constituent Assembly the report of the Basic Principles Committee was substantially amended regarding the 'repugnancy clause.' Any law of a Pakistan legislature which is in conflict with the Quran and the Sunnah was again declared to be invalid. But the later provision was that Supreme court alone should have jurisdiction in such a case. Any objection on the ground of repugnancy to Islam was to be filed within three months of the giving of assents to a bill. Furthermore, it was provided that, for a period of at least twenty-five years, the repugnancy sections should not apply to 'fiscal and monetary measures, laws relating to banking, insurance, provident funds, and credit system.'


The East Pakistan Muslim League passed a resolution regretting that the repugnancy clause was not to be enforceable in the courts. This criticism was more than countered by the attitude of the Awami League. Mr. Hussein Shaheed Suharwardy asserted that his party wanted true Islam in the government and policies of Pakistan, but that the existing state of affairs was so far from Islam that the title should not be included in the name of the state. "I say that you are deluding the people here by calling this an Islamic state." He argued that it was quite unnecessary to provide in the constitution that the President was required to be a Muslim since 86 per cent of the electorate would be composed of Muslim voters. [34]


In 1953, Pakistan was declared an Islamic Republic, in spite of the opposition of a few Muslims and many of the non-Muslim members of the Constituent Assembly. The Report of the Basic Principles Committee was eventually adopted by the assembly on September 21, 1954 with some amendments. The proposal for a Board of Ulema had been dropped; the question of separate or joint electorates was left to be determined by the Central and Provincial Assemblies formed under the constitution. They adopted the principle of joint electorates. After much debate, the Constituent Assembly was able to prepare a final draft of the constitution in 1954 which visualized an Islamic Republic of Pakistan with a parliamentary system and a federation of five units, each with a bicameral legislature. It seems that the constitutional draft could have been adopted in the Constituent Assembly but it was not approved by the ruling elites, that is to say, members of the civil and military bureaucracy and feudal elements of West Pakistan. When the Assembly passed a bill in September 1954 which made the Governor General subservient to the advice of Prime Minister, Governor General Ghulam Mohammad, a senior member of the Indian Audit and Accounts Service, backed by Chaudhry Mohammad Ali, dissolved the Constituent Assembly and dismissed Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin, a Bengali. Perhaps this was the first step towards ultimate bureaucratization and consequent militarization of Pakistan's political system.[35]


The second Constituent Assembly was inaugurated in July 1955 and on January 8, 1956 it presented a draft constitution which was finally adopted on February 29, with certain changes. After nine years of effort, Pakistan was successful in framing the constitution which was implemented on March 23, 1956. Most of the West Pakistani politicians and bureaucrats dreaded the exercise of the will of the people according to the majority principle since that could put the Bengalis (representing 56 per cent of the population) in a commanding position. It took them nine years to devise the so-called parity formula according to which East and West Pakistan would have equal representation in the federal parliament and government.


The constitution provided for a federal structure composed of two units, East and West Pakistan. The parliamentary form of government was adopted and unicameral legislature was based on the principle of 'parity' of representation between the two wings of the country. The merger of the provinces of West Pakistan in 1955 was initiated (against the wishes of Baluchistan, Sindh and North Western Frontier Province in order to transform a federation originally based on five units into a bipolar federal system. This would ultimately imply perpetual confrontation between East and West Pakistan. No attempt was made to abolish feudalism in the country while colonial-era system of civil administration was maintained. Islamic provisions in the 1956 constitution were contained in the Directives Principles of State Policy, which were not enforceable in the courts. The directive principles reaffirmed the statement in the preamble that "steps shall be taken to enable the Muslims of Pakistan individually and collectively to order their lives in accordance with the Holy Quran and Sunnah. Further the state was to endeavor (a) to provide facilities to the Muslims to enable them to understand the meaning of life according to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah; (b) to promote unity and observance of Islamic moral standards; (c) to secure the proper organization of Zakat and Awkaf.


Article 24 provided that the state should endeavor to strengthen the bonds of unity among Muslim countries. The same article enjoined Pakistan to foster friendly relations among all nations.


There was no provision to make Islam the state religion in Pakistan. Article 21 provided that no person should be compelled to pay any special tax, the proceeds of which were to be spent on the propagation of any religion other than his own. The Head of State was to be a Muslim not younger than 40 years of age. The constitution of 1956 represented a decision to transfer to the people and not the Ulema or other religiously privileged class, the responsibility, if not for making the authoritative interpretation of Islam, at least for choosing which interpretation shall become authoritative.


Insofar as Islam was given any practical legal significance in the 1956 Constitution, it was in two ways. First, through Article 197 the president was obliged to set up an organization for Islamic research and instruction in advanced studies to assist in the reconstruction of Muslim society on a truly Islamic basis; and under article 198 the President expected to appoint a Commission of Experts to make recommendations ' as to the measures for bringing existing laws in conformity with the injunctions of Islam. ' The Commission was to submit its report to the President within five years of its appointment. This report was to be placed before the National Assembly, and the Assembly after considering the report was to enact laws in respect thereof. [36]


The constitution had something to offer to both sides; it gave grounds to the orthodox traditionalist that his cause might be advanced, while there was nothing in the Islamic clauses to cause a liberal democrat to feel that Pakistan was incapable of becoming the kind of a state he wishes to see. The constitution did little to settle the fundamental issue of the desirable role of Islam in a modern state. Nor did its adoption serve to bridge what one writer had called the ' wide gulf between the Ulema of the orthodox schools and the intelligentsia." [37] The 1956 constitution was accepted without widespread opposition from religious groups concerning its Islamic provisions. Jamaat-e-Islami described it as an "Islamic constitution." A statement issued by the Majles-e-Shura of the Jamaat on 18th March 1956 said: "The preamble of the constitution, its Directive Principles and Article 198 of the constitution have finally and unequivocally settled the 8-year old struggle between the Islamic and anti-Islamic trends in favor of the former. And the fact that the future system of life in this country has to be shaped on the basis of Islam and that the Quran and the Sunnah shall ever reign supreme here has been so firmly embodied in the constitution of the country that no worldly power shall, Insha Allah, be able to obliterate it." [38]

The constitution of 1956, that took seven years to adopt, was abrogated only after two and half years of its existence by the civilian-military coalition of power elites that brought about a military coup d'état on October 7, 1958. President Iskandar Mirza (a retired Major General who later joined the civil service) imposed martial law and appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, General Mohammad Ayub Khan, later to be named a Field Marshal, as the Chief Martial Law Administrator. Three weeks later General Ayub dismissed President Iskandar Mirza and assumed the presidency. This act marked the transformation of the bureaucratic state system into military regime in which the civilian bureaucrats came to play a sub-servient rather than a dominant role.


The fate of democracy was not allowed to improve even after the enforcement of the 1956 democratic constitution. Political bickering and intrigues which began under the interim constitution after 1953, -- when Prime Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin, who had enjoyed the confidence of the legislature, was arbitrarily dismissed by the Governor-General, Ghulam Mohammad, and when a sovereign constituent assembly was also dissolved by the same Governor-General in an undemocratic manner in 1954, -- continued to dominate the Pakistan political scene even after the adoption of the 1956 constitution. On the political intrigues of President Iskandar Mirza, General Ayub wrote: "The President had thoroughly exploited the weaknesses in the constitution and had got everyone connected with the political life of the country utterly exposed and discredited." [39]


It was expected that general elections will take place in accordance with the provisions of the new constitution but like the interim constitution (1947-56) no elections were held. There were seven prime ministers in Pakistan during the era of parliamentary democracy from 1947 to 1958. With the exception of the first prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, none of the remaining six prime ministers were elected as a result of any election or even as a result of the vote of confidence in the legislature. They were the products of "palace intrigues" by the two governor -generals -- Ghulam Mohammad and Iskandar Mirza (who later became the first president of Pakistan). There was a cabinet, there was a parliament, but the real powers were exercised by the Governor-General with the help of a ruling elite, composed of the top civil and military officials. The constitutional forms and trapping of democracy had only provided a cloak for the ruling elite.


The political order in Pakistan had practically turned into an oligarchy under a democratic constitution. Pakistan's political system was rightly described as a 'modernizing oligarchy,' in a study on the politics of the developing areas. [40] The various government changes that took place in the country from 1953 to 1958 could be traced to the inordinate desire of this ruling oligarchy to perpetuate its power and position. It is no doubt true that this oligarchy was able to maintain its hold because of the lack of cohesion and integrity among the political parties and their leaders. But this is also true that the powerful oligarchy was determined to crush the democratic institutions in the country and it always encouraged splits and disintegration of the parties whenever any of them constituted a threat to its hold and dominance. It was therefore the role and policy of this particular group, which had actual control of the governmental machinery, that was more responsible than any other factor in the unsatisfactory working of the democratic institutions in the country.


A constitution commission appointed by Ayub Khan in 1960 enumerated the following reasons for the failure of democracy in Pakistan: (i) lack of proper elections, (ii) undue interference by the heads of the state with the ministers and political parties and by the central government with the functioning of the government of the provinces, (iii) lack of leadership resulting in the absence of well-organized and disciplined parties, lack of character of the politicians and their under interference in the administration. However, the commission failed to mention the real threat and challenges to democracy in Pakistan that came from an all-powerful and irresponsible executive which was aided and supported by a powerful civil and military bureaucracy.


For more details, click OUR SOURCE here!


Back to top






ISLAMIZATION PROGRAMME OF GENERAL ZIA-UL-HAQ


General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq proclaimed Martial Law in 1977 and assumed the office of the President of the country. The then government had to issue several martial law regulations to effectively control the aggravating situation in the country. There is one strong opinion which has effectively prevailed over the years and that is hat the process of Islamization, in fact, began the day the Qadianis were declared as non-Muslims on their negation of the finality of Prophethood in 1974. The opinion seems to carry some weight as the action of the Government of Mr. Z.A. Bhutto, declaring the Qadianis as non-Muslims, was understood as a step to have been taken for the safeguard of the basic tenants of Islam. However, it was the martial law regime under General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq which took practical steps for the process of Islamization.


The Islamization Programme: - The Islamization programme of General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq contained the following steps.


1. Hadood Ordinance.
2. Qazaf Ordinance.
3. Nizaam-e-Salaat Committees.
4. Zakat Ordinance.
5. Ushr Ordinance.
Central Zakat Council.
Provincial Zakat Council.
District Zakat Committee.
Tehsil Zakat Committee.

6. Establishment of Federal Shariat Court.
7. Interest Free Banking.
8. Compulsory teaching of Pakistan Studies and Islamiat.
9. Ordinance for the sanctity of Ramzan-ul-Mubarak.
10. Ban of Nudity.
11. Arabic News.
12. Use of Dopatta.
13.Majlis-e-Shoora.


in contravention to this Ordinance was liable to three yeas imprisonment and a fine of RS. 500/-. However, hospitals, railway stations, seaports, bus stands, trains and airports were exempted from this Ordinance.


The Government in order to make Pakistan a real Islamic State strived hard to introduce Islamic System in the country.


The Government for this reason needed staunch support and cooperation from the masses. Pakistan at that time was passing through the transitory stage towards the ultimate goal of achieving an Islamic society. A very long span was required to mould Pakistan into an Islamic State.


10. Ban of Nudity: -
The Government imposed a strict ban on the display of nude posters particularly on portraying women as publicity symbols. Display of nude scenes and moving films with nudity were also banned ob the television.


11. Arabic News: -
Everyday, five minutes were reserved for Arabic news on the television. This act is still in practice. Arabic was also introduced as a compulsory subject in high schools. Great efforts were mad for teaching Arabic as a language. Arabic language courses were introduced on ‘Radio Pakistan’ and ‘Pakistan Television’ in Arabic from other medias.


12. Use of Dopatta: -
Female television announcers were forced to cover their heads with dopattas.


13. Majlis-e-Shoora: -
The President of the country, General Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq selected his Majlis-e-Shoora, the Islamic Parliament, to act as the Parliament of Pakistan in place of the National Assembly.

Tipu Sultan

Tipu Sultan, the eldest son of Haider Ali, was born on December 10, 1750 at Devanhalli. Right from his early years he was trained in the art of warfare and at the age of 15 he used to accompany his father Haider Ali, the ruler of Mysore, to different military campaigns. In Addition, he also learnt different languages, mathematics and science. Tipu Sultan had a fascination for learning. His personal library consisted of more than 2,000 books in different languages. He was an extremely active man and worked hard for the welfare of his subjects. He took over the kingdom of Mysore after the death of his father in 1782, who died of a carbuncle in the midst of a campaign against the British. He continued fighting the British and defeated them in 1783. Tipu Sultan was a farsighted person who could foresee East India Company's design to get entrenched in India. He therefore negotiated with the French for help and also sought assistance from the Amir of Afghanistan and the Sultan of Turkey. The British were scared of Tipu's growing strength and after their defeat in 1783 they formed an alliance with the Nizam of Hyderabad and Marhattas. The French, however, deserted Tipu after the signing of the Treaty of Versailles. The British availed the chance with the help of the Nizam and the Marathas, and started the third Anglo-Mysore war in 1790.
As long as the British fought alone, Tipu always defeated them. But he could not come over their diplomacy, conspiracy and intrigue. Thus he was defeated in his capital, Seringapatam, and was forced to sign a humiliating treaty on March 22, 1792. As a result he had to concede half of his kingdom and pay an indemnity of 33 million rupees to the British and their allies. The alliance between the adversaries was soon broken and in 1795 the British, after defeating the Nizam, once again turned their attention towards Mysore. After the treaty at Seringapatam, Tipu Sultan did not waste his time and made extensive preparations against the British. He had rebuilt his war machine in the shortest possible time with the help of the French. The British regarded it as a violation of the treaty. This led to the start of the fourth Anglo-Mysore war in 1798 with the help of the Nizam. The French were unable to provide the needed support to Tipu Sultan. Tipu Sultan retreated to his capital and continued fighting till he breathed his last in May 1799. Tipu Sultan is buried at a mausoleum that he himself had built, along with his father Haider Ali and his mother Fatima Begum.
Tipu Sultan was a great patriot and like his father realized the danger of letting the British becoming stronger. Although much of the period of his rule was given to war with the Marhattas, the Nizam and the British, he made his state secure and peaceful with benevolent rule. He was an enlightened ruler who treated his non-Muslim subjects generously. He built a chain of excellent roads and constructed tanks and dams to promote agriculture. He introduced new industries, promoted trade and commerce on a large scale. Tipu prohibited the production and distribution of liquor and other intoxicants in Mysore. He also built and fortified numerous forts and many palaces, which were demolished by the British after his death. Bangalore Summer Palace still survives and is a remnant of his grand rule.

The Revolutionary Voice
As India was a great country in the past, so it maintains its greatness and significance in today’s world. Its fertility (wealth) and natural resources (metals and minerals) stand surety for the prosperity and comfort of its inhabitants. This country has produced great personalities, and nurtured prominent accomplished persons. Many Rivers are flowing in the heart of this vast country like veins in the human body. There are high mountains surrounded by the ranges of tall trees and green fields.
This is a picture of ancient India, which has immensely been changed by modern India, consisting of dense and diverse population. Various kinds of inventions different instruments, products, and machines have transformed India. Each and every aspect of industry, commerce, economy and society is an index and milestone of how fast life undergoes radical changes occurring in the 21st century. 
After all, each and every aspect of  ancient and modern India, which consists of simplicity and grace, truth and pragmatism, a pretty mixture of public wishes and ambitions and reflects the multi-coloured spectrum of the welfare and progress of the country and the nation, is attractive and favourite one for us all.
The English fixed their eyes at prosperity and wealth of India and their own commercial interests and opportunities, when the Mughal government was at the zenith. They set up their commercial centers (factories) at Surat (Gujarat) and Hugly (Bengal); began to extend their plans and show themselves in their true colours. They also hemmed to Dutch and the Portuguese in and began to fleece Indian trade and economy.
They clutched the agricultural system, education, trade, religions, and cultures of India in their claws and finding the circumstances favourable to their interests; they developed a lust for government and power. Having grabbed the states of the Nawabs and the Rajas, they headed towards Delhi. The battles in Plassey (1757), in Buxur (1764), in Ruhelkhand (1774), in Srirangapattam (1799) are the glaring examples of their aggression and lust for territorial aggrandizement. They entrapped Oudh and Ruhelkhand (1801), Bundelkhand and Delhi (1803) through their cunning and shrewd agreements and practically established their government all over India.
The sequence of the events and the speedy occupation of India were enough to enrage the Indians. The surging storm of public discontent kept brewing every where in the years of the first half of the nineteenth century. The English kept suppressing them through their strategies and might and crushing every public initiative through their conspiracy and aggression. But in the fifties of this century, the situation went out of control and the English sensed a great menace/ threat to their power. Hence, Dalhousie had said that constumacy and rebellion might rise up like steam and vapour. The people who looked innocent, harmless and timid might get involved in more oppression and violence than all other wars just the day when they were engraged. (Fraser: British India, p.273, quoted in Taarikh-i-jang-i-Azadi-i-Hind 1857, by Khurshid Mustafa Rizvi, Raza Library Rampur, U.P., First edition, 1421/2000)  
In 1856, the English introduced new cartridges and trained the Indian soldiers at Dam Dam, (Calcutta), Ambala, and Sialkot Contonments. In 1857, these cartridges were introduced everywhere. On January 22, 1857, the Indian soldiers at Dam Dam objected to their use, saying that the cartridges, prepared with the fat of Pigs and cows, hurt their religious sentiments. The same happened at Ranipur, Barrackpore (Calcutta) and Barhaampur (Murshidabad). But the English officers paid no heed to these protests. On 29th march, 1857, Mangal Pandey flew into rage at Ghazipur (in eastern U.P) and shot an English sergeant dead. As a penalty for this offence, he was hanged to death.
On 1st, May (1857), the Indian soldiers in Lucknow refused to touch the cartridges. Discontent spread in other religions of Oudh also. On 24th April, eighty five Indian soldiers at Meerut refused to bite the cartridges and English officers, in a fit of anger, sentenced them to imprisonment for ten years. These eighty five soldiers were humiliated and disgraced at the parade ground (Meerut); their vardis (uniforms) were torn, and they were put in handcuffs and irons. Then they were sent to jail. When the other Indian soldiers went their homes and to the markets, the women taunted them, saying, “You are not men. Put on these bangles and give your arms to us. We will set our Indian soldiers free.”
As the Indian soldiers were already restless with anger, they flew into rage when they heard the women taunting. On 10th  May, they revolted at Meerut, and set their companions free. They began to catch the English and kill them. They set out from Meerut and reached Delhi. Here, they met Bahadur shah zafar and proclaimed him as the emperor. Here too, they killed the English. The rebels of Delhi too joined them and the Indians and the English were fighting against each other everywhere.
These events did not happen all of a sudden. The causes had already been created. Mr. S.M. Ghosh, the secretary Freedom History Board, says in a speech delivered on 16th September, 1953.
“We come to know from the information provided that it was not a sudden or isolated event but the leaders all over the country had united to free the country. This was the first organized attempt to drive the foreign rulers. The purpose behind the movement was to free the country and form an autonomous government wherein Bahadur Shah would be the sovereign ruler. (Taarikh-i-jang-iAzadi 1857,p.49, by Khurshid Mustafa Rizvi)
P.C. Joshi Writes:
“ The Meerut rebels rushed to Delhi, the age-old capital of India. They entered it through Delhi Gate. Without any serious oppositions, besiegned the last Mughal, Bahadur Shahs”Zafar” and proclaimed him the Shahensha-e-Hindustan.” (Inqilab 1857, p.38, (third edition)) edited by P.C. Joshi, National council for Promotion of Urdu, New Delhi, also available in English)

Quoting history books, P.C. Joshi further writes;
“ Bahadur Shah was declared Shahenshah-e-Hind on 11th may 1857. But in truth he was reduced to a mere nonentity in the first week of July-that is towards the close of the first phase of the Revolt. The rebels of Delhi issued a Parwanah, after the arrival of General Bakht Khan, outlining the structure of the new state. Bahadur shah was again formally proclaimed the Emperor of India, but the real executive power was vested in the court of Administration. The court was to administer the state, maintain peace and order, collect land revenue from the sub-divisions and raise loans from the Mahajans, defend the realm and prosecute the wars. The Emperor had promised the court that “in reference to you no representation of any party whatever will be heeded; and in all such orders as may emanate from your way interfere.” (Inqilab 1857, p.45, (third edition)) edited by P.C. Joshi, National council for Promotion of Urdu, New Delhi, also available in English)

“ A similar court of Administration was set up in Lucknow. Like the Delhi rebels, the Lucknow insurgents crowned Brijis Qadr, a natural son of the ex-king of Oudh. On his elevation to the throne, or rather on his being created Nawab Vazir of Oudh-for his authority was subordinated to that of the Emperor of Delhi-his mother and Mammu Khan enjoyed power that was checked only by the caprice of the troups to whom their elevation was due. (Inqilab 1857, p.50, (third edition)) edited by P.C. Joshi, National council for Promotion of Urdu, New Delhi, also available in English)
Dr. Majumdar sums up his research in the following words:
“ The outbreak of 1857 would surely go down in history as the first great and direct challenge to the British rule, on an extensive scale. As such it inspired the genuine national movement for the freedom of India from the British yoke which started half a century later. The memory of 1857-58 sustained the later movement, infused courage into the hearts of its fighters, furnished a historical basis for the movement, and gave it a moral stimulus, the value of which it is impossible to exaggerate. The memory of the Revolt of 1857, distorted but hallowed with sanctity, perhaps did more damage to the cause of British rule in India than the Revolt itself.” (Inqilab 1857, p.140, (third edition)) edited by P.C. Joshi, National council for Promotion of Urdu, New Delhi, also available in English)
The Muslims and the Hindus were equally complaining against the highhandedness and oppression of the English. The English were fleecing this agricultural country and enriching England and they were particularly rendering Bengal pauper and destitute. This exploitation had reached to such an extent that the Indians began to bear a grudge against them. It was the habit of the English to humiliate and disgrace the Indian Nawabs, Rajas, Zamindars, Businessmen and gentry. When they tried to interfere in their (Indians) religious affairs, their patience knew no bounds. This resulted in the Revolt of 1857 wherein the Muslims as well as the Hindus equally participated. One the one side, the Muslim leaders like Bahadur shah Zafar, General Bakht Khan Ruhella, Prince Firoz Shah, Begum Hazrat Mahal, General Azimullah Khan Kanpuri, Nawab Tafazzul Husain, Nawab Majduddin alias Majju Khan Moradabadi, Nawab Mahmood Khan Bijnori were mentally and practically spending their energies to make this Revolt a successful one, on the other, Nana, the Peshwa, Tantia Tope. Rani Lakshamibai, Ram Kunwar sing, Raja Nahir Singh, Rao Tula Ram were offering their sacrifices. However this is also a fact that the Muslims were more excited and they sacrificed their lives and property more than the other. Therefore, they fell victims to the cruel oppression of the English. During the revolt of 1857, the Ulama as a religious duty, issued the fatwa of  jihad against the English; practically participated in the war; encouraged the Mujahideen and led the revolutionary insurgents. The most prominent among them was Maulana Ahmadullah Shah Madrasi who in compliance with the order of his Peer-o-Murshid (Spiritual mentor) was leading a campaign against the English.
The names of other leading Ulama who played a pivotal roles in the revolt of 1857 are as follows: Mufti Sadruddin Azurda, Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi, Maulana Faiz Ahmad Badayuni, Maulana Kifayat Ali Kafi Moradabadi, Maulana wahhajjuddin Moradabadi, Mufti Inayat Ahmad Kakorvi, Moulana Rahmatullah Kairanvi, Maulana Dr. Wazir Khan Akkarabadi, and Maulana Imam Baksh  Sahbai Dehlavi. According to books dealing with the revolt, around fifteen thousand Ulama were martyred during the War of Independence in 1857.
The above mentioned Ulama were ideologically and practically inspired, in one way or the other, by the following Ulama who were their predecessors also.
Hazrat Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dehlavi (d.1176/1762) (2) Hazrat  Mirza Mazhar Jaan-i-Jaanan Mujaddidi Dehlavi (d.1195/1781) (3) Hazrat shah Abdul Aziz Muhaddith Dehlavi (d.1239/1824) (4) Hazrat Qazi Sana’ullah Panipati (d.1225/1810) (5) Hazrat shah Rafiuddin Muhaddith Dehlwi (d.1233/1818) (6) Hazrat Mufti Iwaz Barelwi (d.1236/1821) (7) Hazrat Mufti Sharfuddin Rampur (d.1268/1852)
One hundred and fifty years of the revolt of  1857 are going to complete in 2007. The whole country is remembering the War of Independence in 1857 which is a practical war in the true sense of the words. All Indians are paying glowing tributes to their  intrepid and daring warriors. On this historical occasion, this booklet containing a brief introduction of these Ulama, whose memory gives freshness, energy and fervour to our spirits, is being presented.
Mufti Sadruddin Azurda Dehlavi
Mufti Sadruddin Azurda Dehlavi (1204/1789-1285/1768) was an accomplished Alim of Delhi whose ancestry is traced back to his Kashmiri forefathers. He had received education from Hazrat Shah Abdul Aziz, the Muhaddith of Delhi ( 1239/1824) and Maulana Fazle Imam Farooqi Khairabadi ( d. 1244/1829). He was the Sadr Amin of Delhi from 1827 to 1846 and Sadrus Sudoor from 1846 to 1857. Being a Sadrus Sudoor of Delhi under the English government was the highest post for a Muslim Alim. His house was the meeting-palace for Ulama, scholars, poets and literary figures Sir Syed Ahmed Khan (1315/1898) in his “ Aasaarus Sanaadid” ( P 524), considers him as an all round accomplished Alim (possessing all the characteristics of an Alim of his age) . Hakim Abdul Hai Rae Barelwi (1341/1922), the former Nazim (manager) of Nadwatul Ulama, writes: “ Mufti Sadruddin Azurda, who came of a great noble family, was the pride of India, and had no match in scholarly accomplishments and excellence.” ( Gul-i Ra’na, P 227, Azamgadh)
The Ulama issued the fatwas of Jihad against the English at several places and several times. One such fatwa, published in the Akhbaaruz Zafar, a Delhi newspaper on 26th July 1857.
Bore Mufti Sadruddin Azurda’s signature. These newspaper are preserved in the National Archives, in Delhi. During the Revolt, Mufti Sadruddin Azurda kept visiting Bahadur Shah Zafar in the Red Fort and the Revolutionary Mujahideen came to his house for instructions and consultations. ( Roznamchah Munshi Jiwan Lal, Delhi and Roznamchah of Abdul Latif, Delhi)
Shahjahan, the Mughal emperor, had built a madrasa “ Darul Baqa” in the sooth of the Shahjahani Masjid which was rendered desolate and deserted by the vagaries of time. Mufti Sadruddin Azurda acquired this madrasa from Bahadur Shah Zafar and started teaching there. (Sir Syed Ahmed khan, Aasaarus Sanaadid p.283)
Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s father, Maulana Khairuddin Dehlavi and his grandfather, Shaikh Mohammad Hadi Dehalvi were Azurda’s disciples. In the same way, the list           
of Azurda’s disciples includes Mufti Sa’dullah Moradabadi, Maulana Faizul Hasan Saharanpuri, Yusuf Ali Khan (the Nawab of Rampur), Nawab Ziauddin Khan Nayyar, Nawab Mustafa Khan Shaifta, Maulvi Sami’ullah Dehlavi, Maulvi Faqeer Mohammad Jahlami, Maulana Khasim Nanotvi and Maulana Rashid Ahmed Gangohi, and the last two being the leaders of the Deobandi Ulama. Azurda wrote several books. He wrote fine poems in urdu, besides Arabic and Persian.
When the English got the upper hands in the revolt of 1857, a case was filed against him and he was tried in a court fro rebellion. After suffering imprisonment and a great deal of pleading, he was acquitted. However, a large part of his property was confiscated. He also lost about 3lakh books. He had collected in his personnel library. Some of them were very important and rare.
The English had turned the Jamia Masjid into a stable after the failure of the revolt. Mufti Azurda, along with the dignitaries of the city, made constant efforts for its evacuation and restoration. Consequently, the English according to an agreement evacuated the Masjid in November 1863. (Mufti Intezamullah Shihabi, Ghadar Ke Chand Ulama, p.48, Delhi). The collection of Ghalib’s Letters (Makaateeb-i-Ghalib) too mentions the evacuation of the Masjid.
A memorable deed, performed by Mufti Azurda, was these that he gave a letter to Maulana Ahmadullah Shah Madrasi (d.1274/1858) and sent him to Agra in 1846 where the latters formed the “ Majlis-i-Ulama” (The council of Ulama) and launched the campaign of purging India of the English. These Ulama Fought bravely against them at different fronts. Mufti Azurda was 81 when he breathed his last in Delhi on 24th Rabi’ul Awwal 1285/ 16th July 1868 and he was buried in Chirag Delhi.
Allama Fazle Haq Khairadabadi
Allama Fazle Haq Khairadabadi (1212/1791-1278/1861) was the son of Allama Fazle Imam Farooqi Khairadabadi (d.1244/1829), the Sadrus Sudoor of Delhi.  Allama Fazle Haq received his education in Islamic Sciences from Shah Abdul Qadir (d. 1230/1815) and Shah Abdul Aziz, the Muhaddith of Delhi (1239/1824) and in rational sciences from his father. At the age of 13, he completed his education and engaged himself in teaching. Then, he took up service with the government in 1815.
When, at the invitation of Faiz Mohammed Khan, the Nawab of Jhajjar (Punjab), he was leaving Delhi for Jhajjar, Bahadur Shah Zafar, expressing his deep sorrow and grief, gave him a Doshaalah (an embroidered Shawl/ a double folded shawl) and, with tearful eyes, saw him off. He also said. “ Since you are ready to leave, I have no choice but approve of your departure. But, Allah Knows well that it is extremely difficult for me to utter the word ‘Good-Bye’.” (Yaad Gaar-e-Ghalib, Dehli)
After his stay at Jhajjar, he was employed at Alwar, Tonk and Rampur. Then he went to Lucknow and became the Sadrus Sudoor and Mohtamim-i-Huzoor-i-Tehsil (official in charge of a tehsil). He was also a Sar-rishtadar (magistrate) in Delhi also. He held a post at Saharanpur too. He wrote some very important books. He also produced disciples who latter on became well known scholars of their age.
There was a fast friendship among Mufti Sadruddin Azurda Dehlavi, Allama Fazle Haq Khairadabadi, and Mirza Asadullah Khan Ghalib. It was Allama’s advice and selection that helped Ghalib arrange his ‘Diwan-i-Ghalib’. According to Mohammed Husain Azad, this is the very version which the readers hold dear these days. (Aab-i-Hayat, Delhi) the houses of Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi and Mufti Sadruddin Azurda were the meeting places of the Ulama, Poets, and literary figures.
When the revolt broke out in 1857, he came from Alwar to Delhi several times and met Bahadur Shah Zafar. This continued since May. Then, when General Bakht Khan, along with his fourteen thousand soldiers, came for Bareilly to Delhi, according to Munshi Zaka’ullah of Delhi, Allama delivered a speech in front of the Ulama in the Jamia Masjid after the Friday prayer. He put fourth an istifta (query seeking legal advice on a point of religious importance) before the Ulama the fatwa (legal advice/ opinion ) was signed by Mufti Sadruddin Azurda, Maulvi Abdul Qadir, Qazi Faizullah Dehlavi, Maulana Faiz Ahmed Badayuni, Dr. Maulvi Wazir Khan Akbarabadi, Syed Mubaraksha Rampuri as soon as these fatwa was published disturbance and tumult intensified throughout the country. Some ninety thousand soldiers gathered in delhi. (Zak’ullah, Taarikh-i-‘Urooj-i-Saltanat-i-Englishiah, Delhi)
When the English regained their control over Delhi, Allama Fazle Haq left Delhi and went to Awadh. A case was filed against him in 1859. He was tried to in a court for rebellion and was sentenced to imprisonment in Kaala Paani (Andaman Nicobar). He himself defended his case and declared in the court that it was he who had issued the fatwa of jihad and stuck to his stand. Maulana Abdul Haq (1244/1828-1316/1898), the son of Allama Fazle Haq, was the principal of Madrasa Alia in Calcutta. W.W. Hunter writes about him: He (Abdul Haq) is the son of the rebel Alim whom the government has sentenced to imprisonment in the Kaala Paani (Andaman Nicobar) and whose library was confiscated and brought to Calcutta. (W.W. Hunter, Hamare Hindustani Mussalamaan,[Urdu] p.203, Delhi)
Maulana Abdul Shahid Shervani of Aligarh, the biographer of Allama and translator of his famous book ‘ Al-Sauratul Hindia’ (the Indian Mutiny) writes, “ Maulana Abdul Haq Khairabadi had made his last will that he should be informed in his grave when the English would leave the country. Therefore, Syed Najmul Hasan Rizvi, along with a big crowd, visited the grave in the Dargaah-i-Makhdoomiah, at Khairabad in Sitapur and read the Fatiha after Milaad Shareef. (Muqadimmah (Introduction to) Zubadatul Hikmah, p.12, Aligarh, 1949) Allamah Fazle Haq Passed away in Andaman Nicobar (Kaala Paani) in 1861 and was buried over there.

Maulana Ahmaddullah Shah Madrasi
Dilawar jang Maulana Ahmaddullah Shah Madrasi (1204/1787-1274/1858) was the son of Mohammad Ali, who was the Nawab of Chinyapattam (?) in the district of poornamalli (?) in south India. He was also the advisor and companion of Sultan Tipu. When Maulana Madrasi, along with his disciples and devotees, went out, a band would  beat a Naqqarah/ Danka (drum). That is why he was also called Naqqarah Shah/ Danka Shah.
In the prime of his youth, he was inclined to saintly life and mystcism. For practicing austerity and asceticism, he left his house and after visiting Hyderabad and Madras, he traveled to England. He also went to Egypt and Hijaz. After performing Hajj  and Ziyarat, he came back to India via Turkey, Iran and Afghanistan.
He practiced austerity and asceticism and performed chillah (retired for forty days into mystic seclussion) at Bikaner and Sambher for about twelve years. Then, he went to Jaipur and became the murid (mystic disciple) Mir Qurban Ali Shah who granted him the Khilafah (spiritual Succession). From there, he went to Tonk where some people objected to his Mahfil-isima (gathering for listening to  Mystical Music). He felt very disgusted with their remarks and left for Gawaliar. There he met mehrab Shah Qalandar Gawaliari who granted him the Khilafah (spiritual Succession and permission) and ordered him to free India from the slavery of the English. Thus he left Gawaliar for Delhi in around 1846.
In Delhi, he met the leading Ulama and Mashaikh and discussed with them the situation prevailing in the city. Mufti Sadruddin Azurda expressed his opinion and advised him to go to Agra which, in his Opinion, Would be the best ground to make better and effective preparations for such a campaign. Mufti Azurda also wrote a recommendation letter to Mufti In’amullah, the government advocate. (He (Mufti In’amullah) was born at Gopa Mau, Hardoi and died at Agra in 1275/1859)
After he reached Agra, he met prominent scholars and leading personalities there. His influence increased day by day. He formed the Majlis-i-Ulama (Council of Ulama) to unite and organize them. These Ulama, later on, proved helping hands to him, Maulana Madrasi also visited the Meerut, Patna, Calcutta etc. besides Delhi and Agra and thus widened the scope of this campaign against the English. Syed Khurshid Mustafa Rizvi writes: “ Maulana Ahmaddullah shah tops the list of leaders who prepared the whole country for the Revolt of 1857.” He visited different parts of the country and intisgated the people for the Revolt.’ Malleson writes that no doubt, the leader behind this conspiracy was the Maulvi (Ahmadullah) and this conspiracy had spread all over India …….. I (Malleson) think that it was he who was the brain behind the revolt. During his journeys, he introduced a scheme which is known as the ‘chapati Scheme’. (Taarikh-i-Jang-i-Azadi-i-Azad-i-Hind 1857, p.205, Raza Library Rampur).
Maulana Madrasi fought pitched battles against the English at Lucknow, Faizabad, Shahjahanpur. At last, Maulana Ahmadullah Shah Madrasi, Prince Firoz Shah, General Bakht, Maulana Faiz Ahmad Badayuni and Dr. Wazir Khan Akabarabadi had formed their own government at Mohammadi (Shahjahanpur). But due to the betrayal of Raja Baldeo Singh, Madrasi failed in his venture and was martyred in 1858. the English gave Baldeo Singh Fifty thousand rupees in reward. Professor Mohammad Ayyub Qadri Badayuni (Karachi) Writes: “ The Martyrdom of Shah Ahmadullah put an end to the war of  independence not only in Ruhelkhand But in the whole country also.” (Jang-i-Azadi-i-Hind 1857, p. 303, Karachi)

The English historian G.W. Forest writes that it is very important to mention that he was a Maulvi for being a practicing alim, a Sufi for his spiritual power and a soldier and commander for his military skills. (History of the Indian Mutiny).
Maulana Faiz Ahmed Badayuni
Maulana Faiz Ahmed Badayuni (b. 1223/1808) received his education under the kind patronage of his maternal uncle, Allama Fazle Rasool Usmani Badayuni (d. 1289-1872). He completed his education when he was only fourteen years old. He was a great and accompalished Alim of his age as well as a very good poet. He was a murid (spiritual disciple) of his maternal grandfather, Shah Abdul Hamid Usmani Badayuni (d. 1233-1820). After teaching at Badayun for a long time, he was appointed a Peshkar (court official) at the Sadr-i-Nizamat of Agra. Then he became an official at the board of Revenue. Sir William Muir, who later on became a military magistrate and lieutenant governor of the United provinces and Agra, had learnt Arabic from him.
He was an active member of the Majlis-i-Ulama (council of Ulama) formed by Maulana Ahmadullah Shah Madrasi (d.1274/1858). He acted as an assistant Munazir (debater) in the munazara (polemical religious discussion/ debate) which took place between Maulana Rahmathullah Kairanvi (d.1308/1891) and Pfander, the missionary, on the topic of Islam and Christianity at Agra in 1854. this debate lasted for three days and Pfander, the missionary, having been defeated, fled away to Europe. Maulana Faiz Ahmad Badayuni made a long struggle to evacuate the Jamia Masjid of Agra, a large portion of which was illegally occupied by the people. At last, he achieved success after litigations. The Masjid was evacuated and repaired. He formed a local agency at Agra to look after the management of the Masjid and it gladly took up the responsibility. During the revolt of 1857, he took some of his companions and reached Delhi. Here, he openly participated in the ongoing war of independence. He was the Peshkar for prince Mirz Mughal, the son of Bahadur Shah Zafar for a few days. Then, he went back from delhi with general Bakhta Khan Ruhella after the revolt failed there. The Maulana fought bravely in the battle of kakrala (Badayun) along with General Bakht Khan. The English General, Penny(?) was killed in the battle field. After the retreat, he went to Bareilly where Khan Bahadur Khan, the grand son of Hafiz Rahmat Khan was fighting against the English.
At Lucknow, he stayed with Ahmadullah Shah and fought against the English. From here, he accompanied Maulana Madrasi to Shahjahanpur and when Maulana Madrasi established his government at Mohammadi, he joined his  ministry. After the English had regained control over Shahjahanpur, he escaped to Nepal. No one knows what happened to  him and where he passed away.
Professor Mohammed Ayub Qadri Badayuni (Karachi) writes : “ The Ulama of Badayun took active parts in the war of independence in 1857. Maulana Faiz Ahmed Badayuni, who was a prominent Alim (scholar) of his age, tops the list. He was employed in the central board of revenue. He was great adeeb (litrary figure) of Arabic as well as a poet. During his stay at Agra, he took part in the Munazarah (debate) that took place between Maulana Rahmatullah Kairanvi and Pfander, the missionary and assisted Maulana Rahmatullah. Then, he heroically participated in the war of independence in 1857. he also went to Delhi. He fought the last battle at Kakrala. The freedom fighters such as Dr. Wazir Khan, Prince Firoz Shah were also there. The famous English General penny (?) was killed. (Encyclopedia of Badayun, p.26, vol.2, Karachi)

Maulana Syed Kifayat Ali Kafi Moradabadi
Maulana Syed Kifayat Ali Kafi Moradabadi (d.1274/1858) was an accompalished Alim, experienced Tabib (physician) and a great poet. Maulana Kafi learnt Hadith from Shah Abu Sa’eed Mujaddidi Rampuri (d.1250/1835) and learnt poetry from the famous poet, Zaki Moradabadi (1281-1864) who was the disciple of Imam Bakhsh Nasikh. He performed Hajj and Ziyarat and  wrote “ Tajammul-i-Darbar-i- Rahmat” as a memorial.
He has written several books e.g. Tarjmah-i-shamail-iTrimizi (poetry), Majmuah-i-Chahal Hadith (poetry) with explainary notes, Khayabaan-i- Firdaus, Bahar-i-Khuld, Naseem-i-Jannat, Maulood-i-bahar, Jazbah-i-Ishq, Diwan-i-Ishq, paying tribute to Na’tiah Sha’eri, (poems in praise of the Holy Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam)and love for the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wa sallam)
 Imam Ahmed Raza Barelwi (d. 1281/1921) writes:
“The world smells sweet because of the fragrance of my mouth,
Here, the sweet songs do not mingle with the bitter ones.
Kafi is the sultan of the Na’t Goyan (poets who writes in praise of the Holy Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam)) Allah Willing, I will be the Wazir-i-Azam (Prime minister)).”
He issued, in Moradabad, a fatwa justifying jihad against the English, the copies of which were sent to other places. He himself went to Aonla, publicized his fatwa and persuaded and excited the people for jihad. Then, he reached Bareilly, consulted Khan Bahadur Khan, the grandson of hafiz Rahmat Khan Ruhella and returned to Moradabad. When a government was formed at Moradabad under the leadership of Nawab Majduddin Khan, alias Majju Khan, Maulana Kafi was appointed as the Sadr Amin. According to the District Gazette, Moradabad, the Muslims, driven by their religious zeal and enthusiasm, revolt against the English in the whole district.
At the same time, Yusuf Ali Khan, the Nawab was in the forefront of supporting and sympathizing and showing loyalty to the English. He attacked upon Moradabad. But when General Bakht Khan, with his army reached Moradabad, the Nawab’s army  fled away. However, the Nawab, assisted by the English, gained control over Moradabad again. The English subjected Nawab Majju Khan to severe and cruel behavior and killed him (martyred him).
Maulana Kafi, through his letters, kept General Bakht Khan aware and well informed of the developments at Moradabad. When the English regained their control over Moradabad on 21st April, 1858, Maulana absconded. But, due to the betrayal of an intelligent agent (spy), he was arrested on 30th April. At that time, the English had formed a commission which settled the cases after a brief and harried trial. The case of the Maulana was referred to the cruel and callous English magistrate. Who very soon pronounced his judgment. (Najmul Ghani Rampuri, Akhbaarus Sanaadid, Rampur)
Mr. John Engleson (?), the Magistrate in Moradabad Commission announced his judgment saying that since this defendant/ respondent accused has revolted against the English government, provoked the masses against a legal/ constitutional government and plundered the city, this act of the accused is an open mutiny against the English government and as a penalty for this, he deserves severe punishment. It was ordered that he should be hanged to death.” (John Engleson (?), 6th may,1858)
All the proceedings of the case were completed within two days. The case was filed on 4th May, the judgment announced on 6th May, and he was hanged on the same day.(Syed Mahboob Hussayin Sabzarwi Moradabadi, Moradabad: (Taarkh-i-jidd-o-juhd-i-Azadi, p.144, Moradabad). At the timed of being hanged he was reciting Na’t Shareef (poems in praise of the Holy Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wasallam)).
Mufti Inayat Ahmad Kakorvi
Mufti Inayat Ahmad Kakorvi (1228/1813-1279/1863) was born at Dewa (Bara Banki Awadh) and settled down permanently with his father, Munshi Mohammad Baksh at Kakor (Lucknow), the native village of his maternal grandfather. After acquiring primary education at Dewa and Bara Banki, he went to Rampur for higher studies (to get instructions in different branches of  knowledge). Then, he learnt Hadith from Shah Mohammad Ishaq (d.1262/1848) in Delhi and Maulana Buzurg Ali Marahravi (1262/1848)in Aligarh. Then he was appointed as a Mudarris (teacher) and a Mufti. Among his many students, Mufti Lutfullah Aligarhi, (d.1334/1916), the Sadrus Sudoor for religious affairs in Hyderabad Deccan, was the most famous one. Mufti Inayat Ahmad Kakorvi also did a government job. At first, he became a Munsif at Aligarh and then at Phaphund (Etawah). After that became the Sadr Amin at Bareilly. He stayed there for a long time and wrote several books on religious and academic topics. Here, he also formed the “Jalsah-i-Ta’eed-i-Deen-i-Mateen”, an organization, for reformist works and tableegh (propagation and preaching) and published some books. This organization is considered the first reformist one throughout the subcontinent. In the beginning of 1857, he was appointed the Sadrus Sudoor of Agra. He was still preparing for the journey, when the revolt broke out in May. He went to Bareilly and Rampur instead of Agra and supported the revolutionaries rather he patronized them. He extended financial help to the Mujahideen and a fatwa bearing the signature of Mufti Inayat Ahmad Kakorvi, and justifying jihad against the English was issued from Bareilly. Professor Mohammad Ayyub Qadri writes: “ Before the revolt, two activists worked for this movement at Bareilly. They were Maulvi Sarfraz Ali and Mufti Inayat Ahmad Kakorvi.” (Jang-i-azadi 1857, Karachi)
Mian Abdur Rashid, a columnist in the Nawa-i-Waq Daily, (Lahore) writes: “ He (Mufti Inayat Ahmad) was active under the leadership of Nawab Khan Bahadur Khan Ruhella at Bareilly which was an important centre for the Mujahideen of Azadi. Maulana Raza Ali Khan, the grandfather of Maulana Ahmad Raza Khan, was one of the leaders of the movement. Mufti Inayat Ahmad Kakorvi did not only organize the Mujahideen but also took active part in the battle as assistant of  Nawab Khan Bahadur Khan Ruhella. (Jang-i-Azadi Number: The Tarjuman-i-Ahlus-Sunnah, Karachi, July 1957)
For the fatwa and his participation in the war, the English arrested him. He was tried in court and was sentenced to Kaala Paani where he underwent severe hardship. At he request of an Englishmen, he had translated the “Taqweemul Buldaan” and in returned he was released. He came back to India in1277/1860. Thereafter, he founded a Madrasa (Faiz-i-Aam) in Kanpur and engaged himself in religious and  academic activities. In  Kaala Paani, He wrote Taarikh-i-Habib-i-Illahi” (a biography of the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam)) and “Ilmus Seghah” (a book of Arabic Syntax and etymology) which is still taught in the Madrasas of India. In all, he wrote about two dozen books. After serving at Madrasa Faiz-i-Aam for a while, he set out for Hijaz to perform the Hajj and Ziyarat. It so happened that the ship capsized on the way. Thus he passed away on 17th Shawwal 1279/17th April, 1863 and was drowned in the ocean of Allah’s mercy.
Maulana Rahmatullah Kairanvi
Payah-i-Haramain (the pillar of the two sanctuaries at Makkah and Madina[?]) Maulana Rahmatullah Usmani Kairanvi (1233/1817-1308/1891), one of the descendants of Kabirul Aulia Makhdoom Jalaluddin Panipat (d.765 A.H) was  a widely known great alim (scholar). Having received his primary education at Kairanah, Muzaffar Nagar (in western uttar pradesh), he went to Madrasa Hayaat in Delhi. Then, he traveled to Lucknow and learnt a few books (of higher studies) from Mufti Sa’dullah Moradabadi (d. 1294/1877), the disciple of Shah Abdul Aziz, the Muhaddith of Delhi and Mufti Sadruddin Azurda Dehlavi. He also learnt few books on Hadith (the traditions of  the Holy Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam)) from Shah Abdul Ghani Mujaddidi Dehlavi (d.1296/1878)
In the beginning, he taught the students in the Masjid at Kairanah. When the missionary schools and the Christians clergymen accentuated their activities and began raising objections against Islam, he wrote a voluminous books, “ Izaalatul Awhaam” at the order of Shah Abdul Ghani Mujaddidi. This books provided satisfactory answers to all the objections put up by the Christians, particularly those raised by Pfander, the missionary, in his book, “Meezaanul Haq”.
A historic Munazarah(debate) between Maulana Kairanvi and Pfander, the missionary, took place at Agra in 1270/1854, in which Maulana Kairanvi, with his substantial arguments, silenced the clergyman. The details of this debate had been published in book form. Maulana Faiz Ahmad Badayuni and Maulana Dr. Maulana Wazir Khan Akbarabadi participated in the debate as his special assistants.
When the revolt of 1857 started, he put up a bold front against the English. Maulana Imdad Sabri Dehlavi writes: “In those days, Naqqarahs (drums) were beaten to assemble the people so that the Mujahideen might be organized and trained. It was also proclaimed that kingdom belonged to Allah and hukm (order), to Maulvi Rahmatullah (Aasaar-i-Rahmat, p.246, Delhi)
Maulvi Rahmatullah enjoyed great/ deep influence upon the intellectuals of Delhi and the princes of the Red Fort and Maintained good rapports with them. Therefore, Maulana Rahmatullah, along with Bahadur Shah Zafar and other Mujahideen, took active part in chalking out plans and guidelines for the war of independence. He also participated in the war. He along with Maulvi Wazir Ahmed Khan Akbarabadi and Maulana Faiz Ahmad Badayuni, participated in waging the war of independence. (Aasaar-i-Rahmat, p.319, Delhi) Munshi Zakaullah writes: first of all, Maulvi Rahmathullah came from Kiraanah to find out what the situation of the jihad was in Delhi. He was an accompalished scholar. (Taarikh-i-‘Urooj-i-Saltanat-i-Englishiyah, p.675,vol.iii, Delhi) It is written in the Roznamchah (dairy) of Abdul Lateef that two hundred people of Najeedabad, under the leadership of Maulvi Rahmatullah, had come to Delhi, waged war and then returned. (Roznamchah –i-Abdul Lateef, p.78, Delhi)
Later on, the English filed a suit against him. They announced that they would award one thousand rupees to a person who would capture Maulana Kairanvi and hand him over to them. Maulana Kairanvi could not be arrested and he secretly migrated to Makkah Mukarramah. His property and holdings at Kairanah were confiscated and then auctioned. In the same way, his property at Panipat too was auctioned.
After he reached Makkah Mukarramah, he established the Madrasa Saulatiah and started teaching there. Haji Imdad Ullah Muhajir Makki and Shiekh Zaini Dahlan Shaf’een Makki supported him there a lot. He traveled to Turkey several times at the invitation of the Sultan of Turkey. At his request, Maulana Kairanvi wrote his magnum opus, “ Izharul Haq” to refute Christanity and silence the clergy men. He passed away at Makkah Mukarrama in 1891 and was buried Jannat-ul-Mu’alla (the grave yard of Makkah)

Maulana Dr. Wazir Khan Akbarabadi
Maulana Dr. Wazir Khan Akbarabadi (d.1289/1873) was from Bihar. After he had received his primary education, his father, Mohammad Nazir Khan sent him to Murshidabad (Bengal) for English education. Then. He was sent to England where he received education in medical science. He also learnt Greek and Hebrew and studied the Injeel (the Gospel) and the Taurah thoroughly and deeply.
He was appointed as assistant surgeon at a hospital in Calcutta after he came back to India. Then, he shifted to Agra. Here, he came in touch with Mufti In’amullah Gopamauvi, the Vakil-i-Sadar. He also assisted Maulana Ahmadullah Madrasi when he formed the Majlis-i-Ulama (the Council of Ulama). Mufti Intezamullah Shihabi writes that it was the influence of the Shah (Ahmadullah Madrasi) Sahab’s company that Dr. Wazir Khan developed  hatred for the English and love for freedom (Ghadar Ke Chand Ulama, p.81, Delhi)
In 1854, the missionary Pfander threw a challenge to the Ulama at Agra for Munazarah (polemical discussion/ debate). After consultation with Majlis-i-Ulama, Dr. Wazir Khan accepted the challenge and sent for his friend, Maulana Kairanvi. The missionary, Pfander fled away after he was defeated at the end of the three day long heated debate. Maulana Kairanvi, on behalf of the Muslims, participated in this debate as the Munazir (debater) while Dr. Wazir Khan and  Maulana Faiz Ahmed Usmani Badayuni were his chief assistants.
Regarding his active involvement in the revolt of  1857 , Mufti Intezamullah Shihabi writes: “Dr. Wazir Khan came out valiantly  and patronized the army of fidayeen (pledged devotees/ warriors). The English confined themselves to the fort. He (Akbarabadi), along with Maulvi Faiz Ahmad Badayuni, reached Delhi. Bahadur Shah held his darbar (court). General Bakht Khan had come from Bareilly. The “war council” had been formed. Dr. (Wazir Khan) sahib too was included into it. General Bakht Khan was the lord governor he took Dr. Wazir Khan with him. Maulvi Faiz Ahmad was appointed the Peshkaar (court official)  of mirza Mughal.” (Ghadar Ke Chand Ulama, p.87, Delhi)
After the failure in Delhi, General Bakht  Khan Ruhella, took Dr. Wazir khan Akbarabadi and Maulana Faiz Ahmad Badayuni along with his army to Lucknow. There he joined Maulana  Ahmadullah Shah  Madrasi and pitted against the English . Then, they all had to leave Lucknow for  Shahjahanpur. When they failed (were defeated) there also, they dispersed and went to Nepal. Maulana Dr. Wazir khan secretly migrated to Makkah, went to Maulana Rahmatullah Kairanvi and settled over there.
He set up a matab (clinic) at Makkah Mukarramah and started treating the sick . Once, he had treated the Yamni wife of an Arab Shaikh, Abdullah . The Shaikh  wanted to pay the fee but he refused to the take it. He was deeply touched. The English government in India wrote to the sultan of turkey ,telling him that a runaway culprit was sheltering in Makkah and asking him (the sultan) to hand him over to India. The Sultan of Turkey wrote to sharif Abdullah, the governor of Makkah. Akbarabadi , after  consultation with the governor of Makkah, informed Abdullah Yamani of the situation. He told the governor that there were ten thousand men (members) in his tribe and Dr. Wazir Khan could be handed over to any one only after all of them are killed. The governor conveyed the news to the Sultan who wrote to the Indian government that handing over (deportation of) a culprit under such circumstances was almost impossible. The Indian government  was compelled to keep quiet. Dr. Wazir Khan lived in Makkah Mukarramah for fourteen years. He breathed his last over there in 1873 and was buried at the Jannatul Mu’alla. 
Maulana Wahhajjuddin Moradabadi
Maulana Wahhajjuddin alias Munno Moradabadi (d. 1274/1858) was a great Alim (scholar) and  a wealthy person in the town. Both the elite and the masses held him in high esteem. Besides Arabic, Persian, and Urdu, he knew English also. During the revolt of 1857, he played a prominent role in Moradabad. He, along with a big crowd, raided upon the prison of Moradabad and set all the prisoners free. No sooner did Mr. John Craft Wilson (?) hear this news than he absconded. “ After the first  failure of the Mujahideen in Moradabad, Maulana wahhajjuddin alias Maulvi Munno organized  the masses again, and with few weapons, he took a huge crowd to the jail.”(Muhaarabh-i-Azam, by Munshi Kanhayya Lal)
Maulana Wahhajjuddin took a bold step and went to Rampur to infuse in the hearts of the people  a spirit for jihad and freedom, as the Nawab of Rampur had been loyal to the English. He went around the villages in the countryside and publicized his message of freedom. When prince  Firoz  Shah became his assistant. Both Maulana Syed Kifayat Ali Kafi and  Maulana Wahhajjuddin got together and stirred an Inqilaab(a revolution). Under the leadership of Prince Firoz, he fought  valiantly against the army of the Nawab and the English.

After the failure of the revolt, due to the betrayal of a secret  agent, the English raided upon Maulana Wahhajuddin’s house and martyred hi (shot him dead) within his house.
Maulana Imam Bakhsh Sahbai
Maulana Imam Bakhsh Sahbai Delhi (d. 1273/1857) was the disciple / pupil of Maulana Abdullah Khan Alavi and was a poet  as well as an author who had written several books. Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, in his Aasaarus Sanaadid, has lavished praises upon him and said that he was an accompalished scholar and had mastery over many of branches of knowledge (arts and sciences). At the recommendation of the Mufti Sadruddin Azurda, the lieufenant Governor of Delhi appointed him a teacher of Persian in the Delhi College in 1840.There was a close friendship between Mirza Ghalib and Sahbai. Sahbai almost visited the houses of Mufti Azurda and Allama Fazle Haq Khairabadi every day where the scholars and poets got together and held their meetings.
Maulvi Abdul Haq, the Baba-e-Urdu, Writes: “Maulvi Imam Bakhsh Sahbai, the head teacher, was a great adeeb (literary person) of Persian language. He was also a poet and author. His books were prescribed in the syllabus. His books are taught even today. He was held in high esteem in the city.” (Marhoom Dilli Kaalej, p.162, Anjuman Traqqi-e-Urdu, New Delhi)
Maulana Sahbai nurtured anti-English feelings and sympathized with the revolutionaries and the Mujahideen. He attended the meetings held in the Qil’a-i-Mu’alla (the Red fort) and offered his opinions. During the revolt of 1857, once, the English captured Fourteen hundred people and shot them dead at Rajghat on the bank of the Yamuna. Maulana Sahbai was one of them. Twenty one members of his family were killed. When Mufti Sadruddin Azurda heard this sad news, he spontaneously said:
(Why should Azurda not go mad, when Sahbai is killed without any guilt.)