The Enemy Property Act, 1968 and its 2017 amendment have stirred debate over national security, legal rights, and inheritance claims—raising critical questions about justice, law, and identity in India
Actor Saif Ali Khan is embroiled in a legal battle over his in ancestral property in Bhopal for over two decades now. In a major set back for the Pataudi family, the Madhya Pradesh high court has dismissed Saif Ali Khan's plea against the government decision to label his estate as 'Enemy Property'. The high court also set aside an earlier trial court order naming Sharmila Tagore, Saif Ali Khan, Saba Ali Khan and Soha Ali Khan as the legal heir.
In the light of this, let's take a moment to understand the nuances of the 'Enemy Property Act'.
What is the Enemy Property Act
Very few legislations carry as much political, legal weight this act. In the aftermath of the Indo-Pak wars and Indo-China war in 1962, the Enemy Property Act was passed in 1968. The legislation was passed to manage the immovable and movable properties left behind by individuals who migrated to enemy countries of China and Pakistan. The properties which were classified such were vested under the Custodian of Enemy Property for India which is a statutory body created to administer such assets.
Related Articles
The act which was borne out of a geopolitical necessity remains in debate as it continues affecting legal heirs - many of whom had remained Indian citizens. They made their way to courts challenging the very definition of the term 'enemy'.
There are about more than 10,000 immovable properties listed as enemy property in India and whose value shoots up to thousands of crores now.
While the law initially targeted people who left for 'enemy' nations, the issue became complicated as they left behind legal heirs who remained loyal to the Indian union and became Indian citizens.
At the heart of this dispute lies the Bhopal estate concerning the Pataudi family.
How is the Pataudi family affected?
The Bhopal estate belonged to the erstwhile nawab of Bhopal Nawab Hamidullah Khan. While the Nawab remained in India till his death in 1960, his heir apparent, the eldest daughter Abida Sultan migrated to Pakistan in 1950.
The Nawab's second daughter Sajida Sultan married the then Nawab of Pataudi Iftikhar Ali Khan Pataudi who is the grand father Saif Ali Khan.
The 2005 Supreme Court decision
In a landmark ruling in Union of India vs. Raja Mohammed Amir Mohammad Khan (2005), the Supreme Court held that the Custodian's role was limited to managing the property of the enemy national during his or her lifetime. Once the enemy national died, the property could pass on to legal heirs who were Indian citizens and not themselves "enemies."
The Court ruled that the Custodian did not have absolute ownership of the property and that legitimate Indian heirs could claim succession. This decision was hailed as a progressive interpretation, balancing national interest with constitutional guarantees and property rights of Indian citizens. For over a decade, this judgment became the basis for several court petitions by heirs of “enemy property” claimants.
The 2017 Amendment
The Enemy Property amendment act was passed in 2017, which effectively overturned the 2005 supreme court judgement.
It declared that tagging a property as 'enemy' property would make any legal claim by successors null and void and no court can challenge the vesting of such property. The amendment also included that the law would be applied retrospectively, nullifying even those claims decided by courts.
For now the High court while reversing the earlier decision by the trial court has asked the trial court to re-examine the cast and conclude proceedings in a year.
As India continues to evolve as a democracy grounded in law and equity, the debate surrounding enemy property is far from settled. It calls for a deeper engagement with both the legal complexities and the human stories that lie beneath its surface.
