Q6
1 markMCQSection A

Which one of the following statements is NOT correct about the princely states ?

Nation-Building at a Time of Partition
Integration of Princely States

Options

(A)Princely states were ruled by the princes.
(B)All the princely states had accepted to be an integral part of India after the end of British rule.
(C)The princes of princely states accepted British supremacy and enjoyed some form of control over their internal affairs.
(D)After the end of British paramountcy, the provinces were free to join either India or Pakistan or remain independent.
Official Answer

The correct answer is (B) All the princely states had accepted to be an integral part of India after the end of British rule — this statement is NOT correct.


Not all princely states readily acceded to India. States like Junagadh, Hyderabad and Jammu and Kashmir posed serious integration challenges, requiring plebiscite, police action, or special negotiation respectively, before finally joining the Indian Union.

princely statesparamountcySardar PatelJunagadhHyderabadJammu and KashmiraccessionInstrument of Accession

Marking Scheme

  • 11 mark for correctly choosing option (B).

Hint

Recall the specific 'problem states' — Junagadh, Hyderabad, Kashmir — which shows accession was NOT automatic or unanimous.

Quick Oral Answer

It is incorrect that all princely states readily joined India — Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir required special measures, including plebiscite and military action, before accession.

Analysis & Explanation

This 'NOT correct' MCQ tests whether students know that the integration of princely states was contested and difficult, not automatic.


Why (B) is the incorrect (hence correct-to-select) statement

  • Several princely states resisted accession: Junagadh's Nawab initially acceded to Pakistan before a plebiscite favoured India; Hyderabad's Nizam resisted until the Indian Army's 'Police Action' in September 1948; Jammu and Kashmir's Maharaja acceded only after Pakistani tribal invasion in October 1947.

Why the other statements are correct (and hence not the answer)

  • (A) is true — princely states, unlike British India's provinces, were ruled directly by hereditary princes.
  • (C) is true — under the doctrine of paramountcy, princes accepted British supremacy in foreign affairs and defence while retaining internal autonomy.
  • (D) is true — with the lapse of paramountcy in 1947, princely states were technically free to join India, join Pakistan, or remain independent, which is precisely why integration required persuasion and, in some cases, force.

Common Mistakes

  1. 1Assuming all princely states smoothly acceded to India, overlooking the contested cases of Junagadh, Hyderabad and Kashmir.
  2. 2Misreading 'NOT correct' questions and selecting a true statement instead of the false one.

Interesting Facts

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and V.P. Menon are credited with integrating over 500 princely states into the Indian Union between 1947 and 1949.

Hyderabad was integrated through 'Police Action' (Operation Polo) in September 1948, after the Nizam refused to accede.

Junagadh's ruler initially acceded to Pakistan, but a plebiscite conducted after Indian intervention in 1948 showed an overwhelming preference for India.

Spotted a mistake or something unclear?

Tell us — we fix reported answers fast.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which princely states resisted joining India?

Junagadh, Hyderabad and Jammu and Kashmir posed the biggest challenges — Junagadh's ruler initially chose Pakistan, Hyderabad's Nizam wanted independence until Police Action in 1948, and Kashmir's Maharaja acceded to India only after a tribal invasion from Pakistan.

Who led the integration of princely states into India?

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, as Home Minister, along with civil servant V.P. Menon, led the successful integration of over 500 princely states through persuasion, the Instrument of Accession, and force where necessary.