Sir, can you please share some sources regarding the seats in Kashmir assembly you mentioned. It will help your Pakistani friends too.My dear fellow Pakistani relax. Logic and history is on your side. You are on the right side of history.
Once again they have no claim over Kashmir and they know it.
It is so simple - for future reference also allow me to just share with you some historical facts that many Pakistanis might not be be aware of.
Sheikh Abdullah's National Conference had zero seats in Kashmir Assembly. Muslim conference had 15 out of 21 muslim seats and Muslim Conference openly declared accession to Pakistan.
Abdullah never had any mandate as he had no seats. There goes the moral argument.
For the princely states- one of the clauses of the 3rd June Plan made it clear that the ruler must respect the wishes of his populace. Did Hari singh do that? No.
Fact is if hindutvadis argue that Kashmir is contiguous to india then Kashmir is more contiguous to Pakistan as the state shares a longer border with Pakistan and it has far more connectivity to Pakistan than india as all her supplies came from Pakistan.
If they argue legal accession, than Pakistan must argue accession of Junagadh and Manavadar to Pakistan.
If they still had any basis of argument, tell them they must return Bengal and Punjab as it was they who demanded partition on religious bases with only muslim areas going to Pakistan.
They cant win, they just want their hindu rashtra and dream of recreating the mauryan empire.
Bengal was already partiononed by British once on the basis of religion. So it was easy to partition it again on same lines. You seriously think that you should have got the entire Punjab? Sikhs wanted to be with India, so how was that possible?