He said the above...
If you had read my link, you would have seen that the script was used to represent Prakrit, an Indo-Aryan language. Prakrit is said to have existed alongside Sanskrit.
Prakrit was not a language, it was a designation for non-Sanskrit Indo-Aryan languages. Each Prakrit language was distinct from each other.
Kharosthi was primarily used to write Gandhari, though it was also used for Sanskrit and regional languages.
Pre-1947 Indian treasures that have been looted from India are as much part of Pakistan as Indias.
How have you come to that conclusion, why would foreign artifacts be of importance to us, in the context of our heritage.
We can even go as far as to say that the Gandharan script had as much in common with Sanskrit as it did with Aramaic (the precursor to Arabic).
Fact: Hazrat Isa R.A., spoke Aramaic.
I am glad that you are taking an interest into this topic, I encourage such endeavors among Pakistanis, but I don't think you know what you are talking about here.
You need to differentiate the
script between the
spoken language. Kharosthi developed from the Aramaic
script, but has nothing to do with the Aramaic
language. Sanskrit is a
spoken language not a script, so I am not sure how you connected Kharosthi to Sanskrit.
Point being a West Indian is not a Indian. Prior to 1947 we were a colony called "British India". Got it? Suffix changes everything. Placing 'West' in front of Indian changes the meaning. So the loot was from British India.
Interesting, I was reading one of the first British book on Sindh from the 1800s, authored by an anthropologist who visited and studied the region for an extended time. As the case with most books of the era, it is sprinked with pseudo-science, but nonetheless still intriguing.
'Western Indian' was shortly used as a term for Indians of the Western Border States (by early British anthropologists) such as Rajasthan, Gujarat, Haryana, etc... but did not include any of the regions of modern-day Pakistan as they were considered distinct nations.
Though I do know your context of 'West Indian' is completely different, I was reminded and thought this was a good chance to share something interesting I recently read.
Here are some snippets from the book regarding Western India and it's distinction from Sindh;