Legal battle intensifies as Saif Ali Khan’s Rs. 15,000 crore royal inheritance faces uncertainty after the Madhya Pradesh High Court overturns the earlier ruling on Bhopal property ownership.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
BHOPAL: Bollywood actor Saif Ali Khan, heir to two of India’s most illustrious royal lineages, the princely states of Pataudi and Bhopal, now finds himself in the middle of an intense legal battle that could strip him and his family of properties worth over Rs. 15,000 crore.
What began as a royal inheritance has now transformed into a full-blown courtroom drama, steeped in post-independence history, disputed succession rights, and the controversial application of the Enemy Property Act.
The roots of the saga lie in the legacy of Nawab Mohammad Hamidullah Khan, the last ruling Nawab of Bhopal. After India’s independence, the Nawab continued to hold immense personal wealth, including palaces, bungalows, and estates.
Though his eldest daughter, Abida Sultan, migrated to Pakistan post-Partition, his second daughter, Sajida Sultan, chose to remain in India. In 1962, the Indian government officially recognised Sajida Sultan, who married Nawab Iftikhar Ali Khan Pataudi of Haryana, as the sole legal successor to all of Hamidullah Khan’s private properties. These assets were then passed down to her son, the legendary cricketer Mansoor Ali Khan (Tiger Pataudi), and subsequently to his children, including actor Saif Ali Khan.
For decades, this lineage remained undisputed. In 2000, a trial court affirmed the inheritance of these properties by the Pataudi family: Saif, his mother Sharmila Tagore, and his sisters Soha and Saba Ali Khan.
However, a major twist came in June 2024 when the Madhya Pradesh High Court, acting on appeals filed by other descendants of Nawab Hamidullah Khan, set aside that 2000 judgment. These appellants argued that the Nawab’s estate should have been divided among all heirs under Muslim Personal Law, not handed entirely to Sajida Sultan’s line.
Justice Sanjay Dwivedi, in a single bench order dated June 30, ruled in favour of the appellants and remanded the matter back to the trial court, instructing it to re-examine the case afresh and ideally deliver a new judgment within a year.
The judge noted that the lower court had not adequately considered all legal and factual aspects and had relied heavily on an earlier judgment that had already been overruled by the Supreme Court. Importantly, he granted liberty to all parties to present additional evidence in light of changing legal circumstances.
As if this inheritance setback weren’t enough, Saif Ali Khan faces a second and potentially even more significant legal challenge. In 2014, the government issued a notice stating that the Bhopal properties inherited by Saif’s family could fall under the ambit of the Enemy Property Act, 1968. This law allows the Indian government to seize properties left behind by individuals who migrated to enemy nations, such as Pakistan.
Since Abida Sultan, the Nawab’s eldest daughter, settled in Pakistan, the government argued that the entire estate, despite being passed to Sajida Sultan, could be considered “enemy property.”
Though Saif initially managed to get a stay on this notice, the legal tide turned in December 2024 when the High Court dismissed his petition. This dismissal followed the government’s retrospective amendment of the Enemy Property Act and the establishment of a dedicated appellate authority, the Custodian of Enemy Property, to review such disputes. The Custodian, based in Mumbai, invalidated the 1962 certificate that recognised Sajida Sultan’s ownership, further weakening Saif’s legal stance.
The timing of these developments could not have been worse for the actor. In January 2025, Saif Ali Khan was seriously injured in a violent home invasion and was hospitalised for several days. His prolonged recovery may have impacted his ability to file a timely appeal against the December 2024 order, raising further uncertainty about the fate of the contested properties.
These regal properties include the Noor-Us-Sabah Palace, now a luxury hotel, the historic Flagstaff House in Bhopal, and multiple other estates and royal bungalows across Madhya Pradesh. Given their location, size, and heritage value, the total worth is estimated to exceed Rs. 15,000 crore.
The dispute now hinges on two fronts: a renewed trial over rightful succession under Muslim Personal Law and a reassessment by the Custodian under the Enemy Property framework. Both cases carry immense historical and legal implications, not just for the Pataudi family, but for royal heirs across India grappling with similar claims.
Adding a final layer to this complex legal saga is the 1949 Instrument of Accession and the Bhopal Succession to the Throne Act of 1947, which had guaranteed that all personal properties of the Nawab would remain under the absolute ownership of his successors. Whether this historical safeguard will hold up under modern legal scrutiny remains to be seen.
As the courts prepare for fresh hearings and legal teams sharpen their arguments, Saif Ali Khan finds himself not on a film set, but in the middle of a high-stakes real-life drama, a battle not just for immense wealth, but for his family’s legacy, identity, and place in Indian royal history.
The Enemy Property Act, 1968
The Enemy Property Act, enacted in 1968, was introduced in the aftermath of the 1965 India-Pakistan war to manage and regulate properties left behind by individuals who migrated to enemy countries, particularly Pakistan and China, after conflicts such as the 1962 Sino-Indian War, and the 1965 and 1971 India-Pakistan wars.
These properties, termed “enemy properties,” were initially vested with the Custodian of Enemy Property for India (CEPI) under the Defence of India Rules, 1962. Despite the Tashkent Declaration (1966) suggesting possible repatriation, India retained control after Pakistan disposed of such assets in 1971.
The 2017 amendment to the Act expanded its scope, allowing the government to retain enemy properties even if legal heirs or successors are Indian citizens or nationals of non-enemy countries. This move was largely influenced by the 2005 Supreme Court judgment in Union of India vs. Raja Mohammad Amir Mohammad Khan, where the court allowed the Indian son of a Pakistani citizen to reclaim ancestral property.
The verdict triggered a surge in similar claims, prompting the government to tighten the law. However, in a significant 2024 ruling, Lucknow Nagar Nigam v. Kohli Brothers, the Supreme Court clarified that the Custodian’s control over enemy property is only temporary, and no ownership is transferred to the Union of India.
The evolving legal landscape reflects a complex balance between national security interests and individual property rights, particularly in cases with historical and cross-border dimensions.
