top of page

By:

C.S. Krishnamurthy

21 June 2025 at 7:45:51 pm

Let Your SIP Fight Your EMI

When Ramesh bought his first home, he was delighted. The keys were finally in his hand, but another number immediately occupied his mind: the monthly EMI. “Now that I have some money left after paying my EMI, what should I do with it?” he asked his financial adviser. “Or should I start investing? And if I invest, won’t I be carrying a loan unnecessarily?” A home loan can run for 15, 20 or even 25 years, while the desire to become debt-free keeps growing. But does a borrower necessarily have...

Let Your SIP Fight Your EMI

When Ramesh bought his first home, he was delighted. The keys were finally in his hand, but another number immediately occupied his mind: the monthly EMI. “Now that I have some money left after paying my EMI, what should I do with it?” he asked his financial adviser. “Or should I start investing? And if I invest, won’t I be carrying a loan unnecessarily?” A home loan can run for 15, 20 or even 25 years, while the desire to become debt-free keeps growing. But does a borrower necessarily have to choose between repaying the loan faster and investing for the future? What if both could be pursued simultaneously? Could a Systematic Investment Plan (SIP) create a corpus that eventually helps reduce or even close the home loan? The idea merits consideration. A SIP is not a magic formula for becoming debt-free, but it can create a second financial track alongside the regular EMI. Two tracks, one objective Consider an illustration. Suppose a borrower takes a home loan of ₹50 lakh at an assumed interest rate of 8.5 pc for 20 years. The EMI would be around ₹43,400.
Instead of putting every available rupee into the loan, the borrower could consider investing ₹10,000 a month through a SIP, provided the household cash flow permits it. At an assumed annualised return of 12 pc, a ₹10,000 monthly SIP could grow to roughly ₹8.24 lakh in five years, ₹23.23 lakh in 10 years, ₹32.22 lakh in 12 years and ₹50.45 lakh in 15 years. While these are not guaranteed returns, the possibility of higher returns is also not ruled out. Meanwhile, the outstanding home loan would gradually decline through EMIs. Over eight to 10 years, the SIP corpus could become substantial enough to give the borrower an additional financial option. The important point is not to decide today exactly when the loan will be closed, but to review the position when the time comes. Why not simply prepay? Prepaying the home loan provides a relatively certain benefit because every rupee of principal repaid reduces future interest outgo, subject to the loan terms and applicable rules. The SIP serves a different purpose. It creates a financial asset and, over the long term, gives the investor an opportunity to participate in the growth potential of financial markets. The decision point comes later The strategy need not have a fixed finish line. After eight to 10 years, the borrower can review the situation rather than mechanically redeeming the SIP. What is the outstanding loan, the investment value and its performance? What are the prevailing market conditions? Is part-prepayment more appropriate than full repayment? These questions can guide the decision. If the corpus has grown sufficiently and circumstances are favourable, the borrower may consider using part of it to reduce the outstanding loan or, if appropriate, redeeming enough to close the loan completely. If the investment is better retained for the long term, there is no compulsion to exit merely because 10 years have passed. The strength of the strategy lies in this flexibility. Think beyond the loan A long-term SIP is not merely a future home-loan repayment fund. It can become a wealth-creation vehicle in its own right. Compounding rewards patience. A disciplined monthly investment held for the long term can help build a corpus for retirement, children’s education, other life goals or financial independence. Thus, while the home loan moves towards closure through the EMI, the investment has the opportunity to grow alongside it. Once the loan is eventually closed, the EMI disappears. Instead of allowing that money to quietly disappear into lifestyle expenses, the borrower can redirect some or all of the former EMI towards investments. A sensible balance This approach is not a universal prescription. Some borrowers may prefer aggressive loan prepayment, while others may find the combination of EMI and SIP more suitable. The SIP amount should also be comfortable. If ₹10,000 strains the monthly budget, start with less. The strategy should strengthen financial security, not create financial pressure. Adequate emergency savings and appropriate insurance should also form part of the overall financial plan. The larger lesson is simple: a home loan need not automatically put wealth creation on hold. With disciplined cash-flow management, a long-term investment approach and periodic reviews, the EMI can continue paying for today’s home while the SIP works towards tomorrow’s financial freedom. In the end, the question need not be, “Loan or investment?” It can be: “How can I use both wisely?” Disclaimer: “Mutual funds are subject to market risks. Read all scheme-related documents carefully.” (The writer is a retired banker and author. Views personal.)

With IWT Suspended, The Long Game Begins

Apr 29
5 min read

While India’s gamble has yet to choke Pakistan’s flows a year after the suspension of the Indus Water Treaty, the move has redrawn the rules and weaponised water diplomacy.

One year has passed since the Pahalgam terror attack, an event that triggered a wave of fierce anti-Pakistan sentiment across the nation. In its immediate aftermath, India suspended the Indus Water Treaty (IWT), long regarded as one of the most successful examples of international cooperation, despite decades of hostility between India and Pakistan. The government’s decision provoked intense debate, yet it was less about delivering instant outcomes and more about signalling a calculated strategic intent. This move marked a paradigm shift in India’s posture toward its neighbour, reframing water not merely as a shared resource but as a tool of strategic deterrence. Now, a year later, it becomes essential to assess the consequences of this stance and to examine how effectively it has reshaped the dynamics of India–Pakistan relations.


Decisive Shift

The IWT, signed in 1960, was a World Bank, mediated compromise that partitioned the Indus basin rivers between India and Pakistan. India received full rights over the Eastern Rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej), while Pakistan controlled the Western Rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab), with India allowed only limited non-consumptive use. Though hailed as a model of transboundary cooperation, the treaty left India with a smaller share of water and decades of disputes over hydropower projects, fuelling perceptions of asymmetry. The 2025 suspension marked a decisive shift, treating water as a strategic instrument rather than a purely cooperative resource. The suspension of the treaty was framed not as a permanent withdrawal but as “holding it in abeyance” until Pakistan “credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism”. This terminology was carefully chosen to maintain a level of international legitimacy while signalling that the era of separating “blood and water” was over.


In the year since India suspended the IWT, the rivers themselves continue to flow unchanged, but the institutional framework around them has been fundamentally altered. The most immediate impact was the removal of Pakistan’s effective veto over Indian projects on the Western Rivers. Freed from treaty constraints, India has stopped sharing technical data, gained design autonomy for hydropower infrastructure, and aligned river management with domestic energy needs rather than treaty schedules.


The Chenab River has emerged as the centrepiece of India’s post-IWT suspension water strategy, given its critical importance to Pakistan’s Punjab province. With nearly three-fourths of Pakistan’s water originating from Western Rivers flowing through Indian-administered territory, India has prioritized the “Chenab Cascade” of hydropower projects. In early 2026, the Central Government set strict commissioning deadlines for four major dams. The Pakal Dul project, India’s first storage dam on a Western tributary, is slated for completion by December 2026. Ratle dam, fast-tracked after bypassing treaty hurdles, is expected to begin generation by May 2026. Kiru, part of an integrated river chain, targets December 2026, while Kwar, designed for grid stability, is scheduled for March 2028. Together, these projects signal a decisive strategic shift. The Pakal Dul project represents a critical inflection point. Unlike “run-of-the-river” projects that must release water as it comes, Pakal Dul has a significant storage component. This allows India, for the first time, to regulate the timing of water flows into Pakistan. In a post-IWT environment, this storage can be used to hold water during the lean season or release it in a manner that maximizes Indian power needs, effectively placing the “tap” in New Delhi’s hands.


India’s suspension of the IWT has revived long-stalled mega projects on the Eastern Rivers, with a clear focus on eliminating cross-border flows. The Ujh Multipurpose Project, first envisioned in the 1920s, finally received approval in March 2026 for a Rs. 11,000 crore plan. With a storage capacity of 900 million cubic meter (MCM), it will irrigate 90,000 hectares in Jammu & Kashmir, divert 400 MCM to Punjab’s Ranjit Sagar Dam, and serve national security by sealing infiltration routes. Equally significant is the Shahpur Kandi Barrage, now in its final commissioning phase, set for completion by September 2026. Together, these projects aim to ensure India fully utilizes its Eastern Rivers allocation, closing historic gaps in water use.


Despite India’s assertive policy shift, the reality of water control remains constrained by infrastructure and institutional limits. India’s lack of large storage reservoirs on the Western Rivers means run-of-the-river projects cannot significantly alter flows to Pakistan. Pakal Dul is only a modest first step. Hydropower construction in the fragile Himalayas also faces long gestation periods, with landslides and seismic risks slowing progress despite political urgency. Finally, internal disputes over water sharing among Indian states and the need to build new administrative frameworks add layers of friction. Together, these factors explain why the transition from treaty regime to strategic control is necessarily gradual.


Fundamental Change

The suspension of the IWT has not altered the physical flow of rivers, but it has fundamentally reshaped India’s water governance. Four areas stand out. First, speed of execution: clearances that once dragged on for years are now processed within weeks, as seen with the Ujh project. Second, design freedom: engineers are no longer bound by restrictive treaty annexures, enabling deeper foundations and larger spillways for more efficient power generation. Third, operational flexibility: the Chenab projects are now managed as a coordinated cascade, allowing synchronized releases to stabilize the Northern Grid. Finally, strategic posture: India has explicitly linked water to national security, signalling that the treaty is no longer sacrosanct and compelling Pakistan to intensify its monitoring efforts.


Despite the bold rhetoric of the past year, the suspension of the IWT has not yet translated into dramatic changes on the ground. Large-scale irrigation gains remain distant, with projects like Ujh years away from delivering water to the promised 90,000 hectares due to incomplete canal networks. Similarly, no significant diversion of flows has occurred; during the 2025–26 lean season, water entering Pakistan’s Punjab via the Chenab and Jhelum remained consistent with historical averages, underscoring India’s limited storage capacity. Immediate economic benefits are also absent, as the capital-intensive expansion of hydropower and irrigation infrastructure continues to strain the exchequer. Real dividends, both agricultural and electrical, are unlikely before 2027, highlighting the slow pace of transformation.


From India’s perspective, the suspension of the IWT has been framed as a decisive domestic victory, signalling resolve against terrorism while accelerating long-delayed infrastructure projects in Jammu and Kashmir. It also reinforces India’s claim to equitable and reasonable utilization under international water law, even as it risks criticism for breaching the “no-harm rule.” For Pakistan, however, the abeyance represents an existential crisis. Without treaty guarantees, its reliance on seasonal rainfall and Indian release patterns has deepened vulnerabilities tied to groundwater depletion and limited storage. Islamabad’s appeals to the UN have yielded little leverage. Beyond South Asia, the move has unsettled other transboundary basins, with China closely observing whether India’s precedent could justify unilateral actions on the Brahmaputra.


Regional Balance

One year after the suspension of the IWT, the regional balance has been decisively altered. The past twelve months have shown that while rivers cannot be stopped overnight, the legal and political foundations for eventual control can be laid with remarkable speed. By rejecting a World Bank–brokered settlement, India signalled its resolve to defend national interests and demonstrated the courage to take a drastic step. The true test now lies in ensuring smooth, efficient execution of planned projects so that administrative momentum translates into tangible outcomes. For Punjab, where groundwater depletion is already acute, harnessing additional river flows could ease shortages and strengthen long-term resource security. This strategic shift promises not only geopolitical leverage but also distinct agricultural benefits, though its success will depend on time’s critical test.


(The writer is a Chartered Accountant with a leading company in Mumbai. Views personal.)

Comments


bottom of page