The whole thing is frankly ridiculous
In order for an independent country to succeed alone they need to have certain things in place like their own currency (or an agreement) which requires a minting, their own national banking system, their own fully functioning military, infrastructure of their own for their military (meaning planes, tanks, weaponry, uniforms, training system, and most importantly soldiers / airforce personnel and navy ships etc if they are on a coastline). They need their own energy act and means to produce power, a constitution, functioning system of government which can never be a theocracy), enough funds to function in world stage and give their part to UN etc.
A state can't just vote to leave a country and then take all of the resources that it has from that country with them. In Canada we had a referendum (questionable whether it was even legal) in Quebec. The people in Quebec thought they would automatically get to keep all the Canadian Forces military bases and infrastructure, etc. But they would not. They also thought they'd et all the land that currently comprises Quebec. Also wrong. As a good portion belongs to the aboriginals and that area is all the area which contains the natural resources like forestry etc. So the French would have had one small area surrounding Quebec City and Montreal in the end, and Canadian forces etc would have been removed from there. France expressed no wishes to take on This new Quebec if it had come to that. Point being, they would not have survived as a country as they had no means to.
Something to think about. Maybe fighting for more rights for identity while still belonging to India would be better than trying to form a whole new country that another nation (likely pak) could just come steal by force since there would be no real protection anymore. Lesser of two evils.