Would Indian independence make naval infrastructure a bad investment?

Did the risk of Indian independence make investment in naval infrastructure there too dangerous?

Not necessarily: interwar planners expected a gradual transition toward an allied, dominion-like India, so the facilities could provide decades of service and remain strategically useful after independence.

British planning anticipated a gradual movement toward dominion-style independence rather than the immediate loss of a hostile base. Infrastructure could remain useful for decades and support an allied India, much as facilities in Australia continued to serve wider imperial defense. Major docks also have long construction and service lives, so planners evaluated them across political changes rather than against one immediate crisis. Decision-makers could regard even a later loss of access as acceptable after receiving years of value from a dry dock.