The Supreme Court of India has reserved their orders for the abrogation of Article 370 of The Constitution of India to be transferred to a larger bench. The bench consisted of five Judges which includes Justices NV Ramana, SK Paul, R Shubhash Reddy, BR Gavi, and Surya Kant and the fourth day; Senior Counsel Parkeh finished his arguments which followed with the arguments from the Senior Advocate Zafar Ahmed Shah representing the Bar Association of Jammu and Kashmir. The Respondent was represented by Attorney General KK Venugopal and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, respectively. However, there are other parties involved in this case which was represented by Senior Advocates like Rajeev Dhavan and Chander Uday, who opined that the case needs to be transferred to a larger bench. It was the order of President of India which paved the way for the abrogation of Article 370 of The Constitution of India and superseded The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) order, 1954. The provision of 1954 consisted of those subjects which shall not be applicable in the territory of Jammu and Kashmir.
There is no denying the fact, The Government of India’s decision to curb the Internet in that territory is a wrong step as they have denied a basic Fundamental Rights to use the Internet and couldn’t connect with their loved ones for more than 173 days, as they are a necessity for each and every one. The executive to overcome the hurdle of the Constituent Assembly as mentioned in Article 370, ceased to exist till the 1950s. Thereby, there was an amendment in Article 367 which transformed the reference of the Constituent Assembly to the Legislative Assembly. The passing of the Reorganization of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, 2019 did separate the State into two halves and gave authentication to Ladakh as Union Territory. Furthermore, The Governor of the State shall be referred to as Lieutenant- Governor for the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh and their period will be determined by the President of India. There will be an amendment in The Representation of People, 1956 to mention the seats allocated to these Union Territories in the House of People, that will five and one, respectively.
- The first day of the argument took place on 10th December 2019 and continued the following day, before the court went for winter-break.
- No requirement for reference was said by the Attorney- General, and Solicitor-General of India.
- The removal of Article 370(3) did seize the autonomy of the State of Jammu and Kashmir.
- This practice is as controversial as the passing of The Citizenship Act (Amendment), 2019 which against the provision of reasonable classification interpreted in Article 14, The Constitution of India.
- Senior Advocate Parekh did highlight the word Sovereignty in the Instrument of Accession which has been repeated many times in the Act.
- Whereas, Justice Ramana asked Advocate Parekh to focus on the issue at hand and not on the merits of Article 370.
Edited by J. Madonna Jephi
Approved & Published – Sakshi Raje
- Bar & Bench, Abrogation of Article 370: Live updates from the Supreme Court [Day 4] https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/abrogation-of-article-370-live-updates-from-the-supreme-court-day-4
- Bar & Bench, One Constitution for India and Jammu & Kashmir: Read Presidential Declaration under Article 370(3) that ceases Article 370 https://www.barandbench.com/news/read-presidential-declaration-under-article-370-3-that-ceases-article-370
- Ministry of Law and Justice, The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 http://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2019/210407.pdf
- Times of India, Article 370: SC reserves order on referring pleas to a larger bench https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/article-370-sc-reserves-order-on-referring-pleas-to-a-larger-bench/articleshow/73569000.cms
- Live Mint, Abrogation of Article 370: SC reserves order on reference to a larger bench https://www.livemint.com/news/india/abrogation-of-article-370-sc-reserves-order-on-reference-to-a-larger-bench-11579783473017.html