The five-judge Supreme Court bench comprising CJI D Y Chandrachud gave the much-anticipated verdict, declaring the abrogation of Article 370 made by the BJP-led Central Government in 2019 as constitutionally valid. Prime Minister Narendra Modi called the judgment “a beacon of hope.”
New Delhi: Monday morning ignited a mix of emotions in the nation as the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the abrogation of Article 370, which conferred special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir. The verdict was made by a five-judge Constitution bench consisting of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, stating that provision under the article was temporary.
The other members of the bench were Justices S K Kaul, Sanjeev Khanna, B R Gavai and Surya Kant. The court was hearing a petition questioning the validity of the two Presidential Orders CO (The Constitution (Application To Jammu and Kashmir) Order) 272 and 273 of August 5 and 6, 2019 respectively, by which the entire Constitution of India was made applicable to Jammu and Kashmir.
Pronouncing the verdict, the court stated that the President’s excercise of power under Article 356 in order to bring about the abrogation and seeking of content of the Union and not of legislature cannot be considered “malafide” and thus valid. Since the petitioners hadn’t challenged the presidential proclamation’s validity, the apex court didn’t review the same. The court also refused to reverse the reorganisation of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories–Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.
Article 370 Explained
Article 370 of the Indian Constitution granted special autonomy to the region of Jammu and Kashmir. It conferred a considerable degree of autonomy, allowing the state to have its own constitution and decision-making powers, with a few exceptions such as in matters of defence, communications, and foreign affairs. The abrogation of Article 370, which took place in August 2019, removed the special status of Jammu and Kashmir and integrated it more closely with the rest of India.
The five-judge bench hearing petition on abrogation of Article 370 Source: X
Major Aspects examined by the Supreme Court
- Whether Article 370 is permanent
- Whether the entire Constitution applies to Jammu and Kashmir
- Whether the abrogation stands despite no recommendation being made by constituent assembly of Jammu and Kashmir.
- Whether the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 has validity without consent of the legislature.
Important Observations by the Supreme Court
- Every state is subordinate to the Constitution of India. The state’s own constitution comes secondary. The Constitution is applicable to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir.
- Article 370 is a temporary arrangement due to war conditions in the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir.
- A review of the reorganisation is not required as the Centre plans to restore statehood.
- The restoration of statehood should take place at the earliest.
- Electionss to assemblies should take place by September 30, 2024.
- The government should set up a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to review human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir
Reacting to the verdict, Prime Minister Narendra Modi stated that it has enhanced constitutional integration. According to him, the verdict fortified the ‘Ek Bharat, Shreshtha Bharat’ spirit and the “bond of togetherness” among Indians. Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath termed the judgment on Articles 370 and 35 A as “commendable.”
Former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, commenting on the verdict, said that he was “disappointed but not disheartened.” DPAP President and former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Ghulam Nabi Azad, described the abrogation of provisions under Article 370 “sad and unfortunate.” Asaduddin Owaisi, President of AIMIM, also expressed his dissatisfaction with the Supreme Court verdict.
