[ad_1]
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday delivered its verdict on a batch of petitions, including those filed by National Conference and People’s Democratic Party, challenging the validity of the Centre’s 2019 decisions to scrap the nearly 70-year-old special status for J&K under Article 370 and its bifurcation into two Union Territories.
The five-judge constitution bench, led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and comprised of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, and Surya Kant, conducted hearings spanning 16 days over a 35-day period, with the verdict being reserved on September 5, after commencing on August 2.
The Chief Justice, in delivering the Supreme Court’s verdict, highlighted the key points of the decision.
Here are the key points
The five-judge constitution bench, led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and comprised of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, and Surya Kant, conducted hearings spanning 16 days over a 35-day period, with the verdict being reserved on September 5, after commencing on August 2.
The Chief Justice, in delivering the Supreme Court’s verdict, highlighted the key points of the decision.
Here are the key points
- There is a unanimous verdict by a five-judge bench on petitions challenging Centre’s 2019 decisions to scrap special status for Jammu & Kashmir under Article 370.
CJI D Y Chandrachud says there are three judgements by the five-judge bench on the issue.- The SC need not adjudicate on validity of presidential proclamation in J&K as petitioners have not challenged it.
- Reading out the judgment, CJI said that the petitioners contention that Centre cannot take any decision during proclamation under Article 356 is not acceptable.
- Jammu and Kashmir did not retain element of sovereignty after joining India
- Jammu and Kashmir became an integral part of India as reflected in Articles 1 and 370
- SC says
Article 370 was a temporary provision. Article370 of Constitution was interim arrangement due to war conditions in state - Article 370 was meant for constitutional integration of J&K with Union and it was not for disintegration and the President can declare that Art 370 ceases to exit
- Constituent Assembly of J&K was never intended to be permanent body. When Constituent assembly of J&K ceased to exist, special condition for which Article 370 was introduced ceased to exist
- After abrogation of Article 370, the constitution of J&K has become inoperative and serves no purpose
- SC directs Election Commission to take steps to conduct election for legislative assembly and orders that statehood should be restored
- We hold the President seeking concurrence of Union and not State is valid, all provisions of Indian Constitution can be applied to J&K
[ad_2]
Source link