SC To Hear A Batch of Pleas Against Abrogation Of Article 370

The Supreme Court on Tuesday said it will begin day-to-day hearings from August 2 on a batch of petitions challenging the changes made to Article 370 of the Constitution that gave  special status on the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir.

A five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, which took up the batch of petitions to issue directions for fulfilling procedural formalities before the start of the actual hearings, said the hearing of the petitions “shall commence on 2 August at 10.30 am and shall thereafter continue on a day to day (basis) except on miscellaneous days (Mondays and Fridays, when SC hears miscellaneous matters)”.

The bench, also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai and Surya Kant, appointed two lawyers -- one from the petitioner’s side and the government side -- to prepare convenience compilations and file it before July 27 and made it clear that after that date no documents will be accepted.

The apex court also made it clear that the Centre’s affidavit filed on Monday with regard to conditions prevailing after the August 5, 2019 notification in J&K will have no bearing on the constitutional issue to be adjudicated by the Constitution Bench.

In its affidavit, the Centre had said that they have “brought unprecedented development, progress, security and stability to the region, which was often missing during the old Article 370 regime” and that this is “testament to the fact that parliamentary wisdom…” was “exercised prudently”. Justice Chandrachud, however, said that the affidavit on the present status of Jammu and Kashmir would not have any bearing on the constitutional issues raised in the petitions “and shall not be relied upon for that purpose”.

The court also allowed IAS officer Shah Faesal and former student leader Shehla Rashid Shora to withdraw their pleas challenging the scrapping of Article 370 in J&K in 2019 and directed their names be deleted from the list of petitioners.

Soon after senior advocate Raju Ramachandran said Mr Faesal and Ms Rashid have filed applications for withdrawal of their names, solicitor-general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said he has no difficulty if anyone wishes to withdraw his or her name from the list of petitioners.

In a recent Twitter post, Mr Faesal said Article 370 is now a “thing of the past”. “370, for many Kashmiris like me, is a thing of the past. Jhelum and Ganga have merged in the great Indian Ocean for good. There is no going back. There is only marching forward,” he said.

Advocate Manohar Lal Sharma, who has also filed a petition contesting the abrogation, said his was the first case which came before the court and notice was issued on it, but the cause list shows his name in between the cases filed by other petitioners, including some NGOs. The bench then said it will be appropriate for the present case to be titled as “In Re: Article 370 of the Constitution” and this will not create any problem for any party to the matter. The counsel appearing for different groups accepted the suggestion put forth by the bench.

In J&K, National Conference leader Omar Abdullah said he is confident there is a strong case in favour of the restoration of Article 370. “It took four years for the case to get to the Supreme Court. It shows how strong our case is. Had it been weak, believe me, they (Centre) would have started the hearing within weeks. It took so long as the Constitution was blown to pieces on August 5, 2019.”

People's Democratic Party  chief Mehbooba Mufti said the top court's decision not to rely on the Centre’s affidavit on the abrogation of Article 370 vindicates her stand that the BJP-led Union government's move did not have a logical explanation. She, however, expressed apprehension over the top court’s decision to hear the matter on a day-to-day basis. Taking to Twitter, the former J&K chief minister said: “There are legitimate apprehensions about why the SC has taken up the Article 370 with such alacrity after their visit to Kashmir. After remaining silent for four years, the decision to hear the case on a daily basis does evoke misgivings.”

The Centre had on August 5, 2019 issued an order amending the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order 1954, and superseding it with the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order 2019. The new order made “all the provisions of the Constitution” applicable to J&K state. The government also amended Article 367 to add a new Clause (4), making the Constitution of India directly applicable to J&K.

On August 6, the President issued a declaration under Article 370(3) making all its clauses inoperative except the provision that all articles of the Constitution shall apply to J&K.

Several petitions challenging the Centre’s move of abrogating the provisions of Article 370 and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act 2019, which split the erstwhile state into two Union territories -- Jammu and Kashmir, and Ladakh --were referred to a Constitution Bench in 2019.