Polls in J-K can be held anytime now: Centre to SC

NEW DELHI: The Centre on Thursday told the Supreme Court that with most of the work on the voters’ list completed, elections can be held in Jammu and Kashmir "anytime from now". The Union government, however, told the top court that it cannot "give the exact time period" when J&K’s statehood can be restored but reiterated that its Union territory status is "temporary".

Solicitor-general Tushar Mehta told a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud, hearing the petitions challenging the amendments made to Article 370, that it is ready for elections in the UT and that the Election Commission has to take a call on specific dates.

Mr Mehta said : "My instructions are that I am unable to give the exact time period right now about complete statehood while saying the UT status is temporary. Because of the peculiar circumstances the state has passed through with repeated and consistent disturbances for decades, it might take some time."

Mr Mehta told the bench, also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai and Surya Kant, that elections in J&K will be held in three stages -- first panchayat polls, the second municipal polls and the third Legislative Assembly polls. "There are three elections that are due. For the first time, the three-tier panchayati raj system has been introduced. First, elections will be for panchayats. District development council elections have already taken place. The Leh elections are over. For the Kargil Hill Development Council, the elections will be held by the end of this month. Then there will be municipality elections and then the Legislative Assembly elections... J&K is a Union territory with a legislature."

On the statehood issue, Mr Mehta said he had already made a statement. That apart, Union home minister Amit Shah said on the floor of Parliament that "UT is a temporary thing in J&K".

 

"We are dealing with an extremely extraordinary situation," the S-G said, adding, "The exact time frame for the restoration of complete statehood in J&K cannot be given at the moment. It might take some time. Various steps are being taken to restore the status of the state in Jammu and Kashmir."

 

While the National Conference (NC) described Mr Mehta's submissions in the top court as a tactic to divert attention from the main issue of the challenge to the legality of the Centre's August 5, 2019 decisions, other political parties said the remarks were fallacious, a joke and similar to the Centre's stand over the last few years.

NC spokesperson Imran Nabi Dar said: "We did not go to the Supreme Court asking for elections. Our basic petition is against the unilateral and unconstitutional decisions taken on August 5, 2019. What the S-G has told the Supreme Court bench is a tactic to divert attention from the main issue, which is the August 5 decisions, and we will confine ourselves to that."

People's Democratic Party chief spokesperson Suhail Bukhari said neither the restoration of statehood nor the conduct of the Assembly polls are essential priorities for the party. "We want to witness how the Supreme Court decides on the constitutional validity of the abrogation of Article 370, which we believe was unconstitutional and illegal. We are satisfied with the cogent manner in which the case of the people of Jammu and Kashmir has been pleaded by the legal luminaries of the country."

Jammu and Kashmir People's Conference chairman Sajad Lone said the submissions made by Mr Mehta were not different from the statements that came from the Centre on the issue over the last four years. "I am disappointed, not because of Jammu and Kashmir, but partly because of the judiciary. This is the highest pedestal of the judiciary and if it asks a question and the answer is the same and as ambiguous and evasive as it was four years ago, then I think it is a matter of concern," he told the media.

In the apex court, Mr Mehta said that terror-related incidents had gone down by 45.2 per cent when compared to 2018. He said that infiltration, which was one of the biggest concerns in the erstwhile state, is down by 90.2 per cent.

Citing more data, Mr Mehta said, "Incidents of stone pelting and hartals, which were 1,767 in 2018, are now nil. The casualties of security personnel have gone down by 60.9 per cent; organised bandhs, which were coordinated by secessionist groups, have gone down from 52 in 2018 to nil in 2023."

For the restoration of statehood, Mr Mehta said several steps are being taken and investments of around '7,000 crores have been promised, out of which over '2,000 crores have already been made.

The S-G said several projects are underway and out of the 53 Pradhan Mantri Development Projects, 32 have been completed. "Peace does not merely come by policing," he told the bench, which was recording the figures given by him.

Mr Mehta added that, as far as Ladakh is concerned, there are two areas -- Leh and Kargil. For Leh, the elections for the hill development council are over but for Kargil, they will be held next month.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for NC leader Mohd Akbar Lone, objected to the bench recording the figure given by the Central government. He said it should not be taken on record as it will "affect the mind" of the court, which is adjudicating the constitutional issue of Article 370.

The CJI assured Mr Sibal that whatever data the solicitor-general has given will not have any bearing on the constitutional issue being adjudicated by the five-judge bench.

"What he has given is in pursuance of the court's query and what steps the Union of India has taken to restore electoral democracy. We should be fair to the solicitor-general as he has only given the roadmap," the bench said, adding, "The nature of the development, which the government says took place post-August 2019, may not be relevant to your constitutional challenge and therefore, what they respond to the constitutional challenge has to be dealt with independently."

Mr Sibal told the bench that even otherwise, the petitioners will have to counter these facts being brought on record by the Centre. "They are saying there were zero hartals. Over 5,000 people were put under house arrest. How will there be hartals, when you don’t allow them to go to the hospital? The proceedings of this court are televised and these figures may aid in creating an opinion," he said.

The CJI told Mr Sibal: "These are matters where there can and should be policy differences, but that can't affect the constitutional arguments. We place these facts in the perspective of the roadmap to the statehood of J&K. This isn't a justification and cannot be to a constitutional challenge."

On August 29, the Centre had told the top court that the Union territory status of Jammu and Kashmir is not a "permanent" and that it will make an elaborate statement on the vexatious political issue in court on August 31.

The five-judge constitution bench, hearing the pleas challenging the abrogation of Article 370, had asked the Centre to set a specific time frame for the restoration of electoral democracy in the erstwhile state. "The Union territory status of Jammu and Kashmir is not a permanent thing. So far as Ladakh is concerned, its UT status is going to remain for some time," Mr Mehta had told the court.