The Supreme court of India is hearing the petitions challenging Article 370 abrogation for day 7 on Thursday.
Today Advocate Dushyant Dave will continue his arguments that he began on Wednesday after senior advocate Dr. Dhavan.
Earlier, advocates Kapil Sibal, Zaffar Shah and Gopal Subramaniam challenged the abrogation of the articles that granted special status to Jammu Kashmir.
The Central Government has told the court to not consider rolling back the government decision to abrogate Article 370 as it would be against national interest. Smriti Irani, union minister told the Parliament that people of Kashmir will not get back Article 370.
Throughout the hearings that begun on August 02, various politicians, lawyers, civil society members have visited the supreme court to participate in the proceedings of the apex court.
The matter is being heard by a five judge Constitutional bench presided over by the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud.
CJI told the court that the defendants (Government) will be heard on Tuesday and will be given a chance to defend the legality of the decision the Government took on August 05, 2019 to abrogate the articles 35 a and 370.
On Wednesday, Former chief minister of Jammu Kashmir Mehbooba Mufti and former Minister Sajad Lone were among those who were at the Supreme court.
The Kashmiriyat has been providing you constant updates from the proceedings.
Live updates
1030 A.M: Advocate Dave begins his arguments, You persuade citizens of a state, – at that time an independent state to accede to you. They agree. The Mahraja requested but he expressly asked for this protection.
1045 A.M: Constituent Assembly said that they wanted to continue with Article 370 and that was accepted by President of India. It was an exercise finalized and not intended to be done over and again.
11 20 A.M: Even the Constituent Assembly could not do it again. Let us suppose they passed a resolution later saying they did not want to be part of India? Was that permissible? No.!
It is travesty of justice if GOI says that governor can act on it.
11:40 A.M: The article is not just text. It is the feelings and aspirations of people of Jammu Kashmir.
11:50 A.M: Advocate Dave continues, Clause 1 (b) of the Article 370 deals with legislative powers of the parliament to make laws regarding Jammu Kashmir. It also prescribes limitations on that behalf. Under Pata 1 (sub clause B), parliament has power to make laws regarding the state in matters of union and concurrent list which president has take concurrence from state in regards to the instrument of accession and in other matters parliament can make laws with the concurrence and consultation from the state.
12:02 P.M: Number of viewers watching the live broadcast has crossed 1K on the Supreme Court’s official channel. Many other channels and Facebook pages are broadcasting the proceeding live.
1230 P.M: Dave: The only reason they abrogated Article 370 was because they told people of India tp vote for them and they will abrogate 370. The power has been exercised for colourable considerations. The actual exercise is fraud with irrelevant considerations. Their manifesto is against the guidelines of Election Commision. In 2015, EC did issued guidelines and said that party manifestos must be as per constitutional scheme, concludes Dave.
1245 P M: Senior Advocate Shekhar Naphade begins his arguments, “Beneath the apparent constitutionality lies patent illegality.”
1250 P M: There are implied limitations on the power to modify. Here you are replacing a fundamental concept of Constituent Assembly with Legislative Assembly. The legislative assembly is a creature or product of Constituent Assembly. So this exercise of August 5 is completely in, argues Shekhar Naphade.
1:00 P.M: The bech rises up for lunch.
2:01 PM: The bench gathers for post lunch headings. Senior Advocate Shekhar Naphade restarts his submissions.
Karan Singh convened the Constituent Assembly. His authority to do so is not questioned. So thus, JK Constitution is a constitutional document. My submission is that no matter how widely you interpret the power under 370(1)(d), core of the J-K Constitution was prevailing and that was part V (executive) and Part VI (legislature) of the Jammu Kashmir Constitution.
2:50 P.M: There is no provision in the Indian constitution which can be used to abrogate Jk constitution. Indian constitution itself recognises Constituent Assembly.
3:03 P.M: The exercise of power under 356 is for collateral purpose. Because ultimately what they want to achieve is to do away with Jammu Kashmir state, continues Advocate Naphade.
3:10 P.M: Guv. dissolved JK assembly was in Nov 2018 and assumed the powers under J&K constitution. And 356 proclamation came in Dec 2018. This proclamation is clearly without jurisdiction.
3:20 P.M: It’s a jurisdictional issue. 356 has been invoked for a collateral purpose. And that is apparent on the face of the record.
3: 25 P.M: Naphade continues: If there is breakdown of state machinery, what is the rational nexus to suspend these provisos? There is an implied limitation on this power. Can you suspend the entire constitution? Because the president has issued a proclamation under 356? Once you accept there are implied limitations, suspension of any part of the Constitution as a result of 356 must have a rationale nexus with the object that is to be achieved. And the object to be achieved is Article 355.
3:35 P.M: The whole constitutional structure is demolished, substantively restructured, advocate Naphade concludes his submissions
Senior Advocate Dinesh Divedi begins his submissions.
3: 45 P.M: After the abrogation, people of the Jammu Kashmir will now only have one legislature both for local and the national issues. Their right to be governed by a dual polity has been taken for a toss.
3:50 P M: All other states, when they merged with India signed a treaty of merger conceding all their powers of legislation, but that wasn’t the case with Jammu Kashmir, advocate Dinesh Divedi continues.