The Supreme Court, deemed the Union government’s 2019 decision to revoke Article 370, granting special status to the former state of Jammu and Kashmir, constitutionally valid.
Chaired by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, the five-judge Constitution bench, including Justices S K Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, and Surya Kant, not only affirmed the validity of the abrogation but also instructed the Centre to restore statehood and conduct Legislative Assembly elections.
In three distinct judgments, Chief Justice Chandrachud, alongside Justices Gavai and Surya Kant, rendered one opinion. Justice Kaul provided a concurring judgment, while Justice Khanna concurred with the other two verdicts.
The ruling clarified that the State of Jammu and Kashmir did not retain any element of sovereignty after the Instrument of Accession and the Proclamation dated 25 November 1949, adopting the Indian Constitution. Article 370, viewed as a feature of asymmetric federalism, did not confer sovereignty but rather represented a temporary provision.
Addressing challenges to proclamations, the court underscored that the petitioners failed to challenge Proclamations under Section 92 of the Jammu and Kashmir Constitution and Article 356 of the Indian Constitution until after the abrogation of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status. The court found no merit in adjudicating challenges to proclamations, emphasizing that the focus should be on actions taken post-abrogation.
Furthermore, the court held that Parliament’s power under Article 356(1)(b) could not be restricted solely to law-making, rejecting interpretations inconsistent with the article’s text. The historical context indicated that Article 370 was a temporary provision, and the power under Article 370(3) did not cease upon the Constituent Assembly’s dissolution.
The court clarified that Article 370 could not be amended by exercising power under Article 370(1)(d), and the President’s actions under Article 370(1)(d) were deemed not mala fide. The President had the power to declare Article 370(3) inoperative without the Constituent Assembly’s recommendation, and the Constitution of India, after its full application to Jammu and Kashmir, rendered the state’s constitution redundant.
Regarding the formation of the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, the court upheld Parliament’s power under the first proviso to Article 3 as valid. The decision to carve out the Union Territory of Ladakh was deemed valid, and the court, considering the Solicitor General’s statement, did not delve into the reorganization’s permissibility.
Finally, the court directed the Election Commission of India to conduct Legislative Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir by September 30, 2024 and urged the restoration of statehood at the earliest opportunity.
