The Supreme Court will pronounce its verdict on Monday on a batch of petitions challenging the abrogation of the provisions of Article 370. The Centre on August 5, 2019 abrogated the provisions of Article 370 of the Constitution, which bestowed a particular standing on the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir. The petitioners appealed to the highest court docket to study whether or not the Centre’s transfer was constitutionally legitimate.
A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud will ship the verdict today.Â
According to the trigger record for December 11 (Monday), uploaded on the apex court docket’s web site, the opposite members of the bench are Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai and Surya Kant.
Verdict to be introduced after 16-day listening to
The apex court docket reserved its verdict in the matter on September 5 after a 16-day listening to.
Who did argue in the court docket for the Centre?
The Supreme Court heard Attorney General R Venkataramani, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, senior advocates Harish Salve, Rakesh Dwivedi, V Giri and others on behalf of the Centre and the intervenors defending the abrogation of the provisions of Article 370.
Advocates on behalf of petitioners
Senior advocates, together with Kapil Sibal, Gopal Subramanium, Rajeev Dhavan, Zaffar Shah and Dushyant Dave, had argued on behalf of the petitioners.
Argument on constitutional validity of abrogation
The attorneys had dwelt on varied points, together with the constitutional validity of the Centre’s choice to abrogate the provisions of Article 370, the validity of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, which break up the erstwhile state into two Union territories, challenges to the imposition of the governor’s rule in Jammu and Kashmir on June 20, 2018 and the imposition of the president’s rule on December 19, 2018 and its extension on July 3, 2019.
The petitions challenging the abrogation of the provisions of Article 370 and the validity of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 that divided the erstwhile state into the Union territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh have been referred to the Constitution bench in 2019.
The arguments in the matter had commenced on August 2.
During the listening to, the apex court docket had requested who can advocate the revocation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir when no constituent Assembly, the concurrence of which is required earlier than taking such a step, exists there.
The prime court docket had additionally requested how can a provision (Article 370), which was particularly talked about as momentary in the Constitution, develop into everlasting after the tenure of the Jammu and Kashmir constituent Assembly got here to an finish in 1957.
Some of the petitioners opposing the repeal of Article 370 had argued that the availability couldn’t have been abrogated because the time period of the Jammu and Kashmir constituent Assembly ended in 1957 after it drafted the erstwhile state’s Constitution.
With the constituent Assembly having develop into extinct, Article 370 acquired a everlasting standing, that they had stated.
The Centre had argued that there was no “constitutional fraud” in annulling the availability that accorded the particular standing to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir.
(With PTI inputs)
