New Delhi: A group of judges from the Supreme Court, known as the Constitution Bench, resumed their session on the day to continue hearing a set of petitions that challenge the weakening of Article 370. This provision had previously granted status to Jammu and Kashmir within the Indian Constitution. The bench overseeing these proceedings consists of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud along with Justices SK Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai and Surya Kant.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal presented arguments on behalf of those challenging the changes. He emphasized the significance of consulting or seeking agreement based on the Instrument of Accession (IoA) or matters related to shared responsibilities. Referring to a judgment by a Constitution Bench Sibal highlighted that the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir did not intend for Article 370 to be eliminated.
Furthermore, Sibal critically analyzed the governor’s decision to impose Article 356 underlining that as a figurehead, the governor does not possess powers. He also questioned why it took long for this issue to be addressed since November 21 2018, when the assembly was dissolved—especially considering it is now August 2023. Sibal argued that such actions are not in line with what Article 356 stands for.
In his arguments, Sibal emphasized that the actions taken under Article 356 appear to contradict the principles of federalism, democracy and constitutional morality. He concluded by questioning the process in which the central Parliament assumes the role of spokesperson for the people of Jammu & Kashmir without consulting the residents of the state.