More than four years after Article 370 was repealed and Jammu and Kashmir was divided into the Union territories of J&K and Ladakh, the Supreme Court ruled that the President’s use of his authority was lawful.
The five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court delivered the decision, declaring that the President’s 2019 order to revoke Jammu and Kashmir’s special status was lawful.
A five-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud rendered a unanimous decision on a number of appeals contesting the repeal of Article 370, according to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court, while pronouncing the verdict on the abrogation of Article 370 on Monday, said elections should be held in Jammu and Kashmir by September 2024 and statehood shall be restored as soon as possible.
According to the Chief Justice of India (CJI), no action taken by the Center can be contested. He declared that Jammu and Kashmir is an essential component of India and that the court was not qualified to decide whether the government order was lawful.
According to the Supreme Court, Article 370 is meant to be used as a stopgap measure and an interim procedure.
The Supreme Court ruled that because of the state of war, Article 370 was only a temporary solution. The CJI, reading the ruling, stated, “Textual reading also indicates that Article 370 is a temporary provision.”
“Article 370 doesn’t freeze Jammu and Kashmir integration. Article 370 is for integration and not disintegration.”
The Supreme Court delivered its verdict on the constitutional validity of the abrogation of Article 370, which had accorded special status to Jammu and Kashmir.
A five-judge Constitution Bench, comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, and Surya Kant, delivered the verdict. This bench was tasked with deciding on a series of petitions that challenged the Centre’s decision to revoke Article 370.
