Home News After hearing the petitions challenging the decision to revoke Article 370, the Supreme Court of India, consisting of five judges, has kept its verdict secure

After hearing the petitions challenging the decision to revoke Article 370, the Supreme Court of India, consisting of five judges, has kept its verdict secure

by khushahal vishwakarma
article 370

This landmark case concerning the revocation of Article 370 has seen extensive legal deliberations, and now, it awaits the Supreme Court’s judgment.

For 16 days, the bench, including India’s Chief Justice Dipak Misra, listened to arguments from both sides – the petitioners and the central government. The case, which had been pending for more than three years, finally saw its conclusion.

One of the petitioners, Hasnain Masoodi, a leader of the National Conference and a proponent of revocation, expressed satisfaction with the arguments presented. He stated, “We are content with the evidence we presented. Solid arguments were made on all aspects.”

Also read – Hearing of Article 370 Case: Jammu and Kashmir’s Status Not ‘Permanent’ Union Territory, Government Informs SC.

The hearing began on August 2nd and continued for 16 days, during which extensive arguments and discussions were presented by both sides in the top court. According to Live Law, the petitioners’ lawyers argued for the first nine days. During the arguments, lawyers discussed the nature of Jammu and Kashmir’s relationship with India and emphasized that the then-Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir did not cede his internal sovereignty to the Dominion of India.

In response, the central government argued that the revocation of Article 370 resolved the ‘psychological dilemma’ of the people of Jammu and Kashmir and was not revoked earlier due to the apprehensions of discrimination against the people there. The government further argued that the framers of India’s Constitution had considered Article 370 as a ‘temporary’ provision and wanted it to be ‘abrogated.’

Prominent senior advocates, including Kapil Sibal, Zafar Shah, Gopal Subramanium, Rajeev Dhavan, Dushyant Dave, and Dinesh Dwivedi, argued on behalf of the petitioners. The central government was represented by India’s Attorney General, K.K. Venugopal, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, and Additional Solicitor General K.M. Natraj, defending the decision.

Don’t Miss – Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping not participating in the G20 Summit in India? Explanation

You may also like

Leave a Comment