Vidushi Vats
The Supreme Court bench, consisting of Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and Justices S K Kaul, Sanjeev Khanna, B R Gavai, and Surya Kant, has been examining petitions challenging the alterations made to Article 370 in 2019. After the removal of its special status, the region of Jammu and Kashmir was restructured into the Union Territories of J&K and Ladakh.
The bench had inquired with the government about the schedule for holding elections in J&K and whether there was a defined timeline for reinstating statehood.
On August 31st, the Central government notified the Supreme Court of its preparedness to hold elections in Jammu and Kashmir without any delay. However, the Centre clarified that it cannot provide a precise schedule for the restoration of statehood to the Union Territory.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, while emphasizing the provisional nature of J&K’s Union Territory status, conveyed this message to a Constitution Bench consisting of five judges:
“My instructions are: I am unable to give the exact period right now about complete statehood while saying that the UT status is temporary. Because of the peculiar circumstances the state passed through with repeated and consistent disturbances of decades, it might take some time.”
He added, “The Central government is ready for elections any time now. To date, updating of the voter list has been going on, and is substantially over. Some part is remaining. That the Election Commission is doing. (It) will be a call taken by the UT Election Commission and Election Commission of India together.”
He mentioned that there are three impending elections in Jammu and Kashmir, and these involve the implementation of the three-tier Panchayati Raj system introduced after the events of 2019.
“So, the first election will be that of panchayats. The District Development Council elections have already taken place. The Leh (Hill Development Council) elections are over. The Kargil HDC election is in September. The process is already on. This is the position as of today. The second election will be the municipality elections. And the third would be the Legislative Assembly elections. It (J&K) is UT with a legislature,” he said.
Comparing figures for 2018 and 2023, he said, “Terrorist-initiated instances reduced by 45.2 per cent… Infiltration, which was a major problem in J&K, was reduced by 90.2 per cent, and stone-pelting etc. reduced by 97.2 per cent… The casualty of security persons has reduced by 65.9 per cent. These are all figures relevant to the decision.”
Justice Kaul expressed that, for the court’s current deliberations, the matter is not particularly pertinent or significant.
During the proceedings, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing some of the petitioners, interjected and inquired whether the court was considering the facts presented by the Solicitor General, asserting that these details were not relevant to the case’s resolution. He indicated that if the court was indeed considering these factors, the petitioners would also like to provide their perspective to counter them.
The Chief Justice of India (CJI) clarified that the statements made by Mehta were made in response to the bench’s inquiries regarding the path to statehood. He emphasized that these statements would not impact the court’s decision on the legal issue currently under consideration.