Consider ground realities, remember Pahalgam attack: Supreme Court tells petitioners seeking restoration of J&K Statehood

The Hindu

3 days ago

The Supreme Court on Thursday (August 14, 2025) asked petitioners, seeking direction to the Union government to make good its promise to restore Jammu and Kashmir's Statehood, to be aware of 'ground realities' like the Pahalgam terror attack.
Appearing before a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, petitioners, represented by senior advocates Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Menaka Guruswamy, repeatedly drew the attention of the court to the assurance given by the Union government to restore Jammu and Kashmir as a State.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the Centre, said it was questionable why the petitioners have come at 'this stage' of events, wondered whether their intent was to 'muddy the waters' in that part of the country.
EXPLAINED | Supreme Court's verdict upholding the abrogation of Article 370
The court sought a response from the Centre and posted the case for hearing after eight weeks.
Mr. Mehta said the Centre had assured the court that it would hold elections in Jammu and Kashmir. 'This was fulfilled,' the top law officer said. 'Several considerations have to be seen into for the restoration of Statehood,' he submitted.
The CJI turned to the petitioners to observe that 'you have to take into consideration the ground realities... Remember what happened in Pahalgam'.
Also Read | Supreme Court dismisses pleas to review Article 370 judgment
The plea, filed by Zahoor Ahmed Bhat and activist Khurshid Ahmad Malik, had pointed out that the apex court had, in its 2023 judgment, while upholding the abrogation, merely accepted the assurance of the Centre to restore Statehood to Jammu and Kashmir 'at the earliest'. They had pointed out that the Assembly polls were held peacefully.
'Therefore, there is no impediment of security concerns, violence or any other disturbances which would hinder or prevent the grant/restoration of the status of Statehood to Jammu and Kashmir as had been assured by the Union of India in the present proceedings,' the petitioners had argued.
They argued that the lack of restoration of Statehood in a time-bound manner amounted to a violation of federalism, which was part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution.
In its 2023 verdict, a Constitution Bench of the apex court had unanimously upheld the power of the President to abrogate Article 370 in August 2019, leading to the reorganisation of the full-fledged State of Jammu and Kashmir to two Union Territories and denuding it of its special privileges.
The five-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud (now retired) had confirmed that the President could 'unilaterally issue a notification that Article 370 ceases to exist'.
The court held that the President had the power to abrogate Article 370 if 'special circumstances warrant a special solution'.
The judgment had reasoned that the abrogation of Article 370 was the culmination of a 'gradual and collaborative exercise' spread over the past 70 years between the Centre and the State to integrate Jammu and Kashmir with the Union. The objective of the integration process was to make the entirety of the rights and obligations enshrined in the Indian Constitution applicable to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.