SC to hear plea for restoring Jammu & Kashmir statehood on August 14
A bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran is likely to hear the matter, according to the causelist.
On December 11, 2023, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the revocation of Article 370, even as it ordered that assembly elections be held in Jammu and Kashmir by September 2024 and its statehood be restored "at the earliest".
Last year, a plea was filed in the top court seeking directions to the Centre for the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir within two months.
The application was filed by Zahoor Ahmad Bhat, an academician, and Khurshaid Ahmad Malik, a socio-political activist.
"It is submitted that the delay in the restoration of statehood would cause serious reduction of democratically elected government in Jammu and Kashmir, causing a grave violation of the idea of federalism which forms part of the basic structure of the Constitution of India," the application said.
The assembly elections and the Lok Sabha polls were conducted peacefully in Jammu and Kashmir without any incident of violence, disturbance or any security concerns being reported, it said.
"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 plea said.
The non-restoration of the status of statehood of Jammu and Kashmir, the plea said, would result in a lesser form of elected democratic government to the state, particularly given legislative assembly results were declared on October 8, 2024.
Despite the apex court's directions for the restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir "at the earliest and as soon as possible", no steps have been taken by the Centre to provide any timeline for the implementation of such directions, it claimed.
"Jammu and Kashmir is being operated as a Union Territory for a period of almost five years now, which has caused many impediments and grave losses to the development of Jammu and Kashmir and has affected the democratic rights of its citizens," the plea added.
In its December 2023 verdict, the apex court held that Article 370, which was incorporated in the Indian Constitution in 1949 to grant special status to Jammu and Kashmir, was a temporary provision. The President of India was empowered to revoke the measure in the absence of the Constituent Assembly of the erstwhile state whose term expired in 1957, the court said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
30 minutes ago
- Mint
Stray dogs case: 71% support Supreme Court order, 24% oppose it, says survey
A Local Circle survey revealed that 71 percent of the total respondents "fully supported' the latest Supreme Court order of removing all stray dogs from Delhi NCR within 8 weeks and moving them into shelters. Only 24 percent of respondents said they "don't support' the order and 5 percent of respondents did not give a clear answer. The survey said the result clearly showed that a large majority of residents of Delhi NCR "are in favour of their municipality executing the two judge bench order." The Local Circle's survey received 12,816 responses from residents of Delhi, Gurugram, Noida, Faridabad and Ghaziabad. As many as 62 percent respondents were men, while 38 percent respondents were women. The Supreme Court on Thursday, 14 August, reserved an order on a prayer seeking an interim stay on the 11 August order, in which the two-judge bench ordered shifting Delhi-NCR stray dogs to shelter homes. During the hearing, the Supreme Court asked local authorities about their position on implementing the Animal Birth Control rules. The three-judge bench headed by Justice Vikram Nath said, "The whole problem is because of inaction of local authorities". The bench, also comprising Justices Sandeep Mehta and N V Anjaria, said everyone who has moved the apex court and filed intervention will have to own responsibility. The hearing on Thursday followed widespread protests against the Supreme Court's earlier order directing the blanket removal of stray dogs from all Delhi—NCR areas. The Supreme Court had passed a slew of directions on August 11 while hearing a suo motu case initiated on July 28 over stray dog bites leading to rabies, particularly among children, in the national capital On August 11, the two-judge bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan observed instances of dog bites had given rise to an 'extremely grim' situation and ordered the permanent relocation of all strays in Delhi-NCR 'at the earliest."
Hans India
30 minutes ago
- Hans India
Stray Dog Matter Set for Fresh Hearing by Supreme Court Bench
The matter was taken up by Chief Justice of India B R Gavai on Wednesday from the two-judge bench which on Tuesday ordered pan-India culling of strays across the National Capital Region (NCR). National Capital Region (NCR) cities' streets, and ordered Supreme Court hearing of the matter on Thursday before a 3-judge Supreme Court bench led by Justice Vikram Nath. Order on removing all strays from Delhi, NCR withdrawn On August 11, a bench of Justice J B Pardiwala had ordered the Delhi government and civic bodies in NCR to resolve the stray dog issue India by capturing the dogs from Delhi, Ghaziabad, Noida, Faridabad, Gurgaon and its outskirts and shifting them to any shelter home or pound within a specified timeframe. Acting on the representations of two counsels - one of them on grounds that the order appeared to be in conflict with an earlier SC judgment by a different bench - Following the request of animal control laws activists, a bench led by CJI Gavai on Wednesday withdrew all existing pet control laws from Pardiwala's bench and sent the case for further hearing to the bench of Justices Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N V Anjaria. On May 9 last year, a bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Sanjay Karol passed a detailed order disposing of more than two dozen petitions by Kerala government, Animal Welfare Board, NGOs and animal rights activists who had raised objections over contradictory orders passed by different high courts in the state on the culling of stray dogs. On Wednesday morning, the CJI was told by a counsel that the August 11 order by the Supreme Court was also in conflict with a past Supreme Court order last year which had asked civic bodies to treat the strays with compassion and strictly in accordance with the ABC Rules, 2023. Justice Maheshwari and Justice Karol last year had made it clear that dogs cannot be culled on a large scale and directed that civic authorities must act only with the object and intent of the relevant provisions of the existing laws.
News18
39 minutes ago
- News18
SC quashes actor Darshans interim bail in Renukaswamy murder case
New Delhi [India], August 14 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Thursday cancelled the bail of Kannada actor Darshan Thogudeepa in the Renukaswamy murder case. A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan quashed the interim bail granted to Darshan by the Karnataka High Court, stating that the bail was granted without adequate consideration of the witness intimidation and other Karnataka government had filed a plea in the apex court against Darshan's bail the decision, Advocate DL Chidananda, representing the State government in the case, said the SC stated that the Karnataka HC's decision did not follow the principles of granting Chidananda told ANI, 'The Supreme Court said that the High Court has not followed the principles of law which apply for granting bail. It also reiterated that the rule of law prevails in the country and, however influential an individual may be, they must be treated in accordance with the law."Congress leader Rizwan Arshad said that the State government has built up a 'crystal clear" case against the actor, so they had to appeal against the Karnataka HC's order.'They have built up a crystal clear case. Despite that, he got bail… As a government, we had to appeal against the bail, and that's what we did," Arshad Chief Minister's legal advisor, AS Ponnanna, said that granting Darshan bail would have hampered the investigation and said, 'The state government and the prosecution agency were vindicated… It was the state government's decision that, in a case like this, where a serious offence has been registered, granting him bail would hamper the investigation and trial, as he is a powerful person. They did not want him to use his muscle to derail the prosecution's case."Darshan was named in the chargesheet in the Renukaswamy murder case, where the 33-year-old resident of Chitradurga was murdered. The victim's remains were discovered in Bengaluru's Kamakshipalya on June 9, 2024. (ANI)
