Article 370 Case : Live Updates From Supreme Court [Day 6]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

16 Aug 2023 4:56 AM GMT

  • Article 370 Case : Live Updates From Supreme Court [Day 6]

    The Supreme Court will continue hearing today the cases challenging the Centre's 2019 decisions to dilute Article 370 of the Constitution leading to the scrapping fo the special status of Jammu and Kashmir.Today is the 6th day of hearing before a Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice SK Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai and Justice Surya Kant. So...

    The Supreme Court will continue hearing today the cases challenging the Centre's 2019 decisions to dilute Article 370 of the Constitution leading to the scrapping fo the special status of Jammu and Kashmir.

    Today is the 6th day of hearing before a Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice SK Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai and Justice Surya Kant. So far, Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, Gopal Subramanium and Zaffar Ahmed Shah have completed their arguments on behalf of the petitioenrs.

    Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan is expected to commence his arguments today.

    Track the live-updates from today's hearing here :


    Live Updates

    • 16 Aug 2023 5:58 AM GMT

      Dhavan: It collapses democracy in a State!

    • 16 Aug 2023 5:56 AM GMT

      Dhavan: It must relate to 356. Whatever is required to materialise 356, it must be related to that. "Necessary" or "desirable" are not carte blance powers of president. Could he have suspended Part III under 356? It has to be given a limited meaning.

    • 16 Aug 2023 5:53 AM GMT

      CJI: The proviso says that you will not suspend anything pertaining to a HC, or you'll not assume to yourself powers of HC during the operation of 356. So where it wanted to restraint, it did so.

    • 16 Aug 2023 5:53 AM GMT

      CJI: The proviso seems to indicate that if the constitution wanted to exclude a power from the authority to suspend a provision of the constitution, that has been specifically defined.

    • 16 Aug 2023 5:51 AM GMT

      Dhavan: I have never seen a provision which actually uses it to take away a mandatory provision. This is exceptional. If you expand 356(1)(c), then you will say that the president has a card to amend any part of the Constitution.

      Dhavan: 356(1)(c) has to be read with mandatory provision which it cannot dilute.

    • 16 Aug 2023 5:49 AM GMT

      CJI: Suppose the president in a proclamation suspends the operation of any provision of the Constitution - is that amendable to be challenged on the ground that it is not incidental or supplemental? Or are these words widening the ambit of the first part of 356(1)(b)?

    • 16 Aug 2023 5:47 AM GMT

      CJI: "Including" would mean that what was otherwise not a supplementary or incidental provision, it is within the ambit of presidential proclamation. Isn't it?

    • 16 Aug 2023 5:46 AM GMT

      CJI: Normally when the legislature uses the word "means" and "includes"- it's an indication of expanding the power. So when the constitution says "make incidental and supplementary provisions" and then says "including"- this seems to widen the ambit of earlier part.

    • 16 Aug 2023 5:44 AM GMT

      Dhavan: The suspension in this case goes beyond supplementing. It goes to actually take out a mandatory provision.

    • 16 Aug 2023 5:43 AM GMT

      CJI DY Chandrachud: How do we deal with Art 356(1)(c)? So the president has the power to suspend certain provisions of the constitution during the operation of proclamation under 356.

    Next Story