A 5-judge bench, headed by NV Ramana, refused to refer the issue of abrogation of articles 370 and 35A to a larger bench.
Bengaluru: The top court has refused to refer the issue of abrogation of article 370 to a larger bench.
Currently, a 5-judge bench, headed by NV Ramana is hearing the case. And with this judgement, these judges will only continue to hear the case.
NGO People's Union of Civil Liberties (PUCL), Jammu and Kashmir High Court Bar Association and an intervenor had sought referring the matter to a larger bench.
It might be recalled that the petitioners had sought reference to a larger bench on the ground that two judgments of the Supreme Court -- Prem Nath Kaul versus Jammu and Kashmir in 1959 and Sampat Prakash versus Jammu and Kashmir in 1970 -- which dealt with the issue of Article 370 are in direct conflict each other and therefore the current bench of five judges could not hear the issue, as reported by India Today.
It further reported that Attorney General KK Venugopal, appearing for the Centre, had told the Supreme Court bench -- also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, R Subhash Reddy, B R Gavai and Surya Kant -- that "the abrogation of provisions of Article 370, has now become a "fait accompli" leaving sole option to accept the change".
Referring to the two earlier judgments, Venugopal had said that they were not related to each other and dealt with different issues.
On August 5, 2019, the Indian government, headed by PM Modi moved a resolution to abrogate the contentious articles 370 and 35A.
Both the houses of the Indian Parliament ratified the resolution, thereby integrating Jammu and Kashmir with the rest of India.
Later, the Jammu and Kashmir was split into two union territories.
The opposition, in its efforts to spoil the reputation of the Modi government has opposed the abrogation.
As far as the BJP is concerned, it had made the abrogation a part of its manifesto.
Read Exclusive COVID-19 Coronavirus News updates, at MyNation.
Last Updated 2, Mar 2020, 1:09 PM