Invoking sections of the Government of India Act, 1935, he said that once admission is complete, the state’s sovereignty is lost and absorbed into the bigger sovereignty.
In New Delhi: Beginning his arguments on behalf of the Centre on Thursday, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta asserted that regardless of the outcome, the Constitution Bench’s ruling will be “historic” and put an end to the “psychological duality” that existed in the minds of Jammu and Kashmir residents.
“However, it (Jammu & Kashmir) became an essential and inalienable part of India with the creation of the Constitution. There was still a psychological dualism that will disappear, whether it was caused or not. That status would expire if the judgement went any way, according to SG Mehta.
He said that the misunderstanding over whether the exceptional provision was temporary or permanent stemmed from the form of Article 370 and was the origin of this “psychological duality.”
The top legal officer defended the Center’s conduct by arguing that Article 370 served as a hindrance to the development of J&K residents since they were denied access to assistance programmes and constitutional rights provided by the Union government.
He said that the people of J&K will be granted a significant number of basic rights as well as additional rights. Mehta stated, “They will now fully be a part of the rest of India,” adding that residents in the valley have been denied rights for the previous 75 years.
He informed the Constitution Bench that a significant number of basic rights and other rights will now be granted to those living in J&K, totally on par with those living in the rest of the nation.
SG Mehta disputed the petitioner’s claim that J&K should get special treatment since it was the only state to have its own constitution in 1939. His statement that this reasoning is “factually not well founded”
He said that 286 other states were drafting their constitutions in the late 1930s. “There were 62 states that were having their own Constitutions — whether named as Constitution or instrument of internal governance,” he said.
Invoking sections of the Government of India Act, 1935, he said that once admission is complete, the state’s sovereignty is lost and absorbed into the bigger sovereignty.
In fact, several of them (princely states) drafted their constitutions and then signed their accession documents right away! Everyone shared access to the draught accession agreement. Before the Supreme Court, he argued that “everyone signed the same draught.”
Attorney General R. Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta began the arguments on Thursday.
On behalf of the Centre, senior solicitors Harish Salve, Mahesh Jethmalani, and Rakesh Dwivedi, as well as Additional Solicitor General K.M. Natraj, will also present oral arguments.
Wednesday morning, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said before the Constitution Bench that the Union government had zero intention of interfering with the specific Constitutional provisions that apply to the northeastern states or any other region of the nation.
Notably, a 5-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice of India Chandrachud is now deliberating a number of petitions that challenge the 2019 Presidential Order that divided the former state of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories and removed the special status granted to it.
On August 28, the petition will continue to be heard by the Constitution Bench, which also consists of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, and Surya Kant.
