BREAKING CJI: CONCLUSIONS

 

 

1. J&K DOES NOT RETAIN ANY ELEMENT OF SOVEREIGNTY AFTER INSTRUMENT OF ACCESSION WAS SIGNED

 

2. NO INTERNAL SOVEREIGNTY FOR JAMMU AND KASHMIR

 

3. CHALLENGE TO THE PROCLAMATION OF PRESIDENTIAL RULE IS NOT VALID

 

4. EXERCISE OF POWER OF PRESIDENT MUST HAVE A REASONABLE NEXUS WITH THE OBJECT OF PRESIDENTIAL RULE

 

5. POWER OF PARLIAMENT TO LEGISLATE FOR STATE CANNOT EXCLUDE LAW MAKING POWER

 

6. ARTICLE 370 WAS A TEMPORARY PROVISION

 

7. WHEN CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY WAS DISSOLVED ONLY THE TRANSITORY POWER OF THE ASSEMBLY CEASED TO EXIST AND NO RESTRICTION ON PRESIDENTIAL ORDER

 

8. PARA 2 OF CO 272 BY WHICH ARTICLE 370 WAS AMENDED BY AMENDING ARTICLE 367 WAS ULTRA VIRES AS INTERPRETATION CLAUSE CANNOT BE USED FOR AMENDMENT

 

9. PRESIDENT USE OF POWER WAS NOT MALA FIDE AND NO CONCURRENCE NEEDED WITH STATE

 

10. PARA 2 OF CO 272 IN EXERCISE OF POWER UNDER 370(1)(D) APPLYING ALL PROVISIONS OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION TO JAMMU AND KASHMIR WAS VALID

 

11. THE CONTINUOUS EXERCISE OF POWER BY THE PRESIDENT SHOWS THE GRADUAL PROCESS OF INTEGRATION WAS ONGOING. THUS CO 273 IS VALID

 

12. CONSTITUTION OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR IS OPERATIVE AND IS DECLARED TO HAVE BECOME REDUNDANT

 

13. PRESIDENTIAL USE OF POWER NOT MALA FIDE

 

14. SG MADE STATEMENT THAT STATEHOOD WILL BE RESTORED TO JAMMU AND KASHMIR. WE UPHOLD THE DECISION TO CARVE OUT UT OF LADAKH. WE DIRECT ECI HOLDS POLLS UNDER SECTION 14 OF THE REORGANISATION ACT AND STATEHOOD AT THE EARLIEST

 

#SupremeCourt #Article370