Constitution of India

Trending Today JAMMU AND KASHMIR POST ARTICLE 370 ANIMAL CRUELTY CONTROVERSY: HOW THE 2023 SCC DECISION AFFECT JALIKATTU Role of technology in transforming the Indian judiciary COMMON CAUSE v. UNION OF INDIA 2018 Legal Framework governing reproductive rights and abortion law The Impact of Contract Law on E-Commerce and Online Transactions Indian Parliament Addressing Judicial Issues in Revenge Porn Cases Triviality section 95 INDIAN YOUNG LAWYERS ASSOCIATION v. STATE OF KERALA & Ors JAMMU AND KASHMIR POST ARTICLE 370: A SOCIO-ECONOMIC EVALUATION 01 Mar 2025 Introduction Article 370 of the Indian Constitution has been one of the most contentious topics since its establishment. Its relevance, consequences, and political and legal discourse have all had a considerable impact on India’s constitutional and political landscape. This article dives into the historical backdrop, legal framework, debates, and final repeal of Article 370, providing a thorough explanation of its history and relevance. Historical Context. The integration of Jammu and KashmirArticle 370 has its roots in the turbulent time of 1947, when British India was divided into two distinct sovereign states: India and Pakistan. Maharaja Hari Singh, monarch of the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, initially sought independence. However, faced with an invasion by tribal militias from Pakistan, he requested military aid from India. In exchange, he signed the Instrument of Accession on October 26, 1947, which admitted Jammu and Kashmir to India. This accession was remarkable in that it granted the state extensive autonomy in accordance with the wording of the Instrument. The deliberation of Article 370Article 370 of the Indian Constitution legally enshrines Jammu and Kashmir’s special status. This Article was written to reflect the parameters of the Memorandum of Acquisition while also addressing the specific circumstances under which Jammu and Kashmir joined India. Article 370, drafted by former Jammu and Kashmir Prime Minister Gopalaswami Ayyangar, was intended to be a temporary provision until a permanent resolution could be reached. Objectives of Article 370 Sovereignty and Special DesignationArticle 370 awarded Jammu and Kashmir a unique autonomy status. Unlike the other Indian states, Jammu and Kashmir had its own constitution, which went into effect on January 26, 1957. The Indian Parliament’s legislative powers over the state were confined to defence, foreign affairs, finance, and communications, as stated in the Protocol of Accession. Any other laws could only be applied to Jammu and Kashmir with the approval of the state administration. Presidential Decree and Constituent Assembly ResolutionsUnder Article 370(1)(d), the President of India had the authority to apply other parts of the Indian Constitution to Jammu and Kashmir, subject to exclusions and adjustments, and with the authorization of the state administration. This was accomplished through presidential orders. Furthermore, Article 370(2) indicated that the Article will terminate upon the advice of the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly. Yet after the Constituent Assembly dissolved in 1957 without adopting abrogation, Article 370 remained in effect. Disagreements and constitutional interpretations The Talk Over PermanenceThe portrayal of Article 370 as a transitory clause sparked heated debate. Critics contended that Article 370 was only designed to be temporary and would expire once the Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir declared its fate. However, advocates said that because the Constituent Assembly did not recommend its repeal, Article 370 had become a permanent part of the Constitution. Supreme Court verdictsThe Supreme Court of India has played an important role in enforcing Article 370. In the 2018 decision of *SBI v. Santosh Gupta*, the Court maintained that Article 370 was not a transitional provision and had gained permanent character due to the absence of a recommendation for its repeal by the Constituent Assembly. Furthermore, in several decisions, the Supreme Court underscored the autonomy afforded to Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370, underscoring that any changes to its status required authorization of the state government. Presidential DecreeThroughout the decades, multiple Presidential Orders have been issued to extend various parts of the Indian Constitution and central laws to Jammu & Kashmir. Critics said that this approach degraded the state’s distinctive position, effectively reducing its autonomy. However, proponents said that these orders were required to further integrate Jammu and Kashmir with the rest of India and establish legal and administrative uniformity. The Abrogation of Article 370 Political PerspectiveThe Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) and its ideological father, the Rastriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), have been vocal advocates for the repeal of Article 370. The BJP’s programme has constantly included the repeal of Article 370, which it sees as a barrier to national unification and growth. The BJP won a large mandate in the 2019 general elections, allowing it to pursue its programme. Legislative and Philosophical ManoeuvresOn August 5, 2019, the Indian government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah, announced the repeal of Article 370. This was achieved through a series of legal and political manoeuvres.    1. Presidential Order C.O. 272: This order essentially modified Article 367 of the Indian Constitution, which addresses interpretations. It included a clause declaring that references in Article 370 to the Jammu and Kashmir Constituent Assembly should be construed as references to the state’s Legislative Assembly. Considering the state was under President’s Rule (direct control by the central government), the Parliament of India was empowered to act on behalf of the Legislative Assembly.        2.The resolution in Parliament: Concurrently, a resolution in Parliament was passed recommending that the President issue an order under Article 370(3) announcing that all Article 370 sections would no longer be in effect.   3. Reorganisation Act: Parliament introduced and approved the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act in 2019, which divided the state into two Union Territories: Jammu and Kashmir (with a Legislative Assembly) and Ladakh (without one).  Judicial Limitations and the consequences The repeal of Article 370 provoked intense debate and multiple legal challenges. The petitioners claimed that Presidential Order C.O. 272 and subsequent measures violated the Constitution and harmed the notion of federalism. They maintained that such a fundamental constitutional reform required the assent of the Constituent Assembly, or at