The petitions against the Article 370 move are being heard by a five-judge constitution bench.
Highlights
- Petitions against Article 370 move being heard by 5-judge bench
- Special status of J&K under Article 370 scrapped in August last year
- Petitions challenge the constitutional validity of the government's move
There are no reasons to refer a bunch of petitions challenging the government's move to end the special status of the state under Article 370 and bifurcate it to a larger, seven-judge bench.
The petitions are currently being heard by a five-judge constitution bench headed by Justice NV Ramana.
The top court had on January 23 reserved its order on the issue of whether the batch of pleas would be referred to a larger seven-judge bench. Referring to two older judgments on Article 370, the top court today said there is no conflict between the two verdicts.
On August last year, the government decided to withdraw Jammu and Kashmir's special status and also bifurcate it into two union territories.
As part of the sweeping curbs in movement and communication, several political leaders, including three former Chief Ministers, have been in detention in Kashmir. Former Chief Ministers Farooq Abdullah, his son Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti were charged under the Public Safety Act - a stringent law that allows detention without trial for up to three months and multiple extensions.
The government had justified the restrictions and said that due to the preventive steps, not a single life was lost and not a single bullet was fired.