………………………………………..

( photo – Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru with
Kashmir’s Maharaja Hari Singh in Srinagar
in May 1948.)

………………………………………..

ஜம்மு-காஷ்மீர் இந்தியாவுடன் இறுதியாக இணைக்கப்பட்டது,
அரசியல் சட்ட விதி 370 நீக்கப்பட்டது,
மாநில அந்தஸ்து குறைக்கப்பட்டது – ஆகியவை குறித்த
பல வழக்குகளை ஒன்றிணைத்து,

• சுப்ரீம் கோர்ட்டின் தலைமை நீதிபதி ஜஸ்டிஸ் D.Y.Chandrachud
  அவர்களின் தலைமையிலான 5 நீதிபதிகளைக் கொண்ட
  அரசியல் சாசன பென்ச் விசாரித்து வருகிறது.
  இவை நீதிமன்ற தளத்தில் லைவ்’ஆக ஓளிபரப்பப்படுகின்றன.

தொடர்ந்து நடந்து வரும் விசாரணையில் ஒரு அங்கமாக,
ஜம்மு-காஷ்மீரை இந்தியாவுடன் இணைக்கும்போது, நிபந்தனைகள்
(கண்டிஷன்கள்) எதாவது விதிக்கப்பட்டனவா …? என்பது குறித்து
நிகழ்ந்த விவாதங்கள் சுவாரஸ்யமானவை.

இந்த விவாதங்களினூடே, ஒரு நிலையில் – தனது கருத்தை
தலைமை நீதிபதி தெளிவாக (வாய்மூலம்) தெரிவித்திருக்கிறார்.
காஷ்மீர் மஹாராஜா ஹரி சிங் மற்றும் அப்போதைய இந்திய பிரதமர்
ஜவஹர்லால் நேரு ஆகியோரிடையே ஏற்பட்ட உடன்படிக்கையில்
எந்தவித நிபந்தனைகளும் இன்றி, காஷ்மீரை இந்திய யூனியனுடன்
இணைக்க மஹாராஜா ஹரி சிங் ஒப்புதல் தெரிவித்து கையொப்பம்
இட்டிருக்கிறார்… எனவே காஷ்மீர் இந்தியாவுடன் இணைந்தது –
எந்தவித சந்தேகத்திற்கும் இடமின்றி – இறுதியானது என்று
சொல்லி இருக்கிறார் தலைமை நீதிபதி.

சுவாரஸ்யமான இந்த சட்ட நுணுக்கங்களை விவரிக்கும் விவாதம்
குறித்த ஆங்கில செய்தி ஒன்றை அப்படியே கீழே தந்திருக்கிறேன்.

……………………

J&K’s surrender of sovereignty to India was
‘absolutely complete’, says Supreme Court –

The restraint on Parliament to enact certain laws
in Jammu and Kashmir was akin to limitations on
enacting laws on subjects in the State List of
Indian Constitution, says Chief Justice of India…

……….

Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, heading a Constitution Bench hearing petitions challenging
the abrogation of Article 370, on Thursday said
Jammu and Kashmir ceded its sovereignty to the
Dominion of India “absolutely and completely”.

“It was no conditional surrender of sovereignty
to the Dominion of India. The surrender of
sovereignty was absolutely complete,” Chief Justice Chandrachud observed orally.

Supreme Court hearing on Article 370 | Day 5

The restraint on the Parliament to enact certain
laws in Jammu and Kashmir was akin to limitations
on enacting laws on subjects in the State List of
the Indian Constitution.

Limitations placed on the legislative power of the Parliament cannot be construed to mean that Jammu
and Kashmir, unlike other princely states which ceded
to the Dominion and became full-fledged States
under the Constitution, retained its sovereignty,
the Chief Justice noted.

“Take the case of Indian States other than Jammu
and Kashmir. There are restraints on the Parliament
to enact on State subjects… The distribution of legislative power does not affect the fact that
sovereignty vests in India.

So, yes, there are certain areas
where the Parliament cannot touch on the
State List… But merely because the
Parliament is disabled from touching a State List
item while enacting a law, does not detract from
the fact that all these States had once ceded their sovereignty to the Dominion of India,” the CJI
observed on the fifth day of the marathon hearings.

Instrument of Accession –

The court was reacting to arguments that the
“special autonomous status” granted to Jammu and
Kashmir and retention of “residuary legislative
powers” in the State were clear indications that
Jammu and Kashmir retained an element of sovereignty
even after the Instrument of Accession was entered
into between the erstwhile ruler and the Indian
government in October 1947.

The special status granted to Jammu and Kashmir was “engrafted” in the Constitution through Article 370. Subsequently, the ‘Delhi Agreement’ by Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah and Jawaharlal Nehru in 1952 had seen the
Union government acquiesce that residuary legislative
powers would vest with Jammu and Kashmir instead of
the Centre, unlike the case with other States.
The agreement had also empowered the Jammu and Kashmir lawmakers to confer people domiciled there with special rights and privileges.

However, the Chief Justice referred to the Constitution (Application) Order of 1972 in which the Parliament
was granted exclusive powers to make laws to prevent activities threatening sovereignty and territorial
integrity of India.

“The 1972 Order makes it clear beyond a pale of doubt
that sovereignty vested exclusively in India and no
vestige of sovereignty was retained by Jammu and Kashmir post the Instrument of Accession… The Order is an absolutely clear and unequivocal declaration of the sovereignty of India,” Chief Justice Chandrachud
addressed senior advocate Zaffar A. Shah, appearing
for one of the petitioners.

But Mr. Shah persisted that the view would have been acceptable, except that Article 370 had given
“residuary legislative powers” to Jammu and Kashmir.

“Yes, you can say that with the coming of the Indian Constitution, the Instrument of Accession goes, the sovereignty goes, everything goes… But it does not
seem to be like that. This unique relationship
between Jammu and Kashmir and the Union stood for
69 years until 2019. This was how the governments
of the day had worked it out,” Mr. Shah submitted.

But the Chief Justice said restraints on the power
of the Parliament to enact legislation were implicit
in the frame or scheme of the Constitution. “We are
not a unitary state… Fetters on the Parliament
does not dilute its sovereignty,” Chief Justice
Chandrachud noted.

Justice Sanjay Khanna, on the Bench, asked Mr. Shah
what was supreme — the Constitution of India or the accession instrument.

Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul said the integration of
Jammu and Kashmir was “complete”. Justice Kaul
said the “effectiveness” of Article 370 was
“chipped away over time”

.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………….………