Saturday, Jul 04, 2020 | Last Update : 04:23 AM IST

101st Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra1929901046878376 Tamil Nadu102721583781385 Delhi92175630072864 Gujarat34686249411905 Uttar Pradesh2579717597749 West Bengal2048813571717 Karnataka197108807293 Rajasthan1878515043435 Telangana185709069275 Andhra Pradesh169347632206 Haryana1550911019251 Madhya Pradesh1410610815589 Bihar10911821184 Assam8956583212 Jammu and Kashmir76954856105 Odisha7316535333 Punjab56683989149 Kerala4594243626 Uttarakhand2791190937 Chhatisgarh2339193713 Jharkhand2339160512 Tripura140110931 Manipur13166390 Goa11984783 Himachal Pradesh9796179 Puducherry73930112 Nagaland5351820 Chandigarh4463676 Arunachal Pradesh182601 Mizoram1601230 Sikkim101520 Meghalaya50421
  India   All India  24 Jan 2020  In SC, govt rules out plebiscite to end J&K issue

In SC, govt rules out plebiscite to end J&K issue

THE ASIAN AGE. | PRAMOD KUMAR
Published : Jan 24, 2020, 2:36 am IST
Updated : Jan 24, 2020, 2:36 am IST

To buttress his point Mr Venugopal referred to the preamble and other provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Constitution.

Supreme Court of India (Photo: PTI)
 Supreme Court of India (Photo: PTI)

New Delhi: Ruling out plebiscite to determine the status of Jammu and Kashmir since the state is an integral part of India, the Centre on Thursday told the Supreme Court that British wanted J&K should go to Pakistan and not remain with India.

“The question of plebiscite does not arise as J&K Constitution says that the state is an integral part of India,” said attorney-general K.K. Venugopal, addressing a five-judge Constitution Bench.

 

The five-judge Constitution Bench of Justices N.V. Ramana, S.K. Kaul, R. Subhash Reddy, B.R. Gavai and Surya Kant on Thursday continued hearing various pleas challenging the abrogation of Article 370, which conferred special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir.

The bench reserved its judgment on a plea by veteran journalist Prem Shankar Jha, PUCL, and the J&K High Court Bar Association seeking that the matter be referred to a larger 7-judge Constitution Bench.

Mr Jha and the J&K High Court Bar Associa-tion have contended that, though in a different perspective, a five judge constitution bench in 1959 and later in 1969 had dealt with Article 370 and both the judgments were conflicting.

Addressing the constitution bench on the status of J&K, the attorney-general said that the J&K Constitution, which unequivocally says that the state was an integral part of the India, was framed by a Constituent Assembly having 25 popularly elected representatives.

To buttress his point Mr Venugopal referred to the preamble and other provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Constitution.  

The Centre’s rejection of plebiscite to determine the status of Jammu and Kashmir apparently came in response to the arguments by senior counsel Zafar Ahmed Shah who had contended that integration of Jammu and Kashmir with India was limited to the integration of territories with Centre controlling defence, external affairs and communication and not other issues internal to the State.

Tags: supreme court