You can’t ignore what happened in Pahalgam: SC on restoration of statehood to J-K

The Supreme Court on Thursday asked the Centre to respond to petitions seeking directions to the Centre to restore statehood to Jammu and Kashmir even as it noted that the April 22 Pahalgam terrorist attack in which 28 innocent tourists were killed can’t be ignored.

Acting on a petition filed by college teacher Zahoor Ahmed Bhat and activist Khurshid Ahmad Malik, a Bench of Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran issued notice to the Centre and posted it for hearing after eight weeks. It issued notice on another petition filed by one Irfan Hafiz Lone on the issue.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said there were "several considerations which go into the decision-making process".

"We assured statehood after elections. There is a peculiar position in this part of our country. I don’t know why this issue this agitated now. This particular state is not the correct state to muddy the water. I will still seek instructions, Mehta said, seeking eight weeks to file the Centre’s reply.

As senior lawyer Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the petitioners sought an early hearing, the Bench said, “You cannot ignore what happened in Pahalgam... It‘s for Parliament and the Executive to take a decision.”

Sankaranarayanan said the Centre had promised that statehood will be restored to Jammu and Kashmir during hearing on the abrogation of Article 370 and that’s why the top court had refrained from deciding the issue of Statehood. "The judgment had trusted the Government to grant statehood. Restoration of statehood was to be done after elections (held in J&K in September-October 2024). It has been 21 months since that judgment…," he submitted.

The BJP-led Government at the Centre has already said it would restore statehood to Jammu and Kashmir.

The petitioners, however, submitted that “The delay in restoration of Statehood would cause serious reduction of democratically elected government in Jammu and Kashmir causing grave violation of the idea of federalism which forms part of the basic structure of the Constitution of India.”

Contending that assembly election results in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir would be meaningless without restoration of statehood; Bhat and Malik had filed a petition in the Supreme Court in October 2024 seeking restoration of its statehood in two months.

Referring to the assembly polls in Jammu and Kashmir, they submitted that formation of the legislative assembly before the restoration of statehood violated the idea of federalism -- a part of basic structure of the Constitution.

In its December 11, 2023, historic verdict, the Supreme Court upheld the Centre’s August 5, 2019, decision to abrogate provisions of Article 370 of the Constitution that gave special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir and said “restoration of statehood shall take place at the earliest”.

A five-judge Constitution Bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud (since retired) had unanimously directed the Election Commission to hold elections in the union territory of Jammu and Kashmir by September 30, 2024, without waiting for restoration of statehood. The elections were conducted in September-October 2024.

While upholding creation of Ladakh as a separate union territory in view of security reasons, the top court had left open the legal question as to whether Parliament can completely convert a state into a union territory as opposed to carving out a union territory from a state in view of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s statement that the Centre would restore statehood to Jammu and Kashmir. The Supreme Court had in May 2024 dismissed petitions seeking review of its December 11, 2023, verdict.