SC adjourns next year hearing on pleas to January challenging Article 35A

The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned to January next year the hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the Constitutional validity of Article 35 A, which provides special rights and privileges to natives of Jammu and Kashmir, after taking note of submissions of the Centre and the state government that there was a law and order problem in the state.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra was informed by Attorney General K K Venugopal and Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre and Jammu and Kashmir government respectively that in view of the impending eight-phased local body elections and law and order situation in the state, the hearing be deferred.

"Let the elections take place. We are told that there is a law and order problem," the bench which also comprised Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud said while adjourning the hearing to the second week of January on petitions challenging Article 35 A.

Shutdown in Kashmir as clashes erupt on rumours of SC scrapping Article 35A

Spontaneous shutdown was observed at several places in Kashmir after clashes broke out between youths and security forces following rumours about scrapping of Article 35A, a police official said.
Article 35A, which accords special rights and privileges to the citizens of Jammu and Kashmir, is facing a legal challenge in the Supreme Court.

"Spontaneous shutdown is being observed in many places in Srinagar, the summer capital of Jammu and Kashmir, and Anantnag district in south Kashmir," the official said.

He said announcements were made on loudspeakers that Article 35A has been scrapped and people were asked to observe a strike and come out to protest.

"Shops and other business establishments, which had opened this morning, downed shutters after rumours of Article 35A being scrapped spread like wild fire and were circulated on social media, the official said.

Stone-pelters clashed with security personnel in Anantnag and in the Safakadal area here in the wake of the rumours, he said.

Should Art 35A pleas go to Constitution bench? 3-judge SC bench to decide

The Supreme Court on Monday said that a three-judge bench would decide whether the pleas challenging Article 35A, which provides special rights and privileges to the natives of Jammu and Kashmir, should be referred to a five-judge Constitution bench for examining the larger issue of alleged violation of the doctrine of basic structure of the Constitution.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice A Khanwilkar adjourned the crucial hearing on as many as five petitions "to the week commencing from August 27" on the grounds that they pertained to the challenge to a Constitutional scheme and could not be heard as the third judge, Justice D Y Chandrachud, was not present on Monday.

As the matter came up on Monday in the backdrop of protests in Jammu and Kashmir on the issue, the state government sought adjournment of the hearing citing upcoming local body elections in the state and was supported by the Centre.

The lawyers for petitioners, however, vehemently opposed the adjournment plea and sought an early hearing after the bench clarified that it cannot take up the matter due to lack of quorum