New Delhi: National Conference leader Mohd Akbar Lone on Tuesday filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court reiterating his oath as a Lok Sabha MP, saying he would protect and uphold the Constitution and protect the territorial integrity of the country. which enraged the Center and claimed it was an “insult to hurt the nation”. The development took place on a day when a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud reserved its judgment on a number of petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370, which gave special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir after 16-16. Was rated Day long marathon hearing.
A major controversy had erupted during the hearing on Monday when the court was told that the lone man had raised the slogan ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ (long live Pakistan) in the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly in 2018. The top court had then directed the National Conference MP to file a case. The affidavit swore allegiance to the Constitution of India and unconditional acceptance of the sovereignty of the country.
On Tuesday, a bench, also comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai and Surya Kant, was told by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that Lone’s affidavit should have read… “I do not support terrorism and separatist activity”. . “This (affidavit) is like rubbing salt on the wound of the nation,” Mehta said.
The top court said it would examine the contents of the loan affidavit. Mehta said no remorse was expressed in Lone’s affidavit and read: “I am a responsible and dutiful citizen of the Union of India. I have exercised my right to approach this court through Article 32 of the Constitution.” Took oath as a Member of Parliament to preserve and uphold the provisions of the Constitution of India and to safeguard the territorial integrity of India.” Taking strong objection to the affidavit, the law officer urged the bench to read what was not written in it. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the loan, filed a one-page affidavit before the court at the end of Tuesday’s hearing.
Lone is the lead petitioner challenging the abrogation of Article 370. At the start of the day’s proceedings, senior advocate Bimal Roy JD, appearing for NGO ‘Roots in Kashmir’, a Kashmiri Pandit group, brought the alleged sloganeering by Lone to the notice of the court. Taking the side of Pakistan, he said that he has some additional documents regarding the conduct of the National Conference leader.
Mehta said he has studied additional documents filed by the NGO and asserted that Lone had expressed sympathy for terrorists when the attack took place in JK. He read out several purported statements made by Lone and claimed that the NC leader had referred to India as some foreign country. Therefore, he requested the court to ask Lone to apologize and take back his statements made at public rallies.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for one of the petitioners challenging the repeal of the provision, said, “They are saying that we are pushing a separatist agenda. Is filing a petition against the abrogation of Article 370 a separatist agenda? I strongly object to this. Government of India is adopting this stand. Does this mean that we are all here to further the separatist agenda?” CJI Chandrachud intervened and tried to pacify them, saying, “It is unfortunate. No one can say that because a petition has been filed under Article 32 against the abrogation of Article 370, it is furthering a separatist agenda. So far no one has said that filing the petition is a separatist agenda.
“It is for the court to separate the wheat from the chaff, on merits, but we have not heard the government saying this. Both the Attorney General and the Solicitor General appeared for the Union of India and did not argue that these petitions should be dismissed. On the grounds that they advance a separatist agenda. We will now cover up this episode,” the CJI said. The bench noted that the challenge to abrogation of Article 370 has been argued on merits and on constitutional terms and this court has said that the issue will be resolved solely on those terms.
The top court heard the arguments of several senior lawyers including Kapil Sibal, Gopal Subram.am, Rajeev Dhawan, Zafar Shah and Dushyant Dave before reserving its verdict. It added that if any counsel appearing for the petitioners or the respondents wishes to file written submissions, he may do so within the next three days. It states that the submission should not exceed two pages.
During the last 16 days of hearing, the apex court heard top law officers including Attorney General R Venkataram. and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, while senior advocates Harish Salve, Rakesh Dwivedi, V Giri appeared for the Centre. Interventionists defending the abrogation of Article 370. The lawyers discussed various issues including the constitutional validity of the Centre’s August 5, 2019 decision to abrogate Article 370, the validity of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorg.zation Act, which bifurcated the erstwhile state into two union territories. The imposition of Governor’s rule in Jammu and Kashmir on June 20, 2018 and President’s rule in the erstwhile state on December 19, 2018 and its extension on July 3, 2019 were challenged.
Several petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorg.zation Act, 2019, which bifurcated the erstwhile state into two union territories – Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh – were referred to a constitution bench in 2019.
