This analysis primarily focuses on the revocation of Article 370 by the Modi
Government on August 5 2019 by using majoritarian power. The abrogation of the
Article 370 clothed to be against the very spirit of the Indian Constitution,
principles of humanity and therefore the democratic norms at a broader level.
This move was also against the elemental rights from article 26-28-freedom of
faith on one hand and on the opposite the targeting of 1 community by the BJP
After the partition of Indo-Pak in 1947, J&K was a provincially an independent
state which was earlier sold by British Govt. to Maharaja Gulab Singh for a sum
of over 7 million. After partition, Unfortunately, on August 20, 1947, Pakistan
invaded Kashmir. In its defence, Maharaja Hari Singh sought help from India then
acceded to the Indian Union temporarily by signing the "Instrument of
Accession". The political parties of J&K are solely liable for the abrogation of
Article 370 so this paper will critically analyse the role of political parties.
This study may be a critical and theoretical analysis to know the particular
myth and reality.
The state of Jammu and Kashmir was territorially the most important princely
state of India and its rulers were enjoying nearly despotic powers just like the
rulers of other princely states. The state was geographically and culturally
divided into four provinces - Jammu, Kashmir, Ladakh and Gilgit. the primary two
contained over ninety percent of the state's population, and quite two-thirds of
it had been Muslim. Maharaja Hari Singh promulgated the law regarding the
'Hereditary state subject' on January 31, 1992 by which outsiders were debarred
from entering the state services and holding immovable property within the
state. However, certain top officials on exceptional and special basis were
again appointed from time to time.
History of Jammu and Kashmir
In 1846, Maharaja Gulab Singh, a Dogra ruler, bought the region of Jammu &
Kashmir from the Malay Archipelago Company after signing the Treaty of Amritsar.
In August 1947, after India got independence from British Empire, Pakistan was
created as a Muslim-majority country. India's princely states, those not
officially with India or Pakistan, got three choices�to stay independent or join
either India or Pakistan. Three of such states were undecided.
They were Junagadh, Hyderabad, and J&K. The Indian Home Minister Sardar
Vallabhbhai Patel tried to convince the undecided princely states to hitch India
and Maharaja Hari Singh signed a standstill agreement with Pakistan, effectively
choosing a standing quo.
In October 1947; armed tribesmen from Pakistan infiltrated J&K and Hari Singh
realized that he needed Indian help. He reached bent the then Prime Minister
Nehru and therefore the Home Minister Patel who agreed to send troops on the
condition that the Maharaja signs an instrument of accession (IOA) in favour of
India, delivering control of its defence, foreign affairs, and communication.
Hari Singh signed the IOA, and Indian troops moved in. The armed conflict,
however, continues till today.
After the independence of India, the 'Instrument of Accession' with the Indian
Union was signed by Maharaja Hari Singh on October 26, 1947 and therefore the
special status within the Indian Union was given by the Parliament through the
adoption of Article 306 on October 17, 1949, which was later rescheduled as
Article 370. The enactment of Article 370 was but not the start of the special
status of the state. In fact, it had been the culmination of a process that had
begun in January 1927 and had been influenced by the Instrument of Accession and
various national and international compulsions that arose between October 26,
1947, and October 17, 1949.
Procedure used for removing Article 370
On 5 August 2019, Amit Shah introduced the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization
Bill, 2019 within the Rajya Sabha to convert Jammu and Kashmir's status of a
state to 2 separate union territories, namely Union Territory of Jammu and
Kashmir and Union Territory of Ladakh. The union territory of Jammu and Kashmir
was proposed to possess a legislature under the bill whereas the union territory
of Ladakh was proposed to not have one. By the top of the day, the bill was gone
by Rajya Sabha with 125 votes in its favour and 61 against (67%). subsequent day
the bill was gone by the Lok Sabha with 370 votes in its favour and 70 against
it (84%). The bill became an Act after it had been signed by the President.
Home Minister Amit Shah announced within the Rajya Sabha (upper house of the
Indian Parliament) that the President of India had issued the Constitution
(Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 2019 under Article 370, superseding
the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954. The order
stated that each one the provisions of the Indian Constitution applied to Jammu
Whereas the 1954 order specified that just some articles of the Indian
constitution were to use to the state, the new order removed any such
restrictions. This in effect meant that the separate Constitution of Jammu and
Kashmir stood abrogated. The President issued the order with the "concurrence of
the govt of State of Jammu and Kashmir", which apparently meant that the
Governor was appointed by the Union government.
The Demerits of Abrogation of Article 370:
- Loss of the unique privileges guaranteed under Article 35A:
According to the provisions of Article 35A the non-permanent residents of
J&K couldn't permanently settle within the state by buying immovable
property or acquire land or apply for state jobs or any quite scholarships
and aids granted by the government. With the abrogation of the article
granting them such special powers the citizens of J&K will now lose these
benefits that came with their title of being a permanent resident of the
- Fear of loss of the state's demographic character:
Kashmir is that the only Muslim majority state in India. there's a fear that
the abrogation of the act would change the demography state and disempower
the Muslims to an extent where they might be reduced to the state of being
the second-class citizens in their own state as without the article Hindus
everywhere India could migrate to the state and thus change the demographic
The total lockdown, with the disablement of communication, would've created a
way of enhanced fear, confusion and chaos, something that the people didn't need
to are subjected to the politician's daughter in Kashmir, scared to her life,
demonstrates the acute conditions of fear that prevailed amongst the population
within. Eid Al Adha, one among the core festivals for the people within the
state, was celebrated during a sense of lockdown, unknowing and scared. it's not
a perfect scenario for a rustic like ours, to be creating an environment of dear
Thus overall, all the recommendations would be fulfilling the common purpose and
objective of passing resolutions with a way more peaceful and inclusive
approach. India with its diverse social fabrics must be more inclusive and
sensitive other countries with these differing conditions.
The instrument of accession so signed, was the one condition for the inclusivity
of Kashmir within India. Thus, any diversion would necessarily cause a condition
for disruption Each intricate situation must be addressed the foremost
accommodative manner so on ensure harmonious co-existence.
With reference to Preventive Detention, that was caused by the lockdown and
confinement of the leaders of the state, to pass the bill could only be
considered a clamping down on the voices of the minority population of the
state. What was more important, as many say. was the spirit of the status
provided by Article 370? It signalled that the Indian constitution was malleable
enough to form space for people that felt alienated or estranged from the
The abrogation of Article 370 hence clears that through the bulk any contract
will easily be broken. we discover how communalized article 370 was made by the
BJP-RSS to prove the Instrument of Accession between PM Pt Nehru and Maharaja
Hari Singh. The attack began on a Muslim majority state within the name of 370
then throughout India's Muslims were humiliated, killed, put in jails with the
opening of issues CAA, NRC, and NPR.
The ruling party has throughout associations and links with the RSS, whose aim
is to form India a Hindu Rashtra, but which is against the Indian constitution
that gives all religions equal freedom under fundamental rights from article
25-28 of the Indian constitution. India has an independent judiciary, but it
reflected how it couldn't work independently during the BJP government too.
The political parties of J&K moreover did not protect the state special status
and eventually many leaders were arrested and put in jails against the
protection of article 370. History although will remember this decision was
contrary to the Indian constitution and against the desire of Kashmiris.
- Basu, D. D., Manohar, V. R., Banerjee, B. P., & Khan, S. A. (2001). Introduction to the Constitution of India (p. 74). Wadhwa.
- Rao, H. G. (1967). Legal Aspects of the Kashmir Problem: HS Gururaj Rao. London, New York.
- Paswal, N. H. (2020). Caste and Secular Crises in Indian Politics. Our Heritage, 68(30), 10471-10482.
- Jamwal, S. S. (1993, January). Article 370-Its Genesis and Reactions In J&K State. In Proceedings of The Indian History Congress (Vol. 54, Pp. 467-471). Indian History Congress.
- Ashraf, F. (2002). Jammu and Kashmir dispute: Examining various proposals for its resolution. Published by the institute of strategic studies in Islamabad, Series: Islamabad Papers (20), 1-51.
- Teng, M. K., Bhatt, R. K. K., & Kaul, S. (1976). Constitutional History and Documents. New Delhi.
- Singh, M., & Jha, M. (2017). The Special Status Conundrum and the Problem of Rehabilitation in Jammu and Kashmir. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 8(5), 73-83.
- Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies. (2019). (Rep.). Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies. doi:10.2307/resrep19799
- Abdullah, M., Mehmood, Y., & Hussain, N. Historical Background and Socio-Cultural Aspects of Gujjar Community in Jammu and Kashmir: A Case Study.
The Constitution of India, 1950