What is your comment on the Supreme Court saying it has held that 'Article 370 is a temporary provision'?
x-CJI DY Chandrachud had opened his mouth in February 2025 in a BBC interview on hotly debated topics and decision during his tenure. He discussed and justified his position of Article 370 and Ayodhya Ram temple. On Article 370, DY Chandrachud said, “Was 75 years was too short a period to abrogate such a provision.” He emphasised that the provision was meant to disappear with time and merge with the Constitution. The question is why it was allowed to be continued?
Architects of Article 370 were PM Jawaharlal Nehru and his close associate Sheikh Abdullah (some people call him half-brother of Nehru). Sheikh Abdullah prime compulsion was Pakistan’s arrogant determination to take over the state by force and ignore all the local political elements. He had serious reservations about Kashmir being an integral part of India. As his own speeches and declassified documents of the U.S. State Department reveal, he was working towards independent Kashmir under his own domination.
Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed wanted to do away with Article 370 Instead of building a relationship with the masses, the successive Indian governments focused on personalities who were interested in personal power and fiefdom. The relationship has been based on deception and duplicity. The state leaders, irrespective of whatever party label they carried, were power brokers and practiced opportunistic secularism. Whenever they faced even a slight threat to their power, they raised the cry of Kashmiri identity.
It has been bad luck of this country that whenever one correct step was taken, it was subsequently followed by steps which were all wrong. In 1953, people of the state had hoped that the political uncertainty was over and that they could settle down to live a peaceful life. The inevitability of the return of Sheikh Abdullah was kept alive by the Indian authorities, which hung as the sword of Democles over each succeeding Government. They were left with little choice other than bringing peace on the surface by constant and increasing doses of appeasement, which flowed in from the Centre at an extravagant scale. The more the people were sought to be appeased and pampered the more they were emboldened to ask for the moon.
Corruption was a necessary instrument which inevitably created pockets of scandalous riches on one side and spreading discrimination against large section on the other. Bakshi Ghulam Mohammed did try and succeeded to a great extent in making some developmental advances in the state but the sword of religious fundamentalism was always kept hanging over his head by his ambitious opponents, who outwardly called themselves leftists. The secularism practiced by the state leadership was fraudulent and it had always vacillated between secularism & communalism to suit the occasion in its reckless search for power. Democracy in the state was always only in form but not in substance. The leaders never failed to exploit the religious obscurantism always with an anti-India strain during elections.
When congress party extended its organisation to J&K and established a separate Pradesh Congress Committee (PCC) in 1966, Sheikh Abdullah issued a Fatwa from Hazratbal Shrine labelling congress party as an organisation of atheists. He declared that it would be a sin to offer funeral prayers for Muslims who were members of the congress party. He also launched a movement named Tarak-i-Mawalaat (boycott of congress Muslims). As a rival strategy, Congress leaders in the state propped up fundamentalist Jamaat-i-Islami (the same way congress created militant Bhindranwale in Punjab to weaken Akalis).
Article370 has been the subject of heated debate ever since the Constitution came into full effect from 26th January 1950. While one section of the Indian polity has strongly demanded its abrogation, some others have vehemently opposed this demand. In 1999, Farooq Abdullah, the State’s then CM, even threatened a revolt if the Article were revoked. Here it should be noted that his father Sheikh Abdullah had revolted again and again and for this Anti-India and Anti-Kashmiri people stand, he remained in the prison. What is harm if there will be discussion on Article 370? But Sheikh Abdullah dynasty thinks that they have copy right on the article 370 and nobody has right to discuss it. Congress supported this policy. On 7 December 2013, UPA minister Shashi Tharoor rejected the demand for a parliamentary debate on Article 370 saying its continuation in Jammu and Kashmir lies in the hands of elected representatives of the border state. He said, “In my view, there is no need for any debate on Article 370. This provision will remain intact till the time democratically elected leaders of Jammu and Kashmir want to continue it”.
The Kashmir ‘riyasat’ was handed over to Sheikh Abdullah and he in turn, made over by the latter to his son, Farooq Abdullah. His son-in-law, G.M. Shah snatched away the same from his brother-in-law for a short span by intrigue. The son retook it with the help of Delhi durbar and faithfully paved the way for terrorist take-over. Terrorists were planning to hand over the Kashmir to Pakistan and declare themselves as an independent new Pakistan. Humble Kashmiris were wondering that their state had acceded to India in 1947 and for what sins are they being kicked like a football for the last 45 years. For what fault of theirs has India forsaken them and thrown them to exploiters.
Sheikh Abdullah, after a decade of self-exile and fruitless wanderings was brought back to power in Kashmir. This was done by Indira Gandhi, who had panicked after realising that crafty Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and his more intelligent daughter, Benazir had outwitted her in Shimla Agreement of 1972. In mid 1970s people were distraught by painful political uncertainties and leadership was engaged in sharp mutual hostility. On his part, the Sheikh settled down to turn his Riyasat and his Quom in the grip of his dynasty.
Jammu and Kashmir has been the region of Durgahs and temples. Blaming the British to wedge a divide between the Muslims and Hindus historians said that after independence successive congress governments also followed the same policy for their political ambitions. Lala Lajpat Rai in his book, Unhappy India, asserted: “The policy of divide and rule is the sheet anchor of all imperial governments. British rule in India has been persistently following that policy,” In the 60 years rule congress adopted the Nehru’s policy to divide and rule. Nehru adopted this policy from Mountbatten.
This Sheikh Abdullah dynasty thinks that J & K is the property of them. Voters of J&K have punished National Conference in Lok Sabha Election 2014. Omar Abdullha tweeted, “So the new MOS PMO says process/discussions to revoke Art 370 have started. Wow, that was a quick beginning. Not sure who is talking.” He went on to add, “Mark my words & save this tweet - long after Modi Govt is a distant memory either J&K won’t be part of India or Art 370 will still exist.” BJP General Secretary Ram Madhav targeted Omar Abdullah on his above comment “J&K won’t be part of India? Is Omar thinking its his parental estate? 370 or no 370 J&K has been and will always be an integral part of India,” When Article 370 was abolished in 2019, a highly frustrated Farooq Abdullah said he will take help from China to bring back Article 370! A fish cannot live without water and similarly, corrupt dynasts cannot live without special constitutional benefits.
P.S. -This post is neither spam nor plagiarised material and follows Quora policy
Picture source: Google / Respective rightful owner
Comments
Post a Comment