news details |
|
|
| SC reserves judgment on Gool killings, Kishtwar riots | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Mar 5: A Division Bench of Supreme Court (SC) of India headed by Chief Justice, P. Sathasivam today reserved the judgment on a petition filed by Sudesh Dogra of National Panthers Party seeking independent probe, compensation to the families of the victims and loss of property.
The other judges who were sitting with the Chief Justice were Rajan Gogoi and NV Ramana.
The Supreme Court reserved the judgment after hearing Prof. Bhim Singh, Sr. Advocate and Luthra, Sr. Advocate, Additional Solicitor of Union of India who argued on behalf of Omar Abdullah's government of J&K.
Prof. Bhim Singh in his arguments sought independent inquiry by outside agency into the human massacre in Gool on 18th July, 2013 and death of three innocent persons besides loss of property worth crores of rupees in Kishtwar on 9th August, 2013.
He strongly abused the process of law by the State government on disparity in ex-gratia to the serving personnel of security service which he said is violation of Articles 14, 21 etc. He said Rs. 5 lacs ex-gratia relief to the local security personnel is very small but it is highly disgraceful that non-resident security personnel on his death is paid only Rs.2 lacs. The Chief Secretary of J&K in his affidavit has defended this disparity and discrimination on the basis that J&K. The Chief Secretary claim that J&K Govt. has a special status to make any law for any person and Articles 14, 21 or Chapter-III was not applicable to J&K.
Prof. Bhim Singh in his arguments strongly rebutted the stand taken by J&K Govt. and submitted that Article 370 had become in fructuous after the termination of Monarchy on 20th August, 1952 when the J&K Constituent Assembly headed by Sheikh Mohd. Abdullah passed a resolution declaring termination of Monarchy.
Prof. Bhim Singh contended that Article 370 was inserted in the Indian Constitution in 1950 as a temporary and transitional provision as monarchy was continued in J&K by the Constituent Assembly of India which was a grave blunder though.
He read out the temporary provisions of Article 370 which said that President of India had power to make any changes in the provisions of Article 370 or otherwise in concurrence with the government of J&K appointed by the Maharaja of J&K on 5th March, 1948. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
