New Delhi -°C
Today in New Delhi, India

Dec 10, 2019-Tuesday



Select city

Metro cities - Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata

Other cities - Noida, Gurgaon, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Bhopal , Chandigarh , Dehradun, Indore, Jaipur, Lucknow, Patna, Ranchi

Tuesday, Dec 10, 2019

All about the Kashmir petitions and Supreme Court responses

The Centre in its August 5 decision revoked Jammu-Kashmir’s special status and divided the state into two union territories – Ladakh and Jammu & Kashmir.

india Updated: Sep 05, 2019 16:07 IST
Bhadra Sinha
Bhadra Sinha
Hindustan Times, New Delhi
(PTI FILE/ Representative Image)

The Supreme Court on Thursday passed a bunch of orders while hearing petitions filed by students, politicians and lawyers following the scrapping of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir in early August. The petitions challenged the arrest of leaders, restrictions on movement and ‘suspension of civil liberty’ among other things.

The Centre in its August 5 decision revoked the state’s special status and divided the state into two union territories – Ladakh and Jammu & Kashmir. The state has been under a security lockdown since then with strict restrictions in place, leaders in detention and communication patchy.

Also Watch | ‘Lies & deceit’: India slams Pak’s ‘interference’ over J&K | Art 370


Here are the details of the petitions and orders passed by the Supreme Court on Thursday:

1.Sana Iltija, daughter of ex-chief minister Mehbooba Muft had moved the Supreme Court seeking directions to the authorities to allow her to meet her mother.

Today’s hearing: The court in its order said, “The state does not intend to prevent the petitioner from coming back to Srinagar and meeting her mother… she may return to Srinagar and be free to meet her mother in private. So far as moving around in other parts of Srinagar is concerned, petitioner may feel free to do so subject to requisite permission of the district authorities.”.

2.Aleem Syed Mohammed, a law graduate in Delhi’s Jamia Millia, had filed a plea seeking information about his family in Kashmir. In the last hearing he was allowed to travel to Anantnag under police protection to meet his parents. The top court had asked him to come back and report.

Today’s hearing: Mohammed submitted an affidavit in a sealed envelope detailing his trip saying that whatever he mentions in it may have a bearing on his future. “I want to live a quiet and uneventful life,” the student said while handing over a copy of the affidavit in a sealed cover.

3.Sitaram Yechury of the Communist Party of India (CPM) had filed a habeas corpus petition challenging the detention of Kashmiri politician and the party’s general secretary Mohammed Yousuf Tarigami. Court had allowed him to travel to the Valley and file a report on return.

Today’s hearing: The court in its order said, “From your affidavit it seems he needs medical assistance. We are inclined to move him to AIIMS.”

4. Anuradha Bhasin had moved the top court seeking direction to the Centre and officials of Jammu & Kashmir, to immediately relax restrictions on internet, mobile, landline services in Kashmir and parts of Jammu. It also asks for restrictions on free movement of journalists and media persons to be relaxed.

Today’s hearing: The top court sent a notice to Centre after Bhasin’s lawyers Vrinda Grover said: “Media can still cannot operate, one month is over. What is the notification and law. On what basis has this communication been blocked, leading to a black out….My paper still cannot be printed… travel is not allowed. What is a journalist and media meant to report.” Thed matter has been listed for September 16.

5. Tehseen Poonawalla, a social activist, had raised the issue of lockdown in the region as amounting to suspension of Article 19 (freedom of speech) and 21 (personal liberty) of the Constitution.

Today’s hearing: His lawyer, also a resident of J&K, says people in Kashmir are suffocating. They have not been allowed to venture out nor do they have any transport facility to travel. He says there are more people like the MLA (Tarigami), who has been ordered to be moved to AIIMS. Lawyer beseeches the court to at least ask the government to provide transportation. The court asks centre to file their affidavits.