Barely 48 hours after the BJP pulled out of the alliance with the PDP in Kashmir, talks on revoking Article 370 have gained steam. BJP MP, Sabha Subramanian Swamy in a tweet claimed to have written to the PMO on “why Article 370 can be deleted without Parliament concurrence."
Chief minister Mehbooba Mufti had resigned Tuesday evening after the BJP pulled out of the coalition with her party.
New Delhi: Jammu & Kashmir was brought...
Mehbooba Mufti, who submitted her resignation this evening, said her party will continue to strive for dialogue in the state
Srinagar: PDP chief and Jammu and...
The BJP walked out of the alliance with PDP in Jammu and Kashmir. According to reports, BJP was especially unhappy with Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti’s handling of rising violence in the valley. Shortly after, Mufti also submitted her resignation to Governor NN Vohra.
By including two MLAs who were present at protests supporting Kathua rape-murder accused, the BJP has tried to reclaim the narrative that it fights for Jammu’s rights.
India’s industrial output growth saw a 10-month low in June, with Index of Industrial Production (IIP) growing by mere 1.5% as against 1.9% in May 2025.
Standing up to America is usually not a personal risk for a leader in India. Any suggestions of foreign pressure unites India behind who they see as leading them in that fight.
Article 370 exists in both, in GOI Constitution and in JK Assembly Constitution. Any correction or removal must take place signe and sealed by all stake holders. The teouble is the ones who hold JK Assembly powers are 3 to 5 families of long time Muslim heritage who will not make that change and the people of JK will go their representatives sides because they have not seen the fruits of GOI Constitution yet. GOI can not literally buy the JK people’s opinion unless they teach them, bribe them, put them in India with big rewards, and simply hope they will elect only those leaders in JK Assembly who will be proponents of any changes including removal of 370. It’s a catch 22. J. Nehru caused all this to happen. India can physically then, take full control of JK’s electoral process and for some reasons jail these families representatives, and replace them with those who will bring about these changes including removal. Another way is to attack JK and redraft / remove anything GOI does not like. That is called a Civil War.
Like all things in life, nothing is permanent, not even the planets let alone the constitutions of India. They are not set in stones and can never be permanent. Constitutions are created to facilitate the working of a government and not to obstruct its efficiency. They are not permanent and the Supreme Court’s opinion that Article 370 has attained a permanent status in the Indian constitution is itself restricted to time and the culture prevailing in a country. If the people of India demand a change in the constitution of India, only an authoritarian government will ignore the democratic will of its majority electorate. India is a democratic country and it must be governed according to the wishes of its citizens. A nationwide referendum to gauge the views of the majority of Indians with regard to Article 370 will authenticate the true nature of Indian democracy. Any Indian piece of land whether it is in Andaman and Nicobar Islands or in Kashmir belong to all Indians, and not just or exclusively to their local inhabitants. All forms of privileges are unfair, discriminatory and misallocation of resources. Inequality of treatment whether in citizenship, economic opportunities or physical movement is backwardness and against fundamental human rights. The consequence of upholding Article 370 is itself anti-constitutional.
Teh experts talk about the consequences, but a plain reading makes it clear that president can do it but not before seeking consent of constituent assembly of jk, which has been abolished in 1957. So first the constituent assembly is to be created to seek consent but that would be mean the abrogation of the accession signed by the then constituent assembly, a legal herdl.
Its abomination to read a senior journalist like Mr Jagannathan casually stating that historical events and facts don’t matter in governing of the nation.
Its abomination again to read Mr Jagannathan informing the readers that Article 370 is there in the statute, just to appease “MUSLIMS”.
Mr Jagannathan, dose the instrument of accession signed between the Union of India and the sovereign ruler, of J & K, by the way a “HINDU” betray the sentiments expressed by you in your piece?
Apurva there was no ruling that happened with respect to Article 370. It was just a observation. So please do not give wrong information and claim you are a journalist.
Article 370 exists in both, in GOI Constitution and in JK Assembly Constitution. Any correction or removal must take place signe and sealed by all stake holders. The teouble is the ones who hold JK Assembly powers are 3 to 5 families of long time Muslim heritage who will not make that change and the people of JK will go their representatives sides because they have not seen the fruits of GOI Constitution yet. GOI can not literally buy the JK people’s opinion unless they teach them, bribe them, put them in India with big rewards, and simply hope they will elect only those leaders in JK Assembly who will be proponents of any changes including removal of 370. It’s a catch 22. J. Nehru caused all this to happen. India can physically then, take full control of JK’s electoral process and for some reasons jail these families representatives, and replace them with those who will bring about these changes including removal. Another way is to attack JK and redraft / remove anything GOI does not like. That is called a Civil War.
Like all things in life, nothing is permanent, not even the planets let alone the constitutions of India. They are not set in stones and can never be permanent. Constitutions are created to facilitate the working of a government and not to obstruct its efficiency. They are not permanent and the Supreme Court’s opinion that Article 370 has attained a permanent status in the Indian constitution is itself restricted to time and the culture prevailing in a country. If the people of India demand a change in the constitution of India, only an authoritarian government will ignore the democratic will of its majority electorate. India is a democratic country and it must be governed according to the wishes of its citizens. A nationwide referendum to gauge the views of the majority of Indians with regard to Article 370 will authenticate the true nature of Indian democracy. Any Indian piece of land whether it is in Andaman and Nicobar Islands or in Kashmir belong to all Indians, and not just or exclusively to their local inhabitants. All forms of privileges are unfair, discriminatory and misallocation of resources. Inequality of treatment whether in citizenship, economic opportunities or physical movement is backwardness and against fundamental human rights. The consequence of upholding Article 370 is itself anti-constitutional.
Teh experts talk about the consequences, but a plain reading makes it clear that president can do it but not before seeking consent of constituent assembly of jk, which has been abolished in 1957. So first the constituent assembly is to be created to seek consent but that would be mean the abrogation of the accession signed by the then constituent assembly, a legal herdl.
Its abomination to read a senior journalist like Mr Jagannathan casually stating that historical events and facts don’t matter in governing of the nation.
Its abomination again to read Mr Jagannathan informing the readers that Article 370 is there in the statute, just to appease “MUSLIMS”.
Mr Jagannathan, dose the instrument of accession signed between the Union of India and the sovereign ruler, of J & K, by the way a “HINDU” betray the sentiments expressed by you in your piece?
Apurva there was no ruling that happened with respect to Article 370. It was just a observation. So please do not give wrong information and claim you are a journalist.