“While Kashmir has gone through some tough times in history, with the abrogation of Article 370 it feels like Kashmir has been exiled from itself. Recent events, like the communication blackout, have confined Kashmiris to their homes."
These were the words of a Kashmiri PhD scholar at the University of Pennsylvania, as he recited a poem for The Quint on the plight of the people stuck in Kashmir after the Union government abrogated Article 370 on 5 August 2019.
"I dedicate this poem to Kashmiris, who have been rendered prisoners in their own houses, and to Kashmir, which has been exiled from itself," he added.
Nearly four years after the government revoked the special status of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) which led to the bifurcation of the State in 2019, India’s Supreme Court started hearing the petitions challenging the move on 2 August.
"This is a historic moment in many ways. First, your lordships will analyse why history was crossed out. Whether procedure established by parliament was consistent with what democracy stands for. Whether the will of people of J&K can be silenced?,” Senior Advocate Kapil Sibail had said, while opening the arguments in the case.
After nine days of hearings, the petitioners concluded their arguments in the batch of pleas challenging the abrogation and the government is currently arguing its side.
The Constitution bench of the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and including Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, and Surya Kant, presided over these hearings.
But what exactly have the petitioners argued? The Quint breaks it down in 10 points.