Art 35 A adjournment

B L Saraf
The Supreme Court   has   adjourned   hearing of the petitions challenging   Article 35 A of the Constitution   which empowers J&K  Legislature  to define its permanent residents  and  confer on them special rights and  privileges. The adjournment came on the request of  the Central Government which pleaded before the  Court  that it has appointed    a  representative  to hold talks with all stake holders to resolve  the  Kashmir issue and it was not  right time  to proceed with the matter. The Attorney General told the Court    ” We  have appointed an Interlocutor . He has started talks with the stake holders.  If    court  continues with  the  hearing,  it might affect the ongoing  dialogue process .”
Well, seeking an adjournment of a court proceeding is a  routine affair  and, normally,  should not be  a   reason  to initiate a debate  – unless   it affects the    cause of   justice delivery system, itself. It is   a part of the    business   in the  judicial   affairs.  However, given the nature of the case and hype created around it by some   political  players  and the reason supplied for the adjournment the deferment of the case  has something more than meets the eye.  We can get a whiff  of an  inclination,   on the part of GOI,  that it  would prefer  placing  fate of Article 35  A  subservient to the better judgment   of the interlocutor  and, as a corollary,  may not be    against its   retention on the statute book. Who, in turn, may  get a hint  as to how he should    deal  with the   “stake holder” sitting  across  his table, in a bid to    have some   sort of  resolution to the ticklish K issue. So a   legal   issue   changes   complexion to become a  political  one!  Indeed a pleasant development. We have been arguing for some time now that   courts  seldom  provide a forum   to   settle a matter   which, essentially, falls in  a political   domain .   In this regard,   any  issue   related to   the Article  35 A    could be  a case  to point out.
It is good that Prime  Minister  Modi    has chosen   dialogue over  the court battle.  The  adjournment has different meanings  for  the  different people.  Particularly, for those  sitting  on  the  extreme   who seem to have been   overtaken by  the   heavy  dose of  ‘ nationalism’     and for those  flying   high  on the  opposite end  –  dreaming about  azadi    and a   religious   rule .      To the hyper -nationalist  it signals that  PM Modi  will listen to their shrill    ‘nationalistic’  rhetoric only up to  the   point  and not beyond   if it   impinges   up on the larger  ( real)  nation interest.  For the separatist and fence sitters  in Kashmir,  it  carries a message   that PM  can be   accommodative to  the   extent, so long  it does not  affect  the sovereignty and  integrity of the Nation. It also   signifies  that for   Narendra  Modi   commitment to  safeguard    special status  of   J&K, within the Indian Union,   is  second to none    in the  mainstream  politics .
In  this connection it could be said that, hopefully, things have started to move in a right direction . Dineshwar Sharma – the  Center’s  representative  – has , while  talking to a national daily in New Delhi , said about the stone pelting  ” there is nothing like a stone pelter. The youngsters have moved away from the right path . Now it will be my job to talk to them and bring them on the right   side .”   Our prayer  is : let good sense prevail upon  the  misguided !
Though  hard to  convince  them, the separatists  must  understand that if they do not hold the olive branch extended by PM Modi – who enjoys  a mass support  across India and is endowed with a strong  political will  – they won’t  get another chance  and Kashmir would continue to bleed , should  2019 national election through up  a different verdict. Because, in the alternative , we  will   be  in for a misrule of  a rag tag  Coalition  Government that is  brought about by the   desperate  political dinosaurs,  whose  only   purpose would be to perpetuate themselves by  resorting to all kinds of   manipulations .   Survival instinct  and   an  irresistible  urge  to  milk    the   circumstances – to the hilt – will leave  hardly any time for them   to address the K problem.  The  decade long    rule of  the   moribund  UPA  illustrates the point .
The  ‘ major stake holders ‘   must  understand  that  the  politics is a science of good senses , applied to the ever changing  public   events . That demands of them  to  display what may be   a  wisdom today , rather wait for tomorrow when    folly  or  ruin  will    haunt them.   Same  is  true for  those who adorn the  treasury benches in   J&K. Will they  care to listen  ;  after all they are the politicians ?   It  is tragedy that most politicians today don’t deserve to be in the politics. They are  as     unable   to   examine the context as they lack capacity to think  ahead.
All  in all, the  reason put forth for the adjournment  is a well come  development .It may clear the  mist of doubt  about the present status of  J &K  within the Indian Constitution  .  Here,  PM has   done  something  which  to  many  among his own tribe is  anathema.  The move, undoubtedly,     reveals  a glimpse of   statesman  Narendra  Modi, as  opposite to that of an ordinary politician. J&K   is  different place in as much as  here politics is inevitably  ingrained in everything . If things have to  settle down  locally , keeping the cross  -LOC dimension apart  for a while, the contours of  the national   and local  politics –  vis -a – vis the state – must  be  renegotiated . In the  mean time, let us pray  that the case is  adjourned  sine-die .
(The author is former Principal  District  & Sessions Judge)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com