NEW DELHI: The Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justice SK Kaul expressed doubts about the permanent status of Article 370 in the Indian Constitution during a hearing on pleas against the hollowing of the article. They questioned whether the permanence of Article 370 in the Indian Constitution could be derived from the provisions of the J&K constitution. Justice Kaul further stated that it is difficult to accept the argument that neither the assembly nor Parliament can amend Article 370, as the Constitution is a dynamic document. He suggested that there might have to be a new category of unamendable provisions apart from the basic structure. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that any alteration to Article 370 could only have been done by the J&K Constituent Assembly, which no longer exists. He claimed that Article 370 had acquired permanence since the Constituent Assembly lapsed in 1957 without providing a mechanism for amendment. Sibal also argued that Parliament’s application of all provisions of the Constitution to J&K would nullify the significance of Article 370. The CJI clarified that the J&K constitution is subordinate to the Indian Constitution and the state legislature cannot change the relationship between J&K and India. Sibal will continue his arguments on Tuesday.

The content has been rewritten to improve SEO standards, increase readability, and ensure uniqueness.