#Article 370 Verdict

[kimskashmir]

Omar, Mehbooba claim under 'house arrest' ahead of SC verdict on Article 370; Admin denies

SRINAGAR — Former Jammu and Kashmir chief ministers Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti Monday claimed they were put under house arrest ahead of the Supreme Court’s verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution that conferred a special status on Jammu and Kashmir. However, Jammu and Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha and the police said no one was…

[kupwaratimes-fan]

Review petition filed in Supreme Court on Article 370 verdict

Review petition filed in Supreme Court on Article 370 verdict Srinagar, Jan 10 : Article 370 that had given special status to Jammu and Kashmir is once again in headlines after a review petition was filed on Tuesday in the Supreme Court against its verdict last year upholding the abrogation of Article 370.    According to details available with KNS the review petition was filed in the top court…

[45cementry-gates]

I'm so proud of my state. They really said -

Char chavanni ghode pe, separatists mere L***de pe.

Mehbooba mufti and Omar Abdullah (and his father Farukh Abdullah) were both chief ministers of Jammu and Kashmir at one point and both were known separatists.

Here's what they had said about the removal of article 370 -

These two contested for the lok sabha elections and lost by HUGE margins.

(u can google the details yourself)

The people of J&K (especially Kashmir including me) have shown everyone who they want.

Also if you're like... Actually interested to learn about Kashmiri locals watch Yana Mir instead of some random Angrez who doesn't know shit. She's actually a Kashmiri Muslim woman who interviews locals and gathers their opinions.

Oh and engineer Rashid is in jail btw.

But he has spoken against stone pelting and violence by youth.

[odnewsin]

CJI Chandrachud: A legacy of landmark verdicts that shaped society and some controversy too

New Delhi: He has judgments such as the Ayodhya land dispute, the abrogation of Article 370 and the decriminalisation of consensual gay sex that shaped society and politics to his name. India’s 50th chief justice D Y Chandrachud, known also for his many pithy statements, leaves an imprint all his own on the annals of legal history. Friday was the last day in court for Chandrachud, or DYC as he is…

[danzer91]

GOOD NEWS! SUPREME COURT'S Final Verdict on Kashmir's ARTICLE 370 Explained

[bhattandjoshiassociates-blog]

Federalism in the Article 370 Verdict: Unanswered Queries and Justice Ravindra Bhat's Observations on the Supreme Court's Silence

Introduction The verdict on Article 370 by the Supreme Court of India has been a subject of significant scrutiny and debate since its issuance. Retired Supreme Court judge Justice S Ravindra Bhat, in his recent remarks, shed light on a crucial aspect that remained unaddressed in the Court's decision – the issue of federalism. This essay aims to explore the implications of the Supreme Court's silence on federalism in the Article 370 verdict, as elucidated by Justice Ravindra Bhat. Through an analysis of relevant legal principles, precedents, and contemporary constitutional concerns, we seek to understand the broader ramifications of this omission within the Indian legal landscape. Contextualizing the Concern To comprehend the significance of Justice Bhat's remarks, it is essential to contextualize the issue within the broader framework of constitutional law and governance in India. The abrogation of Article 370, which granted special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir, was a landmark decision with far-reaching implications. While the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of this move, questions surrounding federalism and the powers of the Parliament remained unanswered. Justice Bhat's critique highlights the need for a robust examination of federal principles within the Indian constitutional framework, particularly in the context of state reorganization and centralization of powers. Federalism in the Article 370 Verdict: Key Points of Concern Justice Bhat's critique centers on the Court's failure to address the fundamental question of whether the Parliament has the authority to downgrade a State into a Union Territory. This omission is particularly concerning as it has significant implications for the federal structure of the Indian polity. By accepting assurances from the Solicitor General regarding the restoration of statehood for Jammu and Kashmir without specifying a timeline or addressing the broader legal implications, the Court missed an opportunity to clarify the constitutional boundaries of federalism. Analyzing Legal Precedents To elucidate the gravity of the issue, it is instructive to analyze relevant legal precedents and judicial interpretations that inform the understanding of federalism in India. The concept of asymmetric federalism, as articulated in cases such as Govt. of NCT of Delhi v Union of India, underscores the nuanced relationship between Union Territories and the Union government. By recognizing the distinct treatment afforded to different Union Territories based on their constitutional status, the Court has established a framework for accommodating regional diversity within the federal structure. Examining Federalism in the Article 370 Verdict Through Legal Precedents Justice Bhat's remarks also draw attention to the evolving nature of constitutional jurisprudence in India, characterized by a dynamic interplay between legal principles and societal norms. Cases such as the Demonetization Case and the Maharashtra Assembly case have demonstrated the judiciary's role in interpreting constitutional provisions in light of contemporary realities. As the Indian polity undergoes transformative changes, it is imperative for the judiciary to adapt interpretations to reflect evolving societal norms while maintaining fidelity to constitutional principles. Navigating Technological Advancements In addition to constitutional principles, Justice Bhat's remarks also touch upon the impact of technological advancements on legal norms and governance. The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning technologies has posed novel challenges to traditional legal frameworks, particularly in areas such as privacy, public opinion, and policymaking. As AI-enabled products permeate various aspects of society, there is a pressing need for collective efforts to navigate these challenges and reshape legal norms to align with the realities of the digital age. Conclusion: Implications for Federalism in the Article 370 Verdict In conclusion, Justice Ravindra Bhat's critique of the Supreme Court's silence on federalism in the Article 370 verdict highlights broader concerns regarding the interpretation and application of constitutional principles in India. By failing to address fundamental questions surrounding federalism and the powers of the Parliament, the Court missed an opportunity to provide clarity on critical issues of governance and constitutional law. Moving forward, it is imperative for the judiciary to engage in robust deliberations on federalism and adapt legal interpretations to reflect evolving societal dynamics while upholding constitutional values. Only through such proactive engagement can the judiciary fulfill its role as a guardian of constitutional democracy and ensure the preservation of federal principles in India's evolving political landscape. Read the full article

[famousbollywood1]

Bollywood Box Office Collection 2024 Report & Verdict India

There are many Bollywood movies which are hit and flop. Some of the Bollywood Box Office Collection report are:

Article 370: Its budget is Rs 40 crore and it made a Bollywood Box Office Collection of Rs 25.4 crore.

Teri Baaton Mein Aisa Uljha Jiya: Its budget is Rs 85 crore and it made a Bollywood Box Office Collection of Rs 68.8 crore.

Fighter: The cast in this movie are Hrithik Roshan and Deepika Padukone. Its budget is Rs 200 crore and it made a box office collection of Rs 197 crore. It was a hit movie.

Hanuman (Hindi): This is based on the Ramayana. Its budget is Rs 50 crore and it has made a Bollywood Box Office Collection of Rs 50.76 crore. It is a super hit movie.

Dunki: The cast in the movie Dunki are Shah Rukh Khan and Taapsee Pannu. Its budget is Rs 200 crore and it made a Bollywood Box Office Collection of Rs 212.8 crore.

Main Atal Hoon: Its budget is Rs 25 crore and it made a box office collection of Rs 6.4 crore. It is a flop movie.

Animal: The cast in this movie are Ranbir Kapoor, Anil Kapoor, Rashmika Mandanna and Bobby Deol. Its budget is Rs 200 crore and it made a Bollywood Box Office Collection of Rs 555.9 crore. It is an all time blockbuster movie.

Sam Bahadur: The cast in this movie is Vicky Kaushal. Its budget is Rs 65 crore and it made a Bollywood Box Office Collection of Rs 89.62 crore. It is a hit movie.

Conclusion: There are many Bollywood movies which are hits such as 12 fail, Leo, Jawan, Fukrey 3 and Gadar 2 etc. Some flop Bollywood movies are Aquaman 2, The Archies, Farrey, Khichdi 2, Pippa, Hunger Games 5, The marvels, etc.

[truck-fump]

<b>Trump's</b> civil fraud trial verdict expected today. Follow the latest - AP News

New Post has been published on https://www.google.com/url?rct=j&sa=t&url=https://apnews.com/article/trump-civil-fraud-verdict-engoron-244024861f0df886543c157c9fc5b3e4&ct=ga&cd=CAIyGjUzM2UwMTY5ZmFhZTIwMGQ6Y29tOmVuOlVT&usg=AOvVaw2IYGmLDHkSsrbzh-Mz8aM0

Trump's civil fraud trial verdict expected today. Follow the latest - AP News

New York Attorney General Letitia James is seeking $370 million and a ban on Trump and other defendants from doing business in the state.

[livnews]

https://spotyourshop.com/the-supreme-courts-verdict-on-jk-article-370/

[xtruss]

From The Rapes Capital of The World, RANDIA! Fascist Indian Supreme Court’s Unilateral Rulings Driven By 2024 Election Consideration

— Jin Cuodao | December 18, 2023

Illustration: Xia Qing/Global Times

The Fascist Supreme Court of India upheld Indian government's decision to abolish Article 370 of the Constitution on December 11, and ruled that the government acted lawfully when it revoked the autonomy of the state of Occupied Jammu and Kashmir and brought it directly under control of the center.

At the same time, the ruling deemed the so-called Ladakh Union Territory, established by the Indian government in 2019, as legally valid. This ruling not only disregards the wishes and interests of the people of Jammu and Kashmir, but also overlooks the bilateral agreements and existing contradictions between India and Pakistan, as well as between China and India. Furthermore, it ignores the consensus and calls from the international community.

Pakistan firmly rejects the Supreme Court's ruling, stating that it has "no legal value" and that the international law doesn't recognize New Delhi's "unilateral and illegal actions" of August 5, 2019. The spokesperson of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated on December 13 that China has never recognized the so-called union territory of Ladakh set up unilaterally and illegally by India. India's domestic judicial verdict does not change the fact that the western section of the China-India border has always belonged to China. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation has also called for the resolution of the regional issue in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the United Nations Security Council.

So why did the Indian government once again unilaterally provoke the dispute over the Kashmir issue? First, it may want to take advantage of the current favorable international environment. Currently, the international strategic environment is very favorable to India. The US regards China as its biggest strategic competitor and sees India as a pillar to counterbalance China, so Washington no longer focuses on the Kashmir issue. Pakistan is facing political, economic and social crises and challenges domestically, with weak national strength resulting in a decline in its global strategic position.

Currently, India's GDP is around 11 times that of Pakistan, and the significant change in the strength of the two countries clearly favors India, with the gap between them likely to continue to widen. In addition, some Muslim countries value the Indian market and maintain friendly relations with India.

In addition, India's move may be related to the 2024 Indian general elections, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi having declared his intention for a third term. Despite leading in opinion polls, Modi faces a challenge from the opposition coalition. The main activities of the Indian government in 2023 as well as the Fascist Hindus Extremist’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) are actually geared toward the general elections next year.

The revocation of the special status of Indian-administered Kashmir is one of the key promises of the BJP during the 2019 general elections, and the Supreme Court's decision to issue this ruling by the end of 2023 - just a few months before the general elections - is both to endorse and justify the decision of the BJP in 2019, and also to highlight Modi's tough image of practicing what he promises and consolidating his position among the domestic population, especially in the Hindi-speaking regions, to garner more support and votes.

Kashmir is an internationally recognized disputed area, and is not an issue that can be resolved by unilateral domestic legislation or by altering maps and constantly reinforcing the narrative of its ownership. India's attempts to endorse the BJP through the Supreme Court of India and to realize its objective of permanent possession by altering the demographic structure of Indian-controlled Kashmir is an act of unilateralism that places domestic laws above international law. This does not find solutions to problems, but rather creates more and more problems.

This is a great irony for India, who is striving to become a "leader of the global South" and a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. India's constant unilateral repetition of such behavior cannot be justified and will only lead to opposition from Pakistan and the countries concerned, as well as resentment from the international community, thus resulting in deeper contradictions and fissures. The Kashmir issue, which is a historical legacy of the British colonization, can only be resolved properly and peacefully in accordance with the UN Charter, the UN Security Council resolutions and bilateral agreement.

In the recent Israel-Palestine conflict, the Indian government had initially strongly supported Israel's campaign against Hamas, reflecting its deep-seated hatred of Muslims and its disdain for disunity in Muslim countries, as it had done in the case of Kashmir. The Supreme Court's ruling will have a negative impact on the regional situation. While resolutely defending its rights and interests, China adheres to its basic position of resolving disputes through dialogue and strives to play a positive and constructive role in maintaining regional peace and stability.

— The author is a scholar of international studies in Shanghai.

[kimskashmir]

Security beefed up across Kashmir ahead of SC verdict on Article 370

SRINAGAR — Security was beefed up across Kashmir on Monday ahead of the Supreme Court’s verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the abrogation of the provisions of Article 370 of the Constitution that gave a special status to the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir, officials said. Security forces have been deployed at many places in the valley to maintain law and order, they…

[kupwaratimes-fan]

Hope SC to pronounce verdict on Article 370 in favor of JK: Azad

Hope SC to pronounce verdict on Article 370 in favor of JK: Azad Srinagar, Dec 10: Democratic Progressive Azad Party (DPAP) Chairman Ghulam Nabi Azad Sunday said that we are hopeful that Supreme Court to pronounce verdict on Article 370 in favor of Jammu and Kashmir.   He said people of J&K are waiting for last more than four years that they will get justice from the apex court.   “People of J&K…

[common-man]

Letter.

Letter Published in The National UAE on15 Dec23 Indian court's milestone verdict to Kashmir With reference to Bibhudutta Pradhan's report Article 370 verdict: India's Supreme Court upholds revocation of Kashmir's special status (December 11): Five years ago, in August 2019, the special status of the state of Jammu and Kashmir was abrogated by the ruling Bhartiya Janata Party. This was a significant milestone in Indian political history. Now that it has been upheld by the Supreme Court, it's good that polls are to be held there before next September. After the recent victory of the BJP in three of the four state elections, the party will have an even better standing in next year's Lok Sabha elections.

Despite the unhappiness the Court's verdict has caused the political opposition parties, some analysts believe that overall India‘s 'One Nation, One Election' policy will shine through in the coming months. Most people are also hoping that this finally brings development and unity to Kashmir. And that perhaps, above all, Kashmir will regain its place as one of the best destinations for tourists and trade, as witnessed decades ago.

K Ragavan, Bengaluru, India

[arravindra]

ఆర్టికల్ 370 రద్దుపై సుప్రీంకోర్టు తీర్పు.. || Article 370 Verdict || CF...

[vipulchandra1990]

Article 370: J&K Awaits Verdict

As the nation awaited the Supreme Court’s verdict on the constitutional validity of the abrogation of Article 370, voices from Jammu and Kashmir reflected a spectrum of hopes and concerns.

[addnoral]

PM to lead drive against Indian SC verdict on IIOJ&K

Caretaker Prime Minister Anwaarul Haq Kakar on Tuesday said that that he would attending the special session of the AJK Legislative Assembly on Thursday from where he would lead the movement against the Indian Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the revocation of Article 370.The prime minister, in an interaction with the participants of the 12th National Balochistan Workshop, said that no high…