Article 370: Justice Sanjiv Khanna expresses concern on covernsion of State into UT, says it has "grave consequences"

"Union Territories are normally geographically small territories, or may be created for aberrant reasons or causes. Conversion of a State into Union Territory has grave consequences, amongstothers, it denies the citizens of the State an elected State government and impinges on federalism," Justice Khanna said in a concurring but seperate judgement.

In his judgement, Justice Khanna further said that conversion/creation of a Union Territory from a State "has to be justified by giving very strong and cogent grounds".

He opined that it must be in strict compliance with Article 3 of the Constitution of India (Formation of new States and alteration of areas, boundaries or names of existing States).

A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Monday unanimously upheld the validity of the Union government's 2019 decision to abrogate Article 370 of the Constitution which conferred the special status of Jammu and Kashmir while pointing out that Article 370 is a "temporary provision".

Justice Khanna concurred with Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul on the issue of the Constituent Assembly and agreed with Justice Kaul's explanation of the effect of Article 370(3) and why it continued to operate after the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly of the State.

Justice Khanna in his seperate judgement further wrote that Article 370 was enacted as atransitional provision and did not have permanent character. "The abrogation of Article 370 does not negate the federal structure, as the citizens living in Jammu and Kashmir do and will enjoy same status and rights as given to citizens residing in other parts of the country," verdict added.

A five-judge Constitution bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, and Surya Kant said Article 370 was enacted due to wartime conditions in the State and was meant to serve a transitional purpose.(ANI)