In the midst of a raging debate over Article 35A, Jammu lawyers on Thursday decided to approach the Supreme Court by filing an application for impleadment as one of the parties in the case. The lawyers also resolved and decided to unanimously oppose the retention of Article 35A, saying “It was inserted in the Constitution of India by way of Presidential Order in the year 1954, by resorting to Article 370 of the Constitution of India, without following the Constitutional mandate of Article 368 of the Constitution of India which provides for amendment of the Constitution”. “We disown and condemn the statement made by few members of J&K High Court Bar Association (JKHCBAJ) wherein they supported the retention of Article 35A in individual capacity, despite the fact that the Association, in a meeting of its General House on August 3 last year, had already resolved and taken a unanimous decision to oppose the retention of Article 35A,” advocate Abhinav Sharma, president of JKHCBAJ, said after chairing a meeting of the executive committee here. Sharma said they had suspended five members of the association from its basic membership for making statements in support of Article 35A and it was unanimously decided “to intervene before the Supreme Court by filing an application for impleadment as one of the parties in the case”. He also claimed that the executive committee of the Bar had decided that no member of JKHCBAJ was authorised to speak and make statements and tender opinion regarding any issue, particularly Article 35A of the Constitution of India in future, except the official spokesperson appointed by the elected office-bearers or by the office-bearers themselves. Pertinently, the Centre’s recent move of sending 100 companies of troops to Kashmir valley had triggered a major controversy after some reports linked it with the speculations of abrogation of Article 35A
