Sibal: So you cannot exercise that power independent. 370 is only a process of integration. We're dealing with a process adopted by government of India consistent with this process of integration. There is no unilateral declaration.
Sibal: Assuming there is a silence, how will you read it under CO 272 and 273? Because they deal with 370(3) as it stands. You will still have to say if they're consistent with the unilateral notification to be issued by President which isn't there.
Sibal: Article 370 has two colons, the rest are all semi-colons. The two colons reside in (d) and (3).
Sibal: Bilateralism is at the heart of the process...There can't be a unilateral act by the parliament. There is no silence in the constitution.
Sibal: All other states followed a uniform pattern of integration, other than Jammu and Kashmir.
Sibal: See what the language is. "Constitution of India to be shortly adapted shall be insofar as applicable to state of J&K govern..."
Sibal: J&K was not. It was the only state excluded from Part B states.
CJI: Equally the proclamation executed by Yuvraj says that the entire relationship between J&K and Union would be governed by Constitution of India and all previous understandings are superseded.
Sibal: This was incorporated in these terms in the Constitution which was not done for anyone else. This shows that merger was never contemplated except in terms of 370. All the others became through proclamation part of the states and then became part of B states.
Sibal provides the bench with a list of princely states that signed a merger agreement with Union.
Sibal: All through merger agreements, no exception except Jammu and Kashmir. That was not conceived in terms of 370 itself.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal commences his rejoinder arguments for the day.
SG: Even subsequent to filing of petitions, this continued. Filing of petition is not separatist.
Sibal: I hope that that sentiment applies to us also because we have not made any submission other than on the law and the constitution.