Senior Advocate Shah concludes his arguments.
Shah: 370 as a matter of fact, is a case of where the government wants to do something but there is a constitutional obstacle.
Shah: You use 367, alter 370, take it back and then you kill 367 itself. It's not a bonafide action. It's not legitimate.
Shah: Someone thought that we'll kill the hen and get all the golden eggs.
Shah: Entire constitution right from Art 2 to 396 would apply to us. In that, 368 would also apply.
Shah: 3. CO 272 issued with concurrence of govt of J&K which meant a govt where council of ministers is in place
4. All provisions of Indian constitution are made applicable to J&K which couldn't be done as it hadn't been done by Constituent Assembly or by J&K govt in 69 years.
Shah: 1. CO 272 is notified at a stage when the presidential order under 356 is in operation.
2. The President under notification dated 19 Dec 2018 had assumed to himself powers of governor of J&K.
CJI: Can you crystallise your arguments on this aspect?
Shah: We need to interpret 370 on basis of the purpose it has.
Shah: What is the legal value entrapped in 370? Council of ministers- doesn't it show the political presence of people? Doesn't it show that the representatives of people are present? Doesn't it show an element of democracy?