AG : In the Prem Nath Kaul judgement of 1959, these were the specific words used: ““On 25.10.1947, the Maharaja signed an Instrument of Accession with India which had then become an independent Dominion.”
AG : These words are very important, please highlight, your Lordships.
The purpose for this story of integration of the Indian States is to show the consolidation of the country. I want to show that the sovereignty of J&K was indeed temporary. We are a Union of States.
Delving into the history of the State, the AG says that he will differ on many counts. For instance, Maharaja had entered into a Standstill Agreement with Pakistan.
He is reading out from V.P. Menon’s book called “Integration of the Indian States”. This is to showcase the relationship between the Maharaja and Pakistan and the basis of Maharaja’s subsequent IOA with India.
AG - Maharaja had asked for the aid of India due to the insurgents present in the State. There were criminal activities taking place and records even suggest that these separatists trained by Pakistan had been specially sent to create havoc. Section 3 of the Constitution of India does not shed a light on the issue of J&K being an integral part of the country. Referendum was not a permanent declaration of any sort.
AG : That separatists are not bad elements is an incorrect statement.
They wanted their own State.
Attorney General arguing now.
"On the issue of referendum, there were separatists who supported this because they wanted sovereignty for the State. The will of the people resided in that."
The basis of Sampat Prakash and Prem Nath Kaul are different. But, I would rather not go into the merits at this point.
Sr. Adv. Rajeev Dhawan gets up and says that he agrees with the AG on the point of reference.
Shah - The merger and standstill documents had not been executed when it comes to the State of J&K.