Opinion

An open letter to CJI Shri B R Gavai on the need to constitute SC bench to look into reasons leading to Jammu woes

Appeal to take suo motu cognizance and form an SC bench to address Jammu’s exclusion and suffering, and propose remedies

Hari Om

July 2, 2025

Appeal to take suo motu cognizance and form an SC bench to address Jammu’s exclusion and suffering, and propose remedies

Honourable Chief Justice Gavai,

I am a man on the spot in Jammu in the Union Territory of J&K, former Dean of Social Sciences and Head of History Department, University of Jammu, and former member of the Indian Council of Historical Research.

I write to congratulate you for your June 28, 2025 Nagpur University statement that “the idea of a separate constitution for J&K State was never part of B R Ambedkar’s vision for a unified India” and express grave concern over the June 29, 2025 disturbing demand as put forth by former interlocutor on J&K Radha Kumar, former Union Home Secretary G K Pillai, Maj Gen (Retd) Ashok Mehta, AVM (Retd) Kapil Kak and former Union Secretary of the Inter-State Council of India Amitabha Pande through their open letter addressed to you — demand that urged you to constitute “a bench of Supreme Court to hear petitions on the unconstitutionality of the removal of J&K’s statehood, seeking an early deadline for its restoration.” I also write to make a humble request that you should constitute a bench of the Supreme Court to look into the circumstances leading to the Jammu people’s woes and suggest ways and means which enable them to enjoy a status in the polity they, like other citizens of the country, legitimately deserve.

Your statement on the views of B R Ambedkar on Article 370 and a separate constitution for J&K has cleared all the cobwebs of confusion and put things in perspective. The grateful nation would always remain indebted to you.

It was hoped that Radha Kumar, G K Pillai, Ashok Mehta, Kapil Kak, and Amitabha Pande – all petitioners in the Article 370/ special status case – would appreciate your statement. Sadly, it didn’t happen. Instead, they — all ardent believers in the concept of Kashmiri Muslim sub-nationalism – again sided with the votaries of special status in Kashmir, distorted certain facts in their letter to mislead and demanded restoration of statehood wilfully suppressing what the Kashmiri ruling elite did when three historically, geographically, politically and culturally distinct Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh regions were maintained as a single political unit; what the Kashmiri religio-political class has been saying and doing since August 5, 2019, when the Narendra Modi government gave an effect to the B R Ambedkar’s vision, integrated the region fully into India and bifurcated J&K State into two union territories, and what the ruling National Conference has been doing since October 16, 2014, when Omar Abdullah took over as J&K Chief Minister. They – ably backed by certain elements in the South and North Blocks– all muddied, and continue to muddy, the Indian waters in the region, and rigorously exclude the people of Jammu province from all spheres.

For example, they have, in their letter, said: “In his oral remarks, the then Chief Justice of India, D Y Chandrachud, urged the Union administration to restore statehood at the soonest.” I’m afraid what they claimed is not true. Former CJI had, in fact, said: “We (Supreme Court) are conscious of the fact that these are matters of national security. We understand that ultimately, preservation of the nation itself is the overriding concern…Let’s face it, whether it’s a State or a Union Territory, all of us survive if the nation survives. If the nation itself doesn’t survive, there is no relevance of State or Union Territory…Should we not give that allowance to Parliament to postulate that for a certain period, in the interest of the preservation of the nation itself, in the interest of the preservation of the Union itself, we want, for a certain stipulated period, that this particular State should go to the fold of union territory.”

They have, in their letter, also claimed that the people of Kashmir “were the first to protest the Pahalgam terrorist attack” and also expressed fear that the Union government could use this attack as an “argument against statehood.” At the same time, they have suggested that “this is exactly the time to restore statehood.”

Let me quote what the Director of European Foundation for South Asian Studies and a Kashmiri Muslim himself, Junaid Qureshi, said on June 29, 2025, about the Pahalgam attack and Kashmiri Muslims in his great essay “We, the hypocritical Kashmiris” (Rising Kashmir, Srinagar). He said, “Of course, for the first time in history, we protested against terrorism when the Pahalgam attack happened. But did we really protest because we suddenly opposed terrorism, or did many of us protest because the attack had devastating consequences on our tourism industry and our pockets? Public display and the private conversations we have among ourselves in our living rooms suggest duplicity.”

They have, in their letter, in addition, talked about “unity in diversity”, “basic structure doctrine,” and “constitutional right.” Fair enough. But, sadly, their whole approach all through has been Kashmir and one community-centric. They have consistently made common cause with the Kashmiri Muslim political class/ ruling elite and vouched for a special, preferential, and differential treatment to J&K just because Kashmir, which was once 100% Hindu, has turned over 99% Muslim. They have always considered Kashmir and Kashmiri Muslim leadership, religious or otherwise, the sole factor in the region’s political situation, and Jammu and Ladakh as Kashmir’s colonies, and the people these two regions house as the subjects of Kashmir entitled to only crumbs.

It’s very unfortunate that these persons, who held very high and sensitive positions, have become a part of the movement that’s aimed at driving J&K away from the country. The nation would appreciate it if its demand for statehood is rejected. They, like the Kashmiri Muslim political class, consider full state status for J&K a first step towards the final goal: limited accession with the country.

Even the rejection of their demand by the Supreme Court would not be enough. Constitution of a bench of the Supreme Court to look into the causes responsible for the Jammu people woes and its suggestion that aims at empowering them to shape and mould their destiny within the country and under the Indian Constitution will be the most appropriate answer to the protagonists of Kashmiri Muslim sub-nationalism and those who have been indulging in and promoting politics of exclusiveness and competitive secessionism and communalism in the Valley since decades.

I am cataloguing here 10 facts only for your kind consideration and action – facts which serve to demonstrate the total domination of Kashmir over the region and almost total exclusion of Jammu.

The Congress government transferred state power from Jammu to Kashmir in October 1947, using surreptitious means, like London transferred power to the Congress in August 1947. Kashmir had become part of the Jammu Kingdom in March 1846 under the Treaty of Amritsar, and not the vice-versa.
The Indian Constituent Assembly — at the behest of PM J L Nehru — adopted Article 370 to satisfy Sheikh Abdullah’s urge for a separate Republic of J&K.
PM Nehru held discussions with the nominated Wazir-e-Azam Sheikh Abdullah in 1952 to decide the political future of the already acceded to India, J&K.
Former Chief Justice of India, Justice Adarsh Sein Anand, has revealed that Article 35A, which empowered the Kashmiri ruling elite to grant or not to grant citizenship rights to the non-State Subjects and applied to J&K on May 14, 1954, w.e.f. May 14, 1944, flows from an “Agreement in 1954 between India (PM Nehru) and Pakistan” (PM Mohd Ali Bogra).
PM Indira Gandhi signed an accord with Sheikh Abdullah in 1975 and empowered him to review all the Central laws applied to J&K after August 9, 1953, and demand withdrawal of those laws which he considered harmful for Kashmir.
All the Wazir-e-Azams and Chief Ministers of J&K between October 1947 and June 2018 were from Kashmir and all belonged to one religious sect. The story of Omar Abdullah is no different.
The people of Jammu province have been conspicuous by their absence in Kashmir for decades. The rate of unemployment in Kashmir is less than 30%, as against almost 70% in Jammu.
No Dogra from Jammu is allowed by the Kashmiri Muslim ruling elite to acquire immovable property in Kashmir, or get a plot or a flat in the government-developed colonies, or in the colonies developed by any development authority or any housing board in Kashmir.
Jammu and Ladakh remained under the Central rule nine times for almost 15 long years between 1977 and October 2024 for the sins of the Kashmiri ruling class, or because of the Centre.
The Gajendragadkar Commission Report (Dec 1968), the Wazir Commission Report (Dec 1983), and the Singhal Committee Report (Jan 1999) all have candidly acknowledged that the Kashmiri ruling elite didn’t dispense justice to the people of Jammu province.

I appeal to you to take suo motu cognizance of this letter and set up a bench of the Supreme Court to look into the circumstances leading to the exclusion and miserable plight of the Jammu people and suggest remedial measures.

Yours truly,

Hari Om

Copy to:

PM Narendra Modi
HM Amit Shah
J&K LG Manoj Sinha

Note:
1. Text in Blue points to additional data on the topic.
2. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of PGurus.

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.