In Brief
This judgment addresses whether a constitutional challenge to two 2019 Presidential Orders modifying Article 370 (relating to Jammu and Kashmir's special status) should be referred to a larger Bench due to conflicting interpretations by earlier co-ordinate Constitution Benches. The petitioners argued that Prem Nath Kaul (1959) and Sampat Prakash (1970) contradicted each other on whether Article 370 was temporary or permanent. The Court held that there is no genuine conflict: Prem Nath Kaul concerned the legislative competence during the pre-Constitution period, while Sampat Prakash addressed Article 370's continuation after the Constituent Assembly dissolved—distinct issues. The doctrine of precedent requires clear conflicts in ratio decidendi before reference to a larger Bench, applied sparingly. The Court rejected the reference petition.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.