Agreement between the Government of Indian-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir and the Government of India Concluded in New Delhi, 24 July 1952
Agreement between the Government of Indian-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir and the Government of India Concluded in New Delhi, 24 July 1952
Citizenship
It was agreed that in accordance with Article 5 of the Indian Constitution persons who have their domicile in the Jammu and Kashmir State shall be the citizens of India. It was further agreed that the State legislature shall have power to define and regulate the rights and privileges of the permanent residents of the State, more especially in regards to acquisition of immovable property, appointments to services and like matters. Till then the existing State law would apply. It was also agreed that special provision should be made in the laws governing citizenship to provide for the return of those permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir State, who went to Pakistan in connection with the disturbances of 1947 or in fear of them as well as of those who had left for Pakistan earlier but could not
1. From the Statement of Sheikh Abdullah in the State Constituent Assembly, 11 August 1952, A.G. Noorani, The Kashmir Question, pp. 95-109 return. If they return, they should be entitled to the rights, and privileges and obligations of citizenship.
Fundamental Rights
It is obvious that while our Constitution is being framed, the fundamental rights and duties of a citizen have necessarily got to be defined. It was agreed, however, that the Fundamental Rights, which are contained in the Constitution of India, could not be conferred on the residents of the Jammu and Kashmir State in their entirety taking into account the economic, social. and political character of our movement as enunciated in the New Kashmir Plan. The need for providing suitable modifications, amendments and exceptions as the case may be in the Fundamental Rights Chapter of the Indian Constitution in order to harmonise those provisions with the pattern of our principles was admitted....Supreme Court
It was agreed that the Supreme Court should have original jurisdiction in respect of disputes mentioned in Article 131 of the Constitution of India. It was further agreed that the Supreme Court should have jurisdiction in regard to Fundamental Rights which are agreed to by the State.
One behalf of the Government of India, it was recommended that the Advisory Board in the State, designated "His Highness's Board of Judicial Advisers" should be abolished and the jurisdiction exercised by it should be vested in the Supreme Court of India. That is to say that the Supreme Court should be the final court of appeal in all civil and criminal matters as laid down in the Constitution of India. We, however, felt that this should need a detailed examination and consequently it was agreed that we should have time to consider it further.
National Flag
We agreed that in view of the clarifications issued by me in my public statements while interpreting the resolution of this House according to which the old State flag was substituted by a new one, it was obvious that the new State flag was in no sense a rival of the national flag. But for historical and other reasons connected with the freedom struggle in the State, the need for the continuation of this flag was recognized. The Union flag to which we continue our allegiance as a part of the Union will occupy the supremely distinctive place in the State.
Headship of the State
I am glad to inform this House that the Government of India has appreciated the principle proposed by the Basic Principle Committee as adopted by this Assembly in regard to the abolition of the hereditary rulership of the State. In order to accommodate this principle, the following arrangement was mutually agreed upon:
(1) The Head of the State shall be the person recognized by the President of the Union on the recommendation of the legislature of the State.
(ii) He shall hold office during the pleasure of the President. (ii) He may, by writing under his hand addressed to the President, resign his office.
(iv) Subject to the foregoing provisions, the Head of the State shall hold office for a term of five years from the date he enters upon his office.
(v) Provided that he shall, notwithstanding the expiration of his term, continue to hold the office until his successor enters upon his office.
Financial Integration
In regard to this subject, we agreed that it would be necessary to evolve some sort of financial arrangement between the State and the Indian Union. But as this involved far-reaching consequences, it was felt that a detailed and objective examination of this subject would be necessary.
Emergency Powers
On behalf of the Government of India, it was stated that the application of Article 352 of the Constitution was necessary as it related to vital matters affecting the security of the State. They did not press for the application of Article 356 or 360.
In order to meet our viewpoint, it was suggested on behalf of the Government of India that Article 352 might be accepted as it is with the addition at the end of the first paragraph (1) of the following words: "but in regard to internal disturbance at the request or with the concurrence of the Government of the State."
We generally accepted this position, but wanted some time to consider the implications and consequences as laid down in Articles 353, 358 and 359 which on the whole we accepted. In regard to Article 354, we wanted to examine it further before expressing our opinion.