PDP leader Mehbooba Mufti criticizes the Centre after the Supreme Court’s reference to the Pahalgam attack, highlighting the government’s lack of confidence in Jammu and Kashmir’s stability and security.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
SRINAGAR: The Supreme Court’s recent reference to the Pahalgam terror attack has reignited the debate over Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood. PDP president Mehbooba Mufti criticized the Centre’s continued tight control, calling for political dialogue and engagement with the aspirations of the people to ensure lasting peace in the region.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court asked the central government to respond within eight weeks to a petition seeking the restoration of Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood. During the hearing, Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai remarked,
“You cannot ignore what happened in Pahalgam… It is for Parliament and the Executive to make a decision.”
The Pahalgam terror attack, which the court referenced during the proceedings, has become a point of debate, with the petitioner urging an expedited hearing on statehood restoration.
In a post on X, Mehbooba Mufti expressed concern that the Supreme Court’s reference reflects a larger issue regarding the Centre’s approach to Jammu and Kashmir. She said,
“SC’s reference to recent Pahalgam terror attack in the context of granting statehood to Jammu and Kashmir underscores a deeper issue about GOI’s continued lack of confidence in the region’s stability.”
Despite revoking J&K’s special status and converting it into a union territory, the former Chief Minister believes the central government remains reluctant to ease its tight control. According to her, this situation represents a “deeper political and psychological deadlock.”
Mehbooba stressed that the Jammu and Kashmir issue is not just about statehood or constitutional status. She emphasized the need for New Delhi to engage with the political aspirations of the people and tackle the core issues directly. She stated,
“Unless New Delhi engages with the political aspirations of the people and addresses the core issue head-on, it will remain on uncertain footing regardless of the force it deploys.”
The PDP leader called for a sincere process of dialogue and reconciliation to restore lasting peace and dignity to the region, urging the government to correct past missteps and initiate meaningful engagement with stakeholders.
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Thursday addressed a plea seeking the restoration of statehood for Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), highlighting concerns over the recent Pahalgam terror attack. A Bench comprising Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran told Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the petitioners, that the Pahalgam incident “cannot be ignored.”
The Central government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, opposed the plea, noting that it had already assured the Court that statehood would be restored after elections. Sankaranarayanan argued that 21 months have passed since the 2023 Supreme Court judgment upholding the abrogation of Article 370, which had trusted the government’s promise to restore statehood.
The Court has now given the government eight weeks to respond. The petition, filed by college teacher Zahoor Ahmed Bhat and activist Khurshid Ahmad Malik, contends that delaying statehood undermines the rights of J&K’s people.
Jammu and Kashmir was reorganized into two Union Territories, J&K and Ladakh, in 2019 after Article 370 was revoked. The petitioners argue that holding Assembly elections before restoring statehood goes against the federal structure of the Constitution. Currently, the Union Territory is governed by a National Conference-led government with Congress support.
Previously in the Apex Court
The Supreme Court of India, on August 5, 2025, acknowledged a fresh application seeking the restoration of Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood within a fixed time frame. The plea, part of the writ petition “In Re: Article 370 of the Constitution”, was earlier decided in December 2023, when the Court upheld the Centre’s abrogation of Article 370.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan requested that the matter not be removed from the case list, and the Court scheduled the hearing for August 8. In the 2023 judgment, the Court had relied on Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s assurance that statehood would be restored “at the earliest,” excluding Ladakh, and had therefore not ruled on the validity of dividing the former state.
The new application highlights that 10 months have passed without restoring J&K’s statehood, arguing that this delay affects citizens’ rights and undermines federalism. It also raises concerns over the recent Legislative Assembly elections, stating that forming a government before restoring full statehood would weaken democratic governance and violate the Constitution’s basic federal principles.
Filed by Zahoor Ahmad Bhat, one of the original petitioners, the plea emphasizes that J&K’s unique history and culture require a strong federal structure. The 2023 five-judge Constitution Bench verdict upheld the creation of Ladakh as a separate Union Territory and noted security concerns, but left open the question of Parliament’s power under Article 3 to convert a state into Union Territories permanently. The Court also recommended a commission to study human rights violations in J&K since the 1980s.
Case Title:
IN RE ARTICLE 370 OF THE CONSTITUTION AND IN THE MATTER OF (APPLICATION): ZAHOOR AHMAD BHAT AND ANR. vs. UNION OF INDIA
MA 2259/2024 And Connected Matter.
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI BR Gavai
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Jammu and Kashmir’s Statehood
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES