The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court is set to constitute a Special Bench comprising three judges to hear a petition challenging a government notification that declared twenty-five books on Kashmir’s political and social history as “forfeited” under Section 98 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The Chief Justice, Arun Palli, indicated that orders would be passed soon to constitute the Special Bench, which is required to hear petitions under the statute. The formation of a multi-judge Bench reflects the gravity of the matter and the need for a comprehensive judicial examination of the legal and constitutional issues involved.
The petition was filed by Advocate Shakir Shabir, who contends that the forfeiture of these books constitutes a violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution, particularly the right to freedom of speech and expression. According to the petitioner, the books in question comprise academic analyses, historical accounts, and political commentary related to the socio-political conditions in Kashmir. The contention is that these works are scholarly in nature and that declaring them forfeited effectively suppresses legitimate academic discourse, thereby impinging on constitutional liberties.
The government notification, issued under Section 98 of the BNSS Act, declares certain publications as prohibited and mandates their forfeiture in the interest of national security. The statute empowers authorities to take preventive action against materials perceived to be prejudicial to national security, but the petitioner argues that this power has been exercised excessively and without sufficient judicial oversight. The legal challenge thus raises critical questions regarding the scope of the BNSS Act and its interaction with constitutionally protected freedoms, including the extent to which the state may restrict the circulation of literature on grounds of security without violating fundamental rights.
The High Court’s decision to form a Special Bench underscores the importance of examining both the procedural and substantive aspects of the notification. A three-judge Bench allows for a more rigorous scrutiny of statutory interpretation, the validity of executive action, and potential conflicts with constitutional guarantees. The case is expected to address whether the notification and its implementation disproportionately affect academic freedoms and whether adequate safeguards exist to prevent arbitrary or unjustified suppression of literature.
Observers note that the outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for academic research, publication, and the dissemination of historical narratives in Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. It raises broader questions about the balance between national security concerns and the protection of constitutional rights, particularly in contexts where scholarly works may critically examine sensitive political and social issues. The legal proceedings will be closely monitored by academics, civil society organizations, and policymakers, as they may set a precedent regarding how similar statutory powers can be exercised in the future while respecting fundamental freedoms.
As the matter progresses, the High Court is expected to hear arguments on both the legal and factual merits, including whether the publications in question genuinely threaten public order or security and whether less restrictive alternatives to forfeiture were available. The Special Bench will determine the legitimacy of the government’s action, the scope of judicial review under the BNSS Act, and the measures necessary to ensure a fair and constitutionally compliant resolution. The judgment will thus provide clarity on the delicate balance between state security imperatives and the protection of academic and expressive freedoms.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.