Writing the judgement for himself and Justices Gavai and Surya Kant, Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud said Article 370 of the Constitution was a temporary provision and the president has the power to revoke it.
The apex court also upheld the validity of the decision to carve out the union territory of
The erstwhile state does not have internal sovereignty different from other states of the country, the CJI said.
"... all provisions of the Indian Constitution can be applied to J-K," the CJI said.
"We hold the exercise of presidential power to issue constitutional order abrogating Article 370 of Constitution as valid," the CJI said.
Jammu and Kashmir became an integral part of India and this is evident from Articles 1 and 370, he said while pronouncing the judgment.
"The Constituent Assembly of J&K was never intended to be permanent body," the CJI stated.
Article 370, Justice Chandrachud said, was an interim arrangement due to war conditions in the erstwhile state.
The princely state had become an integral part of India and this is evident from Articles 1 and 370, the CJI said.
The bench comprising CJI D Y Chandrachud and Justices Gavai, Surya Kant, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, assembled at 10.56 am to pronounce the three separate and concurring judgements
Justices Kaul and Khanna wrote their judgments separately.
In his concurring judgment, Justice Khanna said the purpose of Article 370 was to slowly bring Jammu and Kashmir at par with other Indian states. He directed the setting up of a truth-and-reconciliation commission to probe human rights violations both by the state and non-state actors.
The apex court reserved its verdict in the matter on September 5 after a 16-day hearing on a batch of petitions challenging the abrogation of the provisions of Article 370.
The pronouncement of the verdict by the CJI is underway.