The five-judge bench of the Supreme Court has reserved judgement on the repeal of Article 370.

On the final day of the 16-day hearing, the Supreme Court heard the senior solicitors' response arguments.

The top court ordered that any attorney representing the petitioners or respondents who desires to submit a written argument may do so within the next three days. (HT)

On petitions contesting the repeal of Article 370, which granted the former state of Jammu and Kashmir special status, a five-judge Supreme Court panel on Tuesday postponed reaching a decision.

Senior solicitors Kapil Sibal, Gopal Subramanium, Rajeev Dhavan, Zaffar Shah, Dushyant Dave, and others presented rejoinder arguments before the Supreme Court panel presided over by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud on the final day of the 16-day hearing.

The top court ordered that any attorney representing the petitioners or respondents who desires to submit a written argument may do so within the next three days. 

It emphasised that the submission shouldn't be longer than two pages. 

The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, as well as several other arguments contesting the repeal of Article 370, were referred before the Constitution bench in 2019.

The court heard arguments from the Centre and the intervenors in support of the repeal of Article 370 from the Attorney General R Venkataramani, the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, senior solicitors Harish Salve, Rakesh Dwivedi, and V Giri, among others.

The attorneys discussed a number of topics, including the constitutionality of the Center's August 5, 2019, decision to repeal the provision, the constitutionality of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, which divided the former state into two Union Territories, challenges to the imposition of the governor's rule in Jammu and Kashmir on June 20, 2018, and the imposition of the president's rule in the former state on December 19, 2018, as well as its extension on July 3, 2019.

Mohd Akbar Lone, the leader of the National Conference, told the Supreme Court on Monday that those who support repealing Article 370 should not use a "emotive majoritarian interpretation" of the Indian Constitution because Jammu and Kashmir was not asked to sign a merger agreement like other princely states or have a complete connection to India.

In support of Lone, senior attorney Kapil Sibal asserted that India's sovereignty had never been questioned.

"We can't turn this into an argument for a sentimental, majoritarian reading of the Constitution. Jammu and Kashmir is not entirely connected to India, according to history. The previous state had a distinct detailed constitution as well as an executive and administrative framework. A merger agreement was never requested of it, according to Sibal.