Central government disputed the maintainability of the West Bengal government's petition accusing the CBI of registering FIRs after general consent was withdrawn
SG categorically highlighted why Article 370 is different from others. He said, “Article 370(3) has an in-built extinguishing provision. That's the distinction. This is the only provision that has a self-destructive clause. This shows it was intended to be temporary."
As Nehru was getting exposed by the arguments being presented by SG Tushar Mehta, petitioner lawyer Kapil Sibal objected to it and created disturbances in the hearing
Amicus Curiae KV Viswanathan urged the top court to strike down the amendment in the larger interest of democracy expressing fear that it will be misused by future governments.
Given the recent arguments about gender, privacy, and sexual autonomy in the Indian Supreme Court, petitions seeking legal sanction for incest are not 'far-fetched' five years down the line.
Giving a hypothetical situation, SG Mehta questioned what would happen if, five years down the line, someone approached the court and challenged provisions prohibiting incest.