Blog

On May 20, 2025, India and Pakistan announced a renewed commitment to the 2021 ceasefire agreement along the Line of Control — their second such declaration in four years. Framed as a diplomatic gesture aimed at “stabilising the region,” the move arrived in the shadow of bloodshed. On the morning of 22 April 2025, a convoy of buses winding through the hills of Pahalgam was ambushed by armed militants. The vehicles were carrying Hindu pilgrims, many travelling from Gujarat and Maharashtra, toward the sacred Amarnath site. The attackers opened fire with military precision. By the time it ended, 27 people were dead, dozens wounded, and Kashmir’s already uneasy calm had cracked again.

Among the survivors was nine-year-old Naksh from Surat, found clutching his brother’s bloodied shirt. Witnesses said the attackers separated passengers by religion before shooting. The brutality of the assault — its timing, its political undertones — raises deeper questions about the promises of peace in Kashmir and the realities on the ground, especially under the framework of what both India and Pakistan still describe as an active ceasefire.

But what, exactly, is being held at bay?

A History of Ceasefire, Interrupted

Kashmir, a region claimed by both India and Pakistan since the Partition in 1947, has endured multiple wars, two full-scale insurgencies, and decades of militarisation. In 1949, the United Nations facilitated the first formal ceasefire between the two countries, freezing control along what came to be known as the Line of Control (LoC). That agreement was never meant to be permanent, and it wasn’t.

After the 1999 Kargil War, ceasefire violations peaked in 2002, with over 5,000 reported incidents. In 2003, a renewed agreement between New Delhi and Islamabad was announced, and for a few years, it seemed to hold. The number of violations plummeted to fewer than 100 by 2005. Cross-border travel was reintroduced. Civil society groups began cautious dialogues. Kashmiris, many for the first time in years, began to believe in a kind of fragile normalcy.

That changed over the next decade. Tensions escalated again following the 2016 killing of militant commander Burhan Wani and even more sharply after the revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status under Article 370 in August 2019. The region saw lockdowns, communication blackouts, and mass detentions. Between 2019 and 2020 alone, India reported over 5,000 ceasefire violations along the LoC.

Yet in February 2021, the two countries surprised many by issuing a joint statement: they would “observe all agreements on ceasefire along the LoC and all other sectors.” Diplomats hailed the announcement as a significant thaw. It was informal, not part of any treaty, but carried the weight of official intent. It was widely referred to in Indian media as “Operation Ceasefire.”

Operation Ceasefire: A Pause Without a Framework

Despite the name, Operation Ceasefire was not an operation in the military sense — it was a diplomatic reaffirmation. There were no new protocols, third-party monitors, or cross-border verification mechanisms. What existed instead was mutual fatigue and perhaps mutual interest: both countries faced economic pressures and, in Pakistan’s case, growing internal instability.

For a time, violations along the LoC sharply declined. According to official data, ceasefire violations dropped by over 90 per cent in 2021 and 2022. For the border towns of Uri, Poonch, and Tangdhar, the lull meant children returned to school, weddings were held in daylight, and life resembled something closer to ordinary.

But for many in Kashmir, especially those far from Delhi’s policy circles or Islamabad’s diplomatic corridors, the word “ceasefire” never meant protection. It meant pause – silence is not guaranteed but expected to break.

After the Pahalgam attack, that silence shattered. Eighteen days following the assault, 83 new violations were recorded along the LoC. Shelling resumed. Drone activity spiked. Inhabitants of border villages began sleeping in basements again.

“We never stopped packing our emergency bags,” said Rina Begum, a mother of three in Uri. “You can’t afford to believe in peace here. You just live in between the bombs.”

The Civilian Cost of Fragile Promises

In the highlands of north Kashmir, the idea of peace is rarely tied to ceasefires. The lines on the map may freeze and unfreeze with official declarations, but the lived reality is one of constant vigilance. Homes have backup escape plans. Schools run modified curriculums for when children cannot attend. Shops stay stocked with dry rations in case roads are sealed without warning.

Nazakat Ahmad Ali Shah, a trekking guide who helped rescue several survivors during the April attack, described it plainly:

“It’s not a ceasefire if we’re still burying people. It’s a ceasefire if we feel safe. And we don’t.”

The international community often treats these surges of violence as isolated ruptures — regrettable but exceptional. But for Kashmiris, especially those along the LoC, these moments are neither new nor surprising. They are cyclical. A massacre, a speech, a reaffirmation. Then, another pause and another promise that cannot shield them from the next round.

And in the middle of it all is Naksh — a boy who speaks less now, eats less, and flinches at thunder. When asked what peace means to him, he said:

“Just quiet. But not the scary kind. The kind where no one is hiding.”

A Ceasefire or a Countdown?

Ceasefires, as currently structured, are not rooted in reconciliation or accountability. There is no truth-telling, no demilitarisation, no reparative justice. What exists instead is an agreement to hold fire temporarily — sometimes upheld, often broken — without addressing the deeper political fractures underneath.

In Kashmir, the difference between silence and gunfire is rarely peace. It’s only space.

And as long as ceasefires remain tactical rather than transformative, Kashmir will continue to experience what it knows too well: the noise of violence, followed by the quieter but no less terrifying wait for it to return.

If this is what we call a ceasefire, what would actual peace look like?

Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai was sworn in as the 52nd Chief Justice of India (CJI) on 14 May 2025, succeeding Justice Sanjiv Khanna. President Droupadi Murmu administered the oath of office at Rashtrapati Bhavan. Justice Gavai will serve as CJI until his retirement on 23 November 2025, with a tenure of a little over six months.

His appointment was confirmed by the Ministry of Law and Justice on 29 April 2025, following a recommendation by Justice Sanjiv Khanna on 16 April. Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and other Union ministers were present at his oath-taking ceremony.

Legal Career and Judicial Tenure

Born on 24 November 1960 in Amravati, Maharashtra, Justice Gavai is the first Buddhist to be appointed as CJI and only the second judge from the Scheduled Caste community to hold the position, after former CJI K.G. Balakrishnan.

Following in his father’s footsteps, the late R.S. Gavai, a well-known Ambedkarite leader and former Governor of Bihar, Sikkim, and Kerala, Justice Gavai enrolled as an advocate in 1985 and began his legal career under Barrister Raja S. Bhonsale, a former Advocate General and High Court judge.

Justice Gavai practised independently at the Bombay High Court from 1987 to 1990. He specialised primarily in constitutional and administrative law and served as Standing Counsel for various municipal bodies and public institutions. He was later appointed Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor in 2000.

Justice Gavai was elevated to the post of an Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court on 14 November 2003 and became a Permanent Judge on 12 November 2005. He served at the Mumbai, Nagpur, Aurangabad and Panaji Benches for over 16 years before being appointed to the Supreme Court on 24 May 2019.

His elevation to the apex court was recommended by the Collegium led by then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, which cited due representation, along with seniority and merit as the key reasons.

Key Judgments and Contributions

As a Supreme Court judge, Justice Gavai has been part of several key Constitution Benches and landmark judgements.

He authored the majority opinion in the 2023 verdict that upheld the 2016 demonetisation scheme and was on the Bench that upheld the abrogation of Article 370. He also struck down the electoral bonds scheme and supported sub-classification within Scheduled Castes in both majority and concurring opinions.

Justice Gavai has been part of several high-profile bail rulings as well, including granting bail to former Delhi Deputy CM Manish Sisodia and activist Teesta Setalvad. He also led the Bench that ordered the release of A.G. Perarivalan in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.

In 2024, Justice Gavai wrote a concurring opinion in State of Punjab v Davinder Singh, advocating for the exclusion of the ‘creamy layer’ within Scheduled Castes. In another important 2024 ruling, he held that demolitions without due process violated the constitutional right to shelter, laying down procedural safeguards against arbitrary bulldozer actions. He was also on the Bench that convicted Advocate Prashant Bhushan for contempt and later stayed Rahul Gandhi’s criminal defamation conviction.

Challenges Ahead for CJI Gavai

Despite his short six-month tenure as Chief Justice, Justice Gavai is set to face several important challenges, with a backlog of over 82,000 cases pending before the Supreme Court as of January 2025, according to the Supreme Court Observer.

More immediately, two High Court judges, Allahabad HC’s Justice Shekhar Yadav and former Delhi HC judge Yashwant Verma, are facing impeachment proceedings. At the same time, three apex court judges, Justices B.V. Nagarathna, Abhay Oka, and Sanjay Karol, are set to retire in the coming months. With two existing vacancies already, Justice Gavai’s Collegium will need to recommend at least five new appointments to maintain the court’s strength.

He will also have to decide on several important issues, including pending cases related to the Places of Worship Act, the criminalisation of marital rape, and the validity of certain Waqf Act provisions. As master of the roster, how he allocates these matters and whether he ensures timely hearings will be closely watched.

Justice Gavai, however, seems to be hitting the ground running. Shortly after taking charge, he addressed media personnel and shared a brief outline of his priorities for the months ahead.

After a career dedicated to serving justice and upholding the Constitution, Justice Khanna now transitions to a well-deserved retirement. He retires on 13 May, marking the end of a six-month tenure defined by clarity and conviction.

Justice Sanjiv Khanna, the 51st Chief Justice of India, is a well-established and renowned judge of the Honourable Supreme Court, marking his presence and opinions in a number of notable judgments on different aspects, such as VVPAT verification, Electronic Bond Scheme, and even upholding the abrogation of Article 370.

Justice Sanjiv Khanna had earlier served as the Honourable Supreme Court Judge for the period commencing from 11 November 2024 to 13 May 2025, preceded by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud. He graduated from St. Stephen’s College, Delhi and thereafter pursued his Bachelor of Laws from the Faculty of Law, Delhi University. Following this, he was enrolled as an Advocate in the Bar Council of Delhi in 1983, serving as a Standing Counsel (Civil) for the National Capital Territory of Delhi and the Income Tax Department.

The legacy of the Khanna family can be seen in the career of Justice Sanjiv Khanna, whose father, Dev Raj Khanna, served as a Justice at the Delhi High Court, and his uncle, Justice Hans Raj Khanna, was a Supreme Court Judge renowned for his landmark judgment in the ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla case on right to life and personal liberty.

During the term of six months serving as the Chief Justice of India, he made a notable presence in various landmark judgements, which not only brought a change in the country but at the same time kept the basic structure of the constitution intact, keeping the sentiments of the citizens of the country intact.

One of the key rulings, which was widely discussed during the last phase of Justice Sanjiv Khanna’s tenure, was the petitions filed against the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, which was led by a special three-judge bench where he played an important role in the Waqf Amendment Act controversy. During the proceedings, the Centre assured the court that no existing Waqf properties will be denotified, and no new and fresh appointments will be made to the Waqf Board or Central Waqf Council until further hearings. The case is still pending on substantive issues, which are to be dealt with by his successor, Justice B.R. Gavai.

As a Supreme Court Judge and serving as Chief Justice of India, Justice Sanjiv Khanna was an integral part of the landmark judgements in the history of India in the case of challenging the constitutionality of Electoral Bond Scheme as well as the abrogation of Article 370 – which revoked the special status of Jammu and Kashmir and reorganised it into Union Territory of India. He also marked his influential presence by dismissing the petition filed with regard to the 1976 Amendment in the Preamble of the Constitution of India, where the terms’ secular’ and ‘socialist’ republic were added to describe India.

Justice Sanjiv Khanna, from the date of holding a strong position at his office and for the country as well, has made some smart administrative moves in keeping the hearings at the Supreme Court more effective. His smart moves included procedural equality by ending oral mentions of early listing of cases at the Supreme Court, and focused on well-drafted petitions

To sum up, Justice Sanjiv Khanna’s tenure as the 51st Chief Justice of India in a period of six months had his involvement in numerous cases, which not only included short cases but sensitive religious matters, including secularism and transparency in the judicial and quasi-judicial system.