A former high court chief justice from Jammu and Kashmir on Friday called for the withdrawal of all petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370, adding an uncommon appeal: “Please don’t invite a judgment which may close the chapter forever.”

Kashmir-born Bilal Nazki, who retired as chief justice of Orissa High Court in 2009 and later served as chairman of the Jammu and Kashmir human rights commission, tweeted: “All petitions related to Art 370 should be withdrawn, let this fight be political (and) please don’t invite a judgment which may close the chapter forever.”

The tweet came amid a debate about the judiciary in the country, which gained traction after lawyer Prashant Bhushan was convicted of criminal contempt for two of his tweets on past and present Chief Justices of India.

On Friday, asked about his tweet, Nazki told The Telegraph in a light-hearted manner: “You can deduce a meaning or write you did not understand. A tweet is not a statement. It is crisp, just to generate a discussion and know each other’s opinion.”

Later during the conversation, the former judge said a “change” had been perceptible in the judiciary over the past few years. He attributed it to the “ideology” of the judges.

“In my 15 years’ experience as a judge, no government ever tried to influence any judge, but ideologically sometimes a person is different. Every judge… is a human being after all,” Nazki said.

The Supreme Court is hearing a slew of petitions challenging the constitutionality of last year’s abrogation of Article 370 that stripped Jammu and Kashmir of its special status.

The Nazki-headed human rights commission too was abolished last year after the central government cancelled the special status and bifurcated the state into two Union Territories.

The Centre has since shown zero tolerance towards any opposition to the August 5, 2019, decisions, arresting thousands during the clampdown that followed. Top political parties in the Valley, whose key leaders had spent months in jail, last week joined hands and vowed to fight for the restoration of Article 370.

Asked why he was calling for the withdrawal of the petitions challenging the abrogation of Article 370, the former judge said it was because “if something is decided in the court then all will say it is concluded. Otherwise, other options are open.”

“Two results are always possible (in court), so why take the risk of a negative decision?” Nazki said.

Asked whether this was not possible in all cases and whether nobody should approach the courts then, Nazki said he was only expressing “my opinion”.

The former chief justice said the courts were sound in India but regretted that some important cases were not being heard.

“You take (the cases challenging the abrogation of) Article 370. Similarly, habeas corpus petitions are the most important cases. We have learnt there are many habeas corpus petitions pending in the Supreme Court. Even Mehbooba Mufti’s case is pending there,” he said.

Former Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Mehbooba has been under arrest since August 5 last year, and her daughter Iltija Mufti has challenged her detention in the Supreme Court.

A habeas corpus is a writ requiring a person to be brought before a judge or into court, especially to secure that person’s release from arrest unless lawful grounds are shown for their detention.

“It should not happen. Every judge knows and every lawyer knows that the court has to give preference to habeas corpus. (As a judge) in Hyderabad, we had decided to decide these matters in three months,” Nazki said.

The former judge said that ups and downs were expected as courts in India were evolving. “When a child grows, sometimes it falls ill, sometimes it suffers from typhoid but that does not mean the child is gone…. Our system is evolving,” he said.