"The provisional relief provided by the International Court of Justice is the first step in ensuring justice to Jadhav," External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Gopal Baglay said.
The order by the ICJ is unanimous, favourable, clear and unambiguous. The verdict a matter of great relief for people of the country, he said.
Baglay said that ICJ's order order creates legally binding international obligation.
As soon as the order came in, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi expressed his satisfaction and spoke to External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj who described the verdict as a "great relief".
In a major boost to India, which has moved the UN's highest judicial body against the death sentence, the ICJ on Thursday instructed Pakistan to take all "necessary measures at its disposal" to ensure that Jadhav was not executed pending a final decision by it.
However, Pakistan's foreign office said the country does not accept the International Court of Justice's jurisdiction in matters related to national security.
The International Court of Justice directed Pakistan that it must take “all measures at its disposal” to prevent the execution of an Indian national, Kulbhushan Jadhav, pending final judgment of the Court.
Asserting its jurisdiction over the case, the court backed India's contention that there has been a violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations as New Delhi's requests for consular access to its national had been denied 16 times.
The Court also stated that Pakistan shall inform it of all measures taken in implementation of that Order. It further decided to remain seised of the matters which form the subject of the Order until it has rendered its final judgment.
It also noted the urgency of the case since Pakistan had given "no assurance that Mr. Jadhav will not be executed before the Court has rendered its final decision".
The Court said, "It (Court) observes that the rights to consular notification and access between a State and its nationals, as well as the obligations of the detaining State to inform the person concerned without delay of his rights with regard to consular assistance and to allow their exercise, are recognized in Article 36, paragraph 1, of the Vienna Convention, and that India has alleged violations of this provision. In the view of the Court, therefore, it appears that the rights alleged by India are plausible."
(With inputs from agencies)