SC upholds constitutional validity of Section 6A of Citizenship Act
The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act related to grant of Indian citizenship to illegal immigrants in Assam.
By a majority of 4:1, a five-judge Constitution Bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud --which had reserved its verdict on the contentious issue on December 12, 2023 -- dismissed petitions challenging the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act.
While CJI Chandrachud, Justice Surya Kant, Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Manoj Misra upheld the validity of Section 6A, Justice JB Pardiwala delivered a dissenting verdict and declared the impugned provision unconstitutional prospectively for being manifestly arbitrary.
Delivering the verdict, the CJI said Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A. It was a political solution to a unique problem faced by Assam due to the huge influx of illegal immigrants following the creation of Bangladesh that seriously threatened its culture and demography.
The CJI noted that one of the main reasons behind the Assam students’ agitation was the dilution of voting rights of indigenous population because of the influx of illegal migration from Bangladesh and Section 6A was an attempt to address the precarious situation.
Added to the Citizenship Act in 1985 as a special provision to deal with citizenship of people covered under the Assam Accord, Section 6A granted citizenship to all immigrants who entered the state from Bangladesh before 1 January, 1966.
However, it barred Indian citizenship to Bangladeshi immigrants who entered India before March 1971 and considered immigrants who entered Assam between 1 January 1966 and 24 March 1971 as Indian citizens without voting privileges for 10 years. Such residents of the north-eastern state are required to register themselves under Section 18 for acquiring Indian citizenship.
The provision fixes March 25, 1971 as the cut-off date for granting citizenship to Bangladeshi migrants in Assam.
On behalf of the centre, Attorney General R Venkataramani, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had defended the provision on behalf of the Government, senior advocates Shyam Divan, Kapil Sibal and others – representing the petitioners -- had assailed it.
The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) had told the Bench that it was not possible to provide accurate data on the extent of illegal migration of foreigners into India since such migrations happened in a secretive manner.
It had said that 14,346 foreign nationals were deported from India between 2017 and 2022, and 17,861 migrants entering Assam between January 1966 and March 1971 were given Indian citizenship.
"Illegal migrants enter into the country without valid travel documents in a clandestine and surreptitious manner. The detection, detention and deportation of such illegally staying foreign nationals is a complex ongoing process. It is not possible to collect accurate data of such illegal migrants staying in various parts of the country," the Centre had said in an affidavit.
