New Delhi. In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, which grants Indian citizenship to migrants who came to Assam from Bangladesh till March 25, 1971. Chief Justice (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundaresh and Justice Manoj Mishra stressed the need for more robust policy measures to curb illegal immigration.
Section 6A was included in the Citizenship Act 1955 in 1985 after the signing of the Assam Accord between the then Rajiv Gandhi government at the Center and the Prafulla Mahanta-led agitating groups in the state (Assam), including the All Assam Students Union (AASU). According to the provision, all persons who came to Assam from Bangladesh on or after 1 January 1966, but before 25 March 1971, at the time of enactment of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 1985 and have since then been residents of Assam, will acquire Indian citizenship. You can register for.
As a result, March 25, 1971 was set as the last date for granting citizenship under this provision to migrants living in Assam, especially those from Bangladesh. The Chief Justice, Justice Surya Kant, Justice Sundaresh and Justice Mishra upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A, while Justice JB Pardiwala dissented in his minority judgment.
The Chief Justice, while considering the time limit of 25 March 1971 as reasonable, writing his judgment said that Section 6A was included with the objective of reducing the entry of migrants into India and dealing with those who have already migrated .
Chief Justice Chandrachud said Section 6A does not violate Articles 6 and 7 of the Constitution, which set a time limit for granting citizenship to immigrants from East and West Pakistan “upon the coming into force of this Constitution”.
He wrote, “Assam Accord is a political solution to the problem of illegal migration. Section 6A was added to the Citizenship Act as a special provision to deal with citizenship matters of people covered under the Assam Accord. He wrote, “Section 6A is another statutory intervention in a long list of laws that strike a balance between the humanitarian needs of migrants of Indian origin and the impact of such migration on the economic and cultural needs of Indian states.”
The Chief Justice said, however, that other states like West Bengal (2216.7 km), Meghalaya (443 km), Tripura (856 km) and Mizoram (318 km) share a much longer border with Bangladesh than Assam (263 km). do, yet the extent of infiltration into Assam and its impact on the cultural and political rights of the Assamese and tribal population is high.
He wrote, “Since there was a large migration from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) to Assam after the partition of India and since there was a massive migration from East Pakistan after Operation Search-Light (conducted by the Pakistan Army to stop the Bangladeshi nationalist movement), Migration increased. “In view of this, this criterion is linked to the objectives of reducing migration and providing citizenship to migrants of Indian origin… Section 6A is neither less inclusive nor more inclusive.” Justice Surya Kant, writing the judgment on his own behalf and Justice Sundaresh and Justice Mishra, said that Section 6A comes within the scope of the Constitution and does not violate the fundamental principles of fraternity.
Justice Surya Kant wrote, “It is held that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 comes within the scope of the Constitution and is a valid law.” Justice Surya Kant underlined that the legal mechanism to identify illegal immigrants in Assam is inadequate. He said that the implementation of immigration and citizenship related laws cannot be left to the mere will and discretion of the authorities and it requires constant monitoring by this Court. Rejecting the central government’s argument that the apex court should refrain from examining Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, the court said that the power of judicial review does not undermine the principle of separation of powers.
The majority judgment said, “Although Section 6A specifically grants the right to citizenship to migrants arriving before the said deadline, it appears that the flow of migrants through the various border states of India is still continuing.” . “With open borders and incomplete fencing, this continued migration poses a significant challenge.”
While disagreeing with the majority decision, Justice Pardiwala said that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is arbitrary and constitutionally invalid. “With the passage of time, the open-ended nature of Section 6A is more likely to be misused as false dates of entry into Assam are recorded through forged documents, leading to illegal migration of illegal immigrants,” he said in a separate, dissenting 127-page judgment. “Help is provided to those who are not eligible under Section 6A because they entered Assam after March 24, 1971.” The court’s decision came on 17 petitions filed by NGO Assam Public Works, Assam United Federation and others.
Supreme Court’s decision on Section 6A is historic, action will be taken against illegal immigrants in Assam: BJP
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Thursday termed the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) as ‘historic’ and said that action has been taken against illegal immigrants on a ‘large scale’ in Assam. Will go. The Supreme Court on Thursday, in a 4:1 majority verdict, upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act granting Indian citizenship to illegal immigrants in Assam.
Chief Justice D.Y. A five-judge Constitution bench led by Chandrachud said that the Assam Accord is a political solution to the problem of illegal migration. The majority decision of the Supreme Court said that the time limit of March 25, 1971 for entry into Assam and granting citizenship is correct.
Senior BJP leader and former Union Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad welcomed the decision, saying, “Today the Supreme Court has given a historic verdict on the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act.” He said that the essence of this provision is that those who entered Assam till 1966 will be considered as citizens of Assam and those between 1966 and 1971 will be considered as citizens subject to compliance with the necessary rules.
He said, “And whoever comes here after that, they will definitely be treated like illegal immigrants.” The BJP leader said that the apex court’s decision is a confirmation of the grievances being felt by the people of Assam regarding illegal immigrants on a large scale. He said that the decision of the apex court will help in taking effective action against illegal immigration in Assam and action will definitely be taken.
Prasad also attacked Congress and said that those doing vote bank politics will also have to follow this. He said that Section 6A has been added to the Indian Citizenship Act in view of the Assam Accord following the students’ agitation during the Congress government led by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. He said, “All the Congressmen have forgotten this.” But today when this provision has been upheld (by the Supreme Court), we appreciate it.”