Supreme Court Upholds Controversial Citizenship of Law Section 6A

The French Revolution was a period of political and social upheaval in France that began in 1789 and ended in 1799. The Revolution was sparked by economic inequality and social unrest, and it led to the overthrow of the monarchy and the establishment of a republic. The Revolution was a bloody and chaotic affair, and it had a profound impact on French history and culture.

Supreme Court Upholds Controversial Citizenship of Law Section 6A

The Supreme Court recently upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, pertaining to the grant of Indian citizenship to illegal immigrants in Assam. A 5-judge bench led by CJI D Y Chandrachud, with Justices Surya Kant, M M Sundresh, Manoj Misra, and J B Pardiwala, voted 4:1 in favor of this decision.

The court emphasized that Section 6A was a legislative response to Assam’s unique challenges posed by significant illegal immigration from Bangladesh post its independence. It also upheld the March 24, 1971, cut-off date for identifying Bangladeshi migrants, considering India’s historical context and humanitarian concerns. Justice Surya Kant, writing separately but concurring, affirmed the government’s authority to maintain law and order and protect citizens’ interests, including through measures like identifying and deporting illegal migrants.

On October 17, the Supreme Court’s five-judge Constitution bench upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, which was added in 1985 as part of the Assam Accord to address illegal immigration. The bench, led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, voted 4-1 in favor of the provision, which grants citizenship benefits to illegal immigrants—primarily from Bangladesh—who entered Assam between January 1, 1966, and March 25, 1971.

The majority opinion, delivered by Justices Surya Kant, M.M. Sundresh, and Manoj Misra, affirmed that Parliament had the legislative authority to enact Section 6A. In contrast, Justice Pardiwala dissented, arguing that the provision is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court noted that the mere presence of diverse ethnic groups in a state does not violate Article 29(1).

Section 6A allows individuals who arrived in Assam before January 1, 1966, to obtain Indian citizenship, while those who came between January 1, 1966, and March 24, 1971, can register as citizens after a ten-year waiting period, during which they cannot vote. The court stated that those arriving after March 24, 1971, should be identified and deported. The constitutionality of Section 6A has been a contentious issue due to concerns about its impact on demographics.