 "What is Section 6A of Citizenship Act that Supreme Court has deemed valid?")
The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 by a 4:1 majority. A five-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud delivered the verdict on Thursday (October 17).
While the CJI and Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh and Manoj Misra ruled that the provision was constitutionally valid, Justice JB Pardiwala gave a dissenting judgement.
What is Section 6A of the Citizenship Act? What was the case and what has the apex court said? Let’s understand.
Section 6A of the Citizenship Act
India’s war with Pakistan in 1971, which led to the independence of Bangladesh , resulted in the influx of Bengali-speaking refugees into India from the then East Pakistan.
Fearing that the Bangladeshi immigrants would change the demography of Assam, the All Assam Students Union (AASU) launched an agitation calling for the deportation of illegal migrants.
The bloody protest lasted for six years and ended with the signing of a Memorandum of Settlement called the ‘Assam Accord’ in August 1985.
The accord was signed by the Rajiv Gandhi-led Central government with the representatives of the Assam Movement, including AASU and All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad (AAGSP).
A key part of the pact was to define who was a “foreigner” in the northeastern state.
Clause 5 of the Assam Accord made January 1, 1966 as the base cut-off date for identifying and deleting “foreigners” from electoral rolls.
Section 6A was added to the Citizenship Act, which states that people of “Indian origin” who entered Assam before January 1, 1966 and have been “ordinarily resident” in the state since then “shall be deemed to be citizens of India”.
Those who came to Assam after January 1, 1966 but before March 24, 1971 were given the rights and obligations of Indian citizens but not allowed to vote for 10 years.
Foreigners who entered after March 25, 1971 would be considered “illegal” immigrants and deported from Assam.
The case before Supreme Court
The Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha, a civil society group in Guwahati, challenged Section 6A in 2012, claiming it is “discriminatory” and violates Article 14 of the Constitution (the right to equality).
The petitioner argued that the provision provides different cut-off dates for citizenship for immigrants entering Assam than the rest of India, which is July 1948.
It also claimed that Section 6A violates the rights of “indigenous” people from Assam. The petition states that “the application of Section 6A to the State of Assam alone has led to a perceptible change in the demographic pattern of the State and has reduced the people of Assam to a minority in their own State. The same is detrimental to the economic and political well-being of the State and acts as a potent force against the cultural survival, political control and employment opportunities of the people.”
They asked why the provision was only implemented in Assam, blaming the “rise in infiltration a consequence or an effect of Section 6A”.
Other organisations from Assam, including NGO Assam Public Works, also filed petitions challenging Section 6A.
The petitioners urged the apex court to declare Section 6A unconstitutional for violating Articles 14, 21 (protection of life and personal liberty), and 29 (protection of interests of minorities) of the Constitution.
As per Indian Express, the Centre, defending the provision, argued that Article 11 of the Constitution gives the power to Parliament “to make any provision with respect to the acquisition and termination of citizenship and all other matters relating to citizenship”. It said this allows Parliament to make laws on citizenship including for a “particular object” without the violation of the right to equality.
Other respondents told the court that if Section 6A is deemed unconstitutional, a large number of people, who have been enjoying citizenship rights for over five decades, will become foreigners and be rendered “stateless”, according to the newspaper.
The Supreme Court heard the case last December and had reserved its judgement.
What has the SC said?
The majority of the five-judge bench upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A, saying the cut-off date of March 25, 1971 for granting citizenship to those who came to Assam is reasonable.
Reading his verdict, CJI Chandrachud observed that the mere presence of different ethnic groups in a state does not mean an infringement of Article 29(1) of the Constitution (protection of interests of minorities).
“The petitioner has to prove that one ethnic group is not able to protect their own language and culture just because of the presence of another ethnic group”, he said.
The CJI said, “The Central government could have extended the application of the Act to other areas, but it was not done because it was unique to the magnitude of Assam.”
“The number of migrants coming to Assam and their impact on culture etc. is higher in Assam. The impact of 40 lakh migrants in Assam is more than that of 57 lakh in West Bengal because the land area in Assam is less than that of West Bengal,” he added.
#BreakingNews: The Supreme Court has upheld constitutional validity of section 6A of the Citizenship Act. Legal correspondent @anany_b shares more with Avantika Singh @PreetyAxomia talks about Assam's situation | #SupremeCourtOfIndia #CitizenshipAct pic.twitter.com/5OQUnBKB2y
— News18 (@CNNnews18) October 17, 2024
Justice Surya Kant ruled that the provision was in the spirit of fraternity. “People cannot choose their neighbours. That is the not idea of fraternity. The idea is to live and let live. People of different backgrounds should live in the spirit of inclusiveness and togetherness”, he wrote in the verdict.
However, Justice Pardiwala dissented, saying Section 6A may have been valid when it was introduced but has become “unconstitutional” with the passage of time.
What does the verdict mean for NRC?
The final National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam prepared in 2019 is based on the conditions laid down in Section 6A of the Citizenship Act.
The plea had requested the Supreme Court to update the Assam NRC with 1951 as the cut-off date for granting citizenship.
However, the top court’s verdict has upheld the basis on which the 2019 NRC was devised.
With inputs from agencies
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
