Supreme Court’s decision on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act
In an important historic decision, the Supreme Court has declared Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, which provides for granting citizenship to migrants from Bangladesh in Assam, as valid and constitutional. The Constitution Bench of five judges has given this decision with a majority of 4:1. The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
Section 6A, which was included in the Citizenship Act 1955 after the signing of the Assam Accord of 1985. Explains the specific provisions of this law and their potential effects. During the hearing, CJI DY Chandrachud said that 6A provides citizenship to those who are not covered under constitutional provisions and are not covered under substantive provisions.
What is Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955?
Section 6A was included in the Citizenship Act as a special provision to deal with the citizenship of people covered under the Assam Accord of 1985. It was signed by the then Rajiv Gandhi government with the All Assam Students Union (AASU), which was then led by Prafulla Kumar Mahanta. Prafulla Kumar Mahanta later became the Chief Minister of Assam twice.
This law contains what is referred to as special provision with respect to the citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord. According to the provision, people who came to Assam on or after January 1, 1966, from various regions including Bangladesh and before March 25, 1971. Since then he has been a resident of Assam. They will now have to register themselves under Section 18 for citizenship.
As per the provision of the Assam Accord, these people were barred from registering as citizens of India for 10 years from the day of their detection. According to the Assam Accord, those who came after March 25, 1971, were scheduled to be deported from India. Then in Section 6A, the cut-off date for granting citizenship to migrants, especially those from Bangladesh living in Assam, was fixed as March 25, 1971.
Why was the validity of Section 6A challenged in the Supreme Court?
Assam Joint Federation and several other petitioners challenged this provision, saying it singles out Assam. It also said that it promotes immigration on a large scale. He claimed that there has been a drastic change in the demography of Assam due to the granting of citizenship to immigrants who claimed to have entered Assam before March 25, 1971. They wanted 1951 as the cut-off year to identify and expel illegal immigrants from Assam.
The petitioners had first challenged Section 6A in 2012, arguing that Section 6A was discriminatory, arbitrary and illegal as it created a different cutoff for regularizing illegal immigrants entering Assam and the rest of India. -Off date is provided.
What did the Supreme Court say?
The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, in a majority decision. Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud himself upheld the constitutional validity of 6A and said that the amount of influx of migrants into Assam was higher than other states, because the land size is small and identification of foreigners is a complex process. . Apart from this, Justice Surya Kant, Justice MM Sundaresh and Manoj Mishra agreed with the CJI. All these judges said that Parliament has the legislative competence to enact such a provision.
Judge JB Pardiwala expressed disagreement
The majority judgment in the Supreme Court held that the cut-off date of March 25, 1971, for entering Assam and granting citizenship was correct. However, Judge JB Pardiwala disagreed and declared Section 6A unconstitutional. He said that the open nature of Section 6A has become more likely to be misused due to the advent of fake documents.
Mixed reactions to the decision
All Assam Students Union (AASU) which led a six-year-long movement against illegal immigrants in Assam between 1979 and 1985. This organization welcomed the decision of the Supreme Court. The influential student organization said that the Supreme Court has given its approval to the Assam Accord. Under this, all the people who have entered Assam illegally should be traced and they should be deported from the country.
However, former AASU leader Matiur Rahman who had filed the original petition in the Supreme Court on behalf of Assam-based organization Sammilita Mahasabha challenging the inclusion of Section 6A in the Citizenship Act. He said that he did not expect such a decision. He termed the decision as unfortunate and said it would make the state a dumping ground for foreigners.
What is the government’s stance?
Acknowledging the petitioner’s concerns over the burden on resources, job opportunities and demographic changes due to influx of immigrants in Assam, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, had said that Section 6A is limited to a particular period and Declaring it unconstitutional will not solve this problem. Tushar Mehta expressed concern over the negative consequences of ever-increasing immigrants on the people of Assam. He also said that this is a serious problem.
India-Bangladesh border with Assam is 267 kilometers.
Let us tell you that India shares a 4,096 km long border with Bangladesh, out of which 267 km falls in Assam. During and after the Liberation War of Bangladesh which led to the neighboring country’s independence in 1971. India has seen a rapid influx of migrants. Even before the independence of Bangladesh, outsiders had started coming to India including Assam. The natives of Assam have been protesting against this illegal immigration for a long time.