Supreme Court Upholds Citizenship Act: A Landmark Decision by 4-1 Majority

The Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act of 1955, which recognizes the Assam Accord, with a decisive 4-1 majority, On October 17, 2024. The five-judge Constitution bench comprised Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra. Justice Pardiwala, however, dissented, deeming Section 6A unconstitutional.

CJI Chandrachud stated that the Assam Accord represented a political solution to the issue of illegal migration, while Section 6A served as the legislative counterpart. The majority opinion concluded that Parliament possessed the legislative competence to enact this provision, which seeks to balance humanitarian concerns with the need to protect the local population.

The majority ruling further explained that distinguishing Assam from other states sharing borders with West Bengal was justified, given the higher percentage of immigrants within Assam's local population compared to other border states. The impact of the estimated 4 million migrants in Assam is significantly greater than the 5.7 million migrants in West Bengal, primarily due to Assam's smaller land area.

Moreover, the court upheld March 25, 1971, as a rational cut-off date for citizenship eligibility, marking the end of the Bangladesh Liberation War. The bench emphasized that Section 6A was "neither over-inclusive nor under-inclusive," arguing that the mere presence of various ethnic groups in a state does not infringe upon the fundamental right to protect linguistic and cultural heritage as outlined in Article 29(1) of the Constitution.

During the proceedings, the court instructed the Ministry of Home Affairs to provide data regarding the inflow of illegal migrants to Assam and other northeastern states post-March 25, 1971, and to furnish information about citizenship grants to immigrants during different time periods.

Understanding Section 6A of the Citizenship Act of 1955

Section 6A permits foreign migrants of Indian origin who arrived in Assam between January 1, 1966, and March 25, 1971, to apply for Indian citizenship. This provision was introduced in 1985 following the Assam Accord, an agreement between the Government of India and leaders of the Assam movement, which sought to address concerns regarding illegal migrants from Bangladesh. The cut-off date corresponds with the conclusion of the Bangladesh Liberation War.

Certain indigenous groups in Assam have challenged this provision, arguing that it legalizes the illegal infiltration of foreign migrants from Bangladesh.

Main Contentions Raised by the Petitioners

The petitioners raised several significant concerns regarding Section 6A:

• They argued that Section 6A violates the essential fabric of the Constitution, particularly principles of fraternity, citizenship, unity, and integrity.
• They claimed it infringes on fundamental rights under Articles 14, 21, and 29.
• The petitioners contended that the provision undermines the political rights of citizens, as articulated in Articles 325 and 326.
• They asserted that Section 6A exceeds legislative competence and contradicts constitutional "cut-off lines."
• They argued that it undermines core democratic principles, federalism, and the rule of law, which are part of the Constitution's basic structure.

As a result, the petitioners sought various remedies, including:

• A declaration that Section 6A is unconstitutional for violating Articles 14, 21, and 29.
• A ruling declaring Rule 4A of the 2003 Rules and a related notification as ultra vires of Section 6A.
• An alternative writ of mandamus directing the Union of India to consult states and Union Territories (UTs) to frame a settlement and rehabilitation policy for immigrants who arrived in Assam after January 6, 1951.
• An order for the Union to expedite border fencing and initiate the identification, detection, and deportation of foreigners in Assam.
• A directive to remove encroachers from protected tribal lands as established under Assam Lands and Revenue Regulations.

Case Trajectory

The Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha, a civil society group from Guwahati, first challenged Section 6A in 2012, arguing its arbitrary and discriminatory nature. They claimed that having distinct cut-off dates for regularizing illegal migrants in Assam compared to the rest of India was unfair and requested the Court to instruct relevant authorities to update the National Register of Citizens (NRC) based on 1951 records instead of relying on electoral rolls before March 24, 1971. Subsequently, other organizations from Assam joined in filing petitions against Section 6A.

The matter was referred to a Constitution Bench by a two-judge panel in 2014, leading to the formation of a new bench after the retirement of most judges involved in the case. Hearings resumed under Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, along with Justices AS Bopanna, MM Sundresh, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, concluding on December 12, 2023. The judgment has now been delivered, affirming the contested provision's validity.