October 17, 2024: In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has upheld a crucial provision of the Citizenship Act that allows Bangladeshi immigrants in Assam to register as Indian citizens. A five-judge constitutional bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, delivered the verdict with a 4:1 majority, affirming the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act.
The case arose from a petition arguing that the influx of refugees from Bangladesh (formerly East Pakistan) has adversely affected Assam’s demographic balance and violated the political and cultural rights of the state’s original residents. Justice JB Pardiwala dissented from the majority opinion, while Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh, and Manoj Misra supported the ruling.
In the majority judgment, Chief Justice Chandrachud emphasized that Section 6A was a political solution addressing the unique challenges faced by Assam due to a significant influx of illegal migrants following the creation of Bangladesh. He stated, “The central government could have extended the act to other areas as well, but did not do so because it was unique to Assam.” He elaborated that the impact of approximately 4 million migrants in Assam is more pronounced than that of 5.7 million in West Bengal, given Assam’s smaller land area.
The ruling specifically applies to immigrants who arrived after March 25, 1971, marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing discourse surrounding citizenship, migration, and cultural identity in the northeastern state. The Supreme Court's decision is expected to have far-reaching implications for the political landscape in Assam, as well as for ongoing debates about immigration and national identity across India.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Supreme Court Upholds Key Section of Citizenship Act, Recognizing Assam Accord
October 17, 2024: In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has upheld a crucial provision of the Citizenship Act that allows Bangladeshi immigrants in Assam to register as Indian citizens. A five-judge constitutional bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, delivered the verdict with a 4:1 majority, affirming the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act.
The case arose from a petition arguing that the influx of refugees from Bangladesh (formerly East Pakistan) has adversely affected Assam’s demographic balance and violated the political and cultural rights of the state’s original residents. Justice JB Pardiwala dissented from the majority opinion, while Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh, and Manoj Misra supported the ruling.
In the majority judgment, Chief Justice Chandrachud emphasized that Section 6A was a political solution addressing the unique challenges faced by Assam due to a significant influx of illegal migrants following the creation of Bangladesh. He stated, “The central government could have extended the act to other areas as well, but did not do so because it was unique to Assam.” He elaborated that the impact of approximately 4 million migrants in Assam is more pronounced than that of 5.7 million in West Bengal, given Assam’s smaller land area.
The ruling specifically applies to immigrants who arrived after March 25, 1971, marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing discourse surrounding citizenship, migration, and cultural identity in the northeastern state. The Supreme Court's decision is expected to have far-reaching implications for the political landscape in Assam, as well as for ongoing debates about immigration and national identity across India.