Citizenship Act, 1955: ss.3, 6 – State of Assam – Report of State Coordinator – Action proposed in Paragraph 7(a) that for any NRC Applications/Claimants, if parent/legacy person through whom eligibility is sought to be established is a DV or DF or PFT, then such persons will not be included in NRC irrespective of the status of the other parent – Challenged on the ground that the said action ran contrary to the provisions of s.3(1)(a) of the Act which dealt with acquisition of citizenship by birth in the case of every person born in India on or after the 26.1.1950 but before 1.7.1987 – Held: The purport and effect of provisions of s.3(1)(a) and (b) of the Act is pending consideration before a Constitution Bench of this court in Writ Petition (c) No.311 of 2015 – The issue pending is whether the expression “every person born in India” would apply only to persons born to Indian citizens and whether the expression “either of whose parents is a citizen of India at the time of his birth” in s.3(1)(b) of the Act would apply to only a person who is born to parents one of whom is a citizen and the other a foreigner, provided he or she has entered India lawfully and his/her stay in India is not in contravention of applicable Indian laws.
Citizenship Act, 1955: State of Assam – Report of State Coordinator – Actions proposed in Paragraph 7(b) and 7(c) that those persons born before 3.12.2004, if the parent through whom legacy is drawn is not DV or DF or PFT and is found eligible for inclusion in NRC, but the other parent from whom legacy is not drawn is a DV or DF or PFT, then, such descendants may be included in NRC; and those persons who are born on or after 3.12. 2004, they will not be included in NRC if any of the parent is DV or DF or PFT even if the parent from whom legacy is drawn is clear from all angles – The suggestions/prayers made in paragraph 7(b) and (c) of Report dated 10.7.2019 of the State Coordinator are in consonance with the provisions of s.3(1)(b) and (c) of the Act and the Standard Operating Procedure (SoP) for disposal of claims and objections – Therefore, there is no reason to refuse leave to the State Coordinator to act in terms of the action proposed in the said suggestions/prayers made in Paragraph 7(b) and (c) subject to such orders that this Court may pass in Writ Petition (c) No.311 of 2015 – Moreover, as suggested by the State Coordinator, the issue raised could be best decided by the Tribunal, if so required as and when appeals are filed.
Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003 – rr.4A, 6A – r.4A of the 2003 Rules carves out special provisions in the matter of preparation of National Register of Indian Citizens in the State of Assam – r.4A(2) specifically provides that the National Register of Indian Citizens in the State of Assam shall be prepared by inviting applications from all the residents calling for specified particulars relating to each family and individual including the citizenship status based on the National Register of Citizens 1951 and the electoral rolls upto the midnight of 24.3.1971 – The special provision contained in r.4A of the 2003 Rules read with the Schedule framed thereunder, for preparation of National Register of Indian Citizens in the State of Assam, had been necessitated on account of the provisions contained in s.6A of the Act which are special provisions as to grant citizenship to persons covered by the Assam Accord – Under s.6A(2) of the Act, all persons of Indian origin who had come to the State of Assam before 1.1.1966 from the specified territory (defined as territories included in Bangladesh) immediately before the commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985, including such persons whose names were included in the electoral rolls for purposes of the General Election to the House of the People held in 1967, and who have been ordinarily resident in Assam since the dates of their entry into Assam are deemed to be citizens of India as on and from 1.1.1966 – Person(s) who had entered Assam between 1.1.1966 but before the 25.3.1971 and who has been ordinarily resident in Assam, upon being detected as a foreigner(s), was/were liable to register himself/themselves in accordance with the Rules made by the Central Government – On such registration, under s.6A(4) of the Act, such a person would have the same rights and obligations as a Citizen of India; but for a period of ten years he/she shall not be entitled to have his/her name included in any electoral roll – s.6A of the Act which was inserted with effect from 7.12.1985 by the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985 (Act No.65 of 1985), thus, carves out a special category of citizens in the State of Assam – The entire NRC exercise having been performed on the aforesaid basis, the same cannot be now ordered to be reopened by initiation of a fresh exercise on certain other parameters that have been suggested on behalf of the intervenors/applicants on the strength of the provisions of s.3(1)(a) of the Act – Citizenship Act, 1955 – ss.3, 6.
National Register of Citizens: Prayer of the State Coordinator with regard to maintenance of security of the NRC data – This Court directed that an appropriate regime be enacted on lines similar to the security regime provided for AADHAR data – Only thereafter, the list of inclusions and exclusions shall be made available to the State Government, Central Government and Registrar General of India – Further it was directed that only hard-copies of the supplementary list of inclusions be published at the NRC Seva Centers, Circle Offices and Offices of the District Magistrates of the State – Also direction passed that the list of exclusions to be published on 31.8.2019 shall be published only on on-line and shall be family-wise – So far as the validity of orders passed under the IMDT Act are concerned, such cases shall be governed by the decision of the Gauhati High Court in Anowar Ali v. State of Assam.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.