18 October,2024 09:09 AM IST | New Delhi | Agencies
Congress leader and lawyer Salman Khurshid talks to the media after the SC’s verdict on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act. Pic/PTI
In a majority verdict, the Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act which granted Indian citizenship to immigrants who came to Assam between January 1, 1966 and March 25, 1971. A five-judge Constitution bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud said the Assam Accord was a political solution to the problem of illegal migration.
Section 6A was inserted in 1985 into the Citizenship Act as a special provision to deal with the citizenship of people covered under the Assam Accord. The CJI upheld the validity and said the magnitude of influx of migrants in Assam is higher as compared to other states considering the smaller land size and the detection of foreigners is an elaborate process.
Besides, Justice Surya Kant, and Justices M M Sundresh and Manoj Misra, held that Parliament had the legislative competence to enact such a provision. The majority verdict held that the cut off date of March 25, 1971 for entry into Assam and granting citizenship is correct. Justice J B Pardiwala, however, dissented and held Section 6A as unconstitutional.
ALSO READ
British prime minister says he has no plans to talk with Putin, reaffirms support for Ukraine
Donald Trump Jr. say pushback against Cabinet picks proves they're disrupters voters wanted
Donald Trump Jr. say pushback against Cabinet picks proves they're disrupters voters wanted
Donald Trump Jr. say pushback against Cabinet picks proves they're disrupters voters wanted
Donald Trump Jr. say pushback against Cabinet picks proves they're disrupters voters wanted
The All Assam Students Union, which spearheaded a six-year-long agitation against illegal immigrants in Assam in 1979-85, welcomed the Supreme Court judgment upholding the validity of Section 6A of Citizenship Act. AASU described the judgment as "historic" while the original petitioner who challenged the provision of the law termed the ruling as unfortunate.
This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever