New Delhi. In an important decision, the Supreme Court has validated the law granting citizenship to immigrants in Assam. The Supreme Court, in its decision delivered on Thursday, October 17, has upheld the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act. The Constitution Bench of five judges headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud has given the verdict by a majority of four to one. Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Surya Kant, Justice MM Sundaresh and Justice Manoj Mishra agreed on the validity of Section 6A, while Justice JB Pardiwala dissented from the judgment.
It is noteworthy that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act was added during the Assam Accord in 1985. Under this law, Bangladeshi immigrants who came to Assam between January 1, 1966 and March 25, 1971 can register themselves as Indian citizens. Whereas foreigners coming to Assam after March 25, 1971 are not eligible for Indian citizenship. While upholding this law, Justice Surya Kant said – We have maintained the constitutional validity of Section 6A. We cannot allow anyone to choose their neighbors and it is against the principle of brotherhood. Our philosophy is live and let live. He also read the judgment on behalf of Justice Sundaresh and Justice Mishra.
Chief Justice DY Chandrachud himself read his judgment. He said- Assam Accord was a political solution to the issue of increasing migration. The added Section 6A was a legal solution. The central government could have implemented this law in other areas also, but it was not done because the circumstances were not like Assam. Assam had an influence on the culture of the people who came to Assam. He said- The argument given by the petitioner against Section 6A is that one ethnic group is not able to protect its language and culture due to the presence of another ethnic group. They have to prove it.
Justice Surya Kant said- We have rejected the argument that the 6A law was made arbitrarily. There are clearly defined conditions for immigrants who came before 1966, after 1966 and before 1971. He said- We have held that the petitioners have not been able to prove that the arrival of immigrants has had a serious impact on the Assamese culture and language. We cannot accept that there has been any impact on the voting rights of the Assamese people.