Supreme Court Cites CAA to Grant Relief to Migrant from East Pakistan
The Hon’ble Supreme Court recently invoked the provisions of the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 (CAA), to adjudicate in favor of an individual who migrated to India from East Pakistan (present-day Bangladesh) in 1969, upholding his claim to Indian citizenship.
The Bench, consisting of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice R. Mahadevan, examined the amended Section 2(1)(b) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, introduced through the CAA. It was noted that, as per the proviso added by the amendment, the appellant, being a Hindu, could not be categorized as an "illegal migrant." The CAA facilitates the grant of Indian citizenship to individuals belonging to non-Muslim communities—Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians—who migrated from Pakistan, Afghanistan, or Bangladesh on or before December 31, 2014. The proviso to Section 2(1)(b) stipulates that individuals from these religious communities entering India before the specified date, even without valid travel documents, shall not be deemed "illegal migrants."
The appellant, aged 16 at the time of his migration, had relocated to India in 1969 with his father. To secure a government position within the West Bengal administration, he applied for Indian citizenship based on a migration certificate issued to his father. The authorities initially issued a no-objection certificate, enabling his appointment to government service in 1985. However, the requisite Police Verification Report, which should have been filed within three months of his appointment, was submitted only in 2010—a delay exceeding 25 years. This report deemed the appellant "unsuitable" for government service, citing an absence of conclusive evidence of his citizenship. Consequently, his services were terminated in 2011, and he was denied retirement benefits.
After the Administrative Tribunal annulled the government’s termination decision, the Calcutta High Court reversed this ruling. The appellant, disputing the High Court's order, sought redress before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The appellant maintained that his Indian citizenship was beyond question, emphasizing his reliance on his father’s migration certificate. The state, however, contended that mere possession of a migration certificate was insufficient to establish citizenship and that the appellant had failed to register his citizenship with the competent authorities.
Justice Mahadevan, delivering the judgment, observed that the appellant was entitled to Indian citizenship under Section 5(1)(b) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which provides that “a person of Indian origin who is an ordinary resident of any country or place outside undivided India is entitled to citizenship.” The judgment further acknowledged that the appellant had claimed Indian origin by virtue of his grandparents’ citizenship, citing Articles 5 to 11 of the Constitution of India, which govern matters of citizenship under Part II. Additionally, Section 4 of the Citizenship Act, 1955, establishes that the appellant’s father is a citizen of India by descent, thereby rendering the appellant eligible for citizenship by registration under Section 5 of the Act.
The Court also noted the protective scope of the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, which grants citizenship benefits to non-Muslim migrants entering India prior to December 31, 2014, exempting them from classification as "illegal migrants." The Court emphasized the legislative intent of the CAA, specifically the proviso introduced to Section 2, clarifying that individuals like the appellant fall outside the definition of "illegal migrants."
Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of the appellant, recognizing his entitlement to Indian citizenship and directing the respondent state to disburse all retiral benefits due to him.
Cause Title: BASUDEV DUTTA VERSUS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
Case No: CIVIL APPEAL No. 13919 of 2024
Date: December-05-2024
Bench: Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice R. Mahadevan
[Read/Download order]
