Section 6A Verdict: Why It Was Inserted In Citizenship Act 1985, Supreme Court Judgement Explained

New Delhi: Section 6A, which was incorporated in Citizenship Act 1955 following signing of 1985 Assam Accord, was upheld by Supreme Court. following explains special provision of law and its possible ramifications.

What is Section 6A of Citizenship Act 1955?

Section 6A was inserted into Citizenship Act as a special provision to deal with citizenship of people covered under 1985 Assam Accord signed by n Rajiv Gandhi government with All Assam Students Union (AASU), n heed by Prafulla Kumar Mahanta, who later twice became chief minister of Assam.

It is referred in law as "special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by Assam Accord".

provision provides that those who h come to Assam on or after January 1, 1966, but before March 25, 1971, from specified territories, including Banglesh , and since n are residents of Assam, must register mselves under Section 18 for citizenship. se people were barred from registering as citizens of India for 10 years from day of ir detection as per provision of Assam Accord. As per Assam Accord, those who h come after March 25, 1971, are bound to be deported from India. As a result, Section 6A fixes March 25, 1971, as cut-off date for granting citizenship to migrants, particularly ones from Banglesh, residing in Assam.

Why validity of Section 6A was challenged in Supreme Court?

Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha and many or petitioners challenged provision, saying that it singles out Assam and has facilitated mass immigration. y claimed that Assam's demography has changed drastically due to citizenship being granted to immigrants who claim that y entered Assam before March 25, 1971. y wanted 1951 as cut-off year for detection and deportation of illegal immigrants from Assam. petitioners h challenged Section 6A first in 2012 while arguing that Section 6A was discriminatory, arbitrary and illegal so far as it provides for different cut-off dates for regularising illegal migrants who entered Assam and rest of India.

What Supreme Court held?

In a majority verdict, Supreme Court upheld constitutional validity of Section 6A of Citizenship Act, 1955. Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud said magnitude of influx of migrants in Assam was higher as compared to or states considering smaller land size and detection of foreigner is an elaborate process. Besides, Justice Surya Kant, who wrote for himself and Justices M M Sundresh and Manoj Misra, concurred with CJI and held that Parliament h legislative competence to enact such a provision. majority verdict held that 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. He said open-ended nature of Section 6A h become prone to abuse owing to forged documents.

Mixed reactions to judgement

AASU, which has spearheed a six-year-long agitation against illegal immigrants in Assam between 1979 and 1985, welcomed Supreme Court judgment. influential students body said Supreme Court has given its stamp of approval to Assam Accord under which all those who h entered Assam illegally must be detected and deported from country. However, Matiur Rahman, a former AASU leer, who filed original petition in Supreme Court on behalf of Sanmilita Mahasabha, an Assam-based organisation, challenging inclusion of Section 6A in Citizenship Act, said he was not expecting such a verdict. He termed ruling as "unfortunate" saying it will make state a "dumping ground" for foreigners.

Is re any link between Section 6A and NRC?

Technically, SC order on Section 6A has no link with National Register for Citizen (NRC). Update of NRC was carried out in Assam on basis of 1971 voters list. Those whose names were part of 1971 voters list or ir descendants were eligible to apply for inclusion in NRC. When final list of NRC was published in 2019, a total of 19.06 lakh people, out of 3.30 crore applicants, were excluded.

After final list was published, AASU and a few or groups moved SC challenging list. While AASU has been maintaining that number is less, a few or groups were saying that number was too high. case has not been heard so far.

What is government stand? 

While mitting petitioner's concerns, over burden on resources, job opportunities, and demographic changes due to an influx of immigrants in Assam , Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, representing Centre, h said that Section 6A was confined to a particular period of time and declaring it unconstitutional would not be solution to this problem. Mehta expressed concerns over negative consequences of unabated influx on people of Assam and submitted that problem was a serious one.

India shares a 4,096 km-long border with Banglesh of which 267 km falls in Assam . During and after liberation war of Banglesh, which led to independence of neighbouring country in 1971, a massive influx of migrants to India was seen. Even prior to Banglesh's independence, migration h started to India. Assam's indigenous people have been protesting against illegal immigration fearing threats to ir land, jobs and political power.