The Supreme Court on Tuesday said it would first determine the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act that permitted the entry of foreigners into Assam till March 25, 1971, and thereafter deal with the row over the National Register of Citizens and other related matters.
A batch of PIL petitions has sought quashing of Section 6A. The petitions, filed by the Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha and others, had said the impugned provision was discriminatory and unconstitutional in that it permitted the entry of foreigners into Assam till March 25, 1971, whereas for the rest of the country, the cutoff date as prescribed under Articles 5 and 6 of the Constitution was July 19, 1949.
On Tuesday, a five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud heard solicitor-general Tushar Mehta and senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who was appearing for some of the petitioners, before framing the issues for consideration and posting the matter for further hearing to February 14.
Mehta said the court had to examine whether it could revisit Section 6A of the Citizenship Act after over 40 years, particularly when a valid statute had been enacted for the purpose. In other words, the Centre justified the constitutionality of Section 6A.
CJI Chandrachud, however, observed: “Many of the issues are the shades of the same question. We will not stop anyone from arguing points on statutory violation being ultra vires of the Constitution. Please decide what you want to argue among yourselves so that there is no overlap.”
The bench passed the following order: “Whether Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955 suffers from any constitutional infirmity.
“The written submissions together with a joint compilation shall be filed within a period of three weeks.”
The bench also had Justices M.R. Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P.S. Narsimha.
A number of individuals and organisations other than the Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha too have intervened in the matter, justifying 6A. Some petitioners have challenged the ongoing NRC exercise carried out by the government in Assam to weed out foreigners.
Critics of Section 6A have contended that the proviso promotes and protects illegal immigrants and was specifically enacted to shield illegal immigrants from Bangladesh who had trespassed into Assam and is, therefore, discriminatory.
The petitioners have pleaded that Section 6A be struck down, the NRC in Assam be updated by taking 1951 as the base year, and illegal immigrants be deported.