No accurate count but situation is grim, Centre tells SC on illegal immigration | India News
No accurate count but situation is grim, Centre tells SC on illegal immigration | India News
The Centre on Tuesday told the Supreme Court that though an “accurate count” of illegal immigrants is not possible as they enter the country clandestinely, the “situation is grim” as pointed out by the petitioners who have challenged the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
Referring to the affidavit filed by Union Home Secretary Ajay Bhalla in response to the court’s direction seeking details of the “estimated inflow” of illegal immigrants to Assam and other northeastern states after March 25, 1971, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told a five-judge Constitution bench, presided by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, “in substance we have said, we have a porous border. They come clandestinely and therefore it is not possible to give exact figure. It may not be an accurate figure. But it is a grim situation. I will not dispute the petitioners on that”.
The bench, also comprising Justices Surya Kant, M M Sundresh, J B Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, reserved its judgment on the petitions till Tuesday.
Section 6A was introduced in the Citizenship Act in 1985 following the signing of the Assam accord between the government of India and agitating groups in the state. It states that all those who entered the state on or after 1 January, 1966, but before March 25, 1971, from Bangladesh and since then are residents of Assam can register for citizenship.
Appearing for a petitioner, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan said there is no machinery for determining the criteria laid down for grant of citizenship. “There are four specific conditions prescribed — is the person of Indian origin, has the person entered Assam before January 1, 1966, has the person entered from Bangladesh and is he ordinarily a resident in Assam. To qualify, one must meet these conditions. That’s what the legislature says, but there is no machinery to determine these,” he said.
“The net effect is that… when you prescribe four criteria and do not couple that with a machinery to evaluate and assess those criteria, you are in short not prescribing any criteria at all. This is fatal… So anyone over the age of 57 in Assam can claim citizenship without the requirement of establishment of ancestry or provenance…This is the grant of citizenship without scrutiny”.
Divan also pointed out that the provision provides no time limit within which the exercise of granting citizenship has to be completed. “If no time limit is provided for working out the section, the section itself is vulnerable…The provision remains on the statute book and continues to act as a beacon indefinitely. It’s like a magnet which attracts people to Assam with all the consequences as far as illegal immigrants are concerned,” he said.
Senior Advocate K N Choudhary, also appearing for the petitioners, while agreeing that it is difficult to make approximation as to what is the exact extent to which immigration has taken place, however, added that “there are contemporaneous facts from which one can come to the conclusion that this immigration is substantial and has caused change of demographic profile and other adverse effects”.
