Source-This post on SC Verdict on Citizenship Case has been created based on the article “Expert Explains: Takeaways from SC verdict in favour of Assam man in citizenship case” published in “The Indian Express” on 16 July 2024.
UPSC Syllabus-GS Paper-2- Indian Constitution—Historical Underpinnings, Evolution, Features, Amendments, Significant Provisions and Basic Structure.
Context- The Supreme Court has declared Md Rahim Ali, an Assam resident, a citizen of India, overturning a Foreigners’ Tribunal’s decision. It has clarified the law on foreign nationality allegations and the individual’s burden of proof.
In 2004, a case was filed against Ali for not providing citizenship documents. The Foreigners’ Tribunal (FT) first declared him a foreigner without his presence, a decision the High Court upheld. The Supreme Court then ordered the FT to re-examine the documents, but the FT again ruled Ali a foreigner, stating that he entered illegally after March 25, 1971.
What are the clarifications given by the Supreme Court in recent judgement?
1) Burden of Proof-Section 9 of The Foreigners Act, 1946, places the burden of proof on the person accused of being a foreigner. However, the Supreme Court questioned whether this allows the authorities to randomly suspect someone without evidence and rely solely on Section 9.
2) State Responsibility -The Supreme Court clarified that while the burden of proof is on the accused, the state must first provide evidence for the allegations. Without sufficient material from the state, initiating such serious proceedings is unjust.
3) Minor Spelling Variations -The Court noted that minor spelling variations in names should not lead to dire consequences, highlighting that such errors are common in electoral rolls.
4) Proof Standards in Court Cases -The court cited the five-judge ruling in Mukesh Singh vs State (2020), emphasizing that even with a reverse burden of proof, the prosecution must first fulfill its initial obligation. In Noor Aga vs State of Punjab (2008), it was established that the prosecution must prove basic facts, and more serious offenses require a higher standard of proof.
A detailed article on Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) Rules can be read here.
What are Foreign Tribunals?
Tribunals Under Colonial Law- These were created under The Foreigners Act, a colonial law established before the Indian Constitution, to address issues related to foreigners. They were set up in 1964 by an executive order from the Home Ministry.
Definition of “Foreigner” -Under Section 2(a) of the 1946 Act, a “foreigner” is defined as anyone who is not a citizen of India. This applies only to those with strong evidence of foreign status, such as being caught entering India or holding a foreign passport.
What are the issues with foreign tribunals?
1) Legitimacy of Tribunal Establishment -They are not established under Article 323B of the Constitution, which allows tribunals to be created by law through the appropriate legislature.
2) Inadequate Investigation-About 300,000 people in Assam were labeled as Doubtful Voters in 1997 and later by low-level officials, without any investigation or notice. They were excluded from the Assam NRC and now face challenges in Foreigners’ Tribunals.
3) Lack of Transparency in Accusations -Paragraph 3(1) of the Foreigners’ Tribunal Order of 1964 requires that notices state the “main grounds” for accusations. However, Foreigners’ Tribunals often do not provide this information, leaving individuals to defend themselves without knowing the charges.
What are the implications of the recent Supreme Court Judgement?
1) The judgment will ease the worries of those concerned about minor spelling errors or date discrepancies in their names and their parents’ names due to the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC).
2) By March 2019, 1.17 lakh people had been declared foreigners, including 63,959 ex parte cases. This judgement may positively impact thousands of pending cases with the Foreigners’ Tribunals.
Note- Ex parte cases– It refers to legal proceedings or decisions made by a court in the absence of one party. This means that only one side (usually the plaintiff) is present or has submitted information, leading to decisions without hearing from the other side.
Question for practice
What clarifications has the Supreme Court provided in its recent judgment? What are the implications of this judgment?
Discover more from Free UPSC IAS Preparation Syllabus and Materials For Aspirants
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
