The Citizenship Amendment Act which has been widely criticised for its
exclusion of muslims applying for Citizenship and many legislators, scholars and
legal luminaries have debated over the topic on it's religious basis as an
amendment into the Citizenship Act,1955. It also formulates the antithesis of
secularism, violative of the basic structure, contravention of Article 15 of the
Keshavananda Bharati the landmark decision of the Apex Court of India had
decided on the doctrine of basic structure which also includes secularism as an
inherent part of it. The Golaknath Case made it clear that Parliament
didn't have any right to curtail or amend Fundamental Rights i.e., Part 3 of the
Constitution. The SR Bommai Case also endorsed Federalism in India as a
way to achieve secularism. It defined the Constitutional Philosophy of not
mixing religion and politics.
The Indian Republic has been a Parliamentary Democracy where deliberations are
held on the legislative process of the government and suggestions are given by
the opposition to make certain changes.
The CAA can pass the legal test in the apex court on one ground i.e., the
Doctrine of Reasonable Classification which is being called an exception to
Article 14 on certain legal propositions laid down by the apex court in the case
of Shri Ram Krishna Dalmia Vs. Shri Justice S. R. Tendolkar & Others
(1958 AIR 538)
The Ten Propositions given in the Dalmia Case have an Important Relevance on the
Presumption of Constitutional Validity of the Citizenship Amendment Act,2019.
The misinterpretation of Article 14 Right to Equality can lead to Confusion in
the evolving Legislative Process and Undemocratic Interference into the
Parliamentary Deliberations held. Refugee Laws are given to those minorities who
suffer from Religious and Ethnic Problems in an Theocratic, Militaristic and
Majoritarian Society. The Historical Background of these Religious Communities
have to be considered and the law that doesn't affect the Citizens of the Indian
State is not a Matter of Legal Concern because Judicial Supremacy is present in
India to decide over the Interpretation of these laws.
Equality is also given to those who are treated unequally and provide them with
positive egalitarian policies. The precedents of the Apex Court have decided the
conditions for determination of Social, Economic and Political Equality.
Political Hypocrisy of Left Ideologies can't decide the socio-political future
of a developing country. Constitutional Interpretation of Laws is to be decided
on Statutory Basis and Reasonable Basis. If the Citizenship Amendment Act,2019
satisfies the legal conditions of Test of Reasonableness and Doctrine of
There is a Reasonable Nexus between the Aim of the Law and the object of the act
to be achieved. There are exemptions for Article 14 which are being unread and
the interpretation of Article 14 should be on the Precedents of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court which is an Highest Infallible Legal Authority of India.
The meaning and scope of Article 14 have been described in two different classic
decisions of the Supreme Court of India, viz., Chiranjit Lal Chowdhury v. The
Union of India, Though Art. 14 lays down an significant fundamental right,
which should be proximately and prudently guarded, a doctrinaire approach
which might gag all beneficial legislation should not be adopted, in construing
it as it would obstruct the affirmative action given to an unequal class et al.
and therefore the State of Bombay and Another v. F.N.Balsara, and the
principles laid down in those decisions have to be kept in view in deciding the
other cases of Violation of Article 14 because construing violation has to be
legally consistent with the Constitutional Provisions as Equality can't be
granted to every act which doesn't come under the ambit of unequals or
constitutes an discrimination of any three types whether Social, Economic or
Political and it's restrictions are present under the purview of Law to prevent
misuse of fundamental rights an constitutional machinery against the state for
The Citizenship Amendment Act,2019 is a statute that gives Citizenship to
Migrants at a Fast-Track Level and gives a Religious Definition to Section 2 of
the Citizenship Act,1955 and Enforcement Mechanism by insertion of Section 6B.
The Pan-India NRC exercise draft has not yet been prepared and the hon'ble home
minister on various occasions to increase an unprecedented animosity for
political benefits has used the Pan-India NRC Rhetoric.
Former Chief Justice of India had remarked that NRC is "a base document for the
future" and had hit out at the critics for being ignorant about the harsh
reality of Illegal Migrant Issue in the State of Assam and it could have severe
political turmoil and social instability. The NRC exercise although faulty on
some fronts due to bureaucratic inefficiency can't be doubted because it
determines the legal citizens of India which is a substantial question as per
Sarbananda Sonowal v/s Union of India. The legal questions of NRC are
whether it is prejudiced towards exclusion of Muslims and Whether the Doubtful
are given enough legal chance of being heard and present their documents.
The Rationale behind giving CAA to only Non-Muslims has an reasonable cause
because the Ahmadiyyas, Shias and Other Islamic Communities were in the favour
of creation of an Modern Islamic Theocratic Country which was supported by Mr.
Zafrullah Khan an Leader of the Ahmadiyya Community and the historical
perspective of Joginder Nath Mandal who became an cabinet minister in the
theocratic country was the Dalit Proponent for the cause of Two-Nation Theory
who had vociferously supported the creation of an Islamic Theocratic Country
including Rehmat Ali Chowdhry and Mohammed Ali Jinnah and there was the two
nation theory prepared by Sir Syed Ahmed Ali Khan. The test of reasonableness is
that Citizenship can be given to persecuted minorities of an theocratic
autocratic country and all can't be given citizenship because it could be
improper and irrational.
The NRC exercise was meant for the State of Assam to determine legal citizens
and find illegal immigrants who are living there and are illegally occupying the
place according to International Law.
The Pan - India NRC exercise has not yet been planned conclusively and there's
no Pan-India NRC Draft Prepared by the Government of India except the Paras
that say that NPR is the First Step towards the creation of NRC was already said
in an pre-2014 Home Ministry Report to create National Identity Cards and
Prevent Fraud Actions in Mainstream Activities by Illegal Migrants and the NPR
is more an Census to identify the new demographic statistics of India and the
Press Briefing of Government of India has answered most of the questions related
to the nexus between CAA - NRC and NPR as it is an essential legal activity
carried out by various nations before to identify their legal citizens and
migrants and classify them and it doesn't contravene the concept of
Constitutional Morality because India's First Priority is Protection of the
Lives of the Indian Citizens and uplifting the lives of the Marginalized and
Impoverished Sections of Indian Society rather than the protecting the foreign
nationals and illegal migrants who are living illegally and enjoying socialist
benefits given by Indian Government. NRC in the State of Assam was as per the
SC Order in Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors.