In a landmark decision on October 17, 2024, the Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955. This section, introduced through an amendment in 1985, was a key component of the Assam Accord, aimed at addressing the issue of illegal immigration into Assam from Bangladesh.
A five-judge Constitution bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, delivered the verdict with a 4-1 majority. Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh, and Manoj Misra sided with the Chief Justice in affirming the validity of Section 6A, while Justice JB Pardiwala dissented, declaring the provision unconstitutional.
What Is Section 6A of the Citizenship Act?
Section 6A was introduced to implement the Assam Accord, which was signed in 1985 as a political solution to the growing issue of illegal immigration in Assam. This provision grants citizenship benefits to illegal immigrants from Bangladesh who entered Assam between January 1, 1966, and March 25, 1971.
- Citizenship before 1966: People who entered Assam before January 1, 1966, are granted Indian citizenship.
- Citizenship after 1966: Those who arrived between January 1, 1966, and March 24, 1971, are allowed to register as Indian citizens after a 10-year waiting period, during which they cannot vote.
- Post-1971 immigrants: Immigrants arriving after March 24, 1971, are considered illegal and are to be detected and deported.
The Court’s Verdict
The majority of the bench, led by Chief Justice Chandrachud, ruled that Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A of the Citizenship Act. They emphasized that the Assam Accord was a political resolution to a highly sensitive issue and that the mere presence of diverse ethnic groups in Assam does not infringe on the rights of those protected under Article 29(1) of the Constitution, which guarantees the protection of the interests of minority groups.
However, Justice JB Pardiwala dissented from the majority, stating that Section 6A is unconstitutional, highlighting concerns over its impact on the demographic makeup of Assam.
Why Was Section 6A Controversial?
Section 6A has been a source of long-standing controversy, primarily due to the demographic concerns it raised in Assam. Many feared that granting citizenship to large numbers of immigrants could alter the state’s ethnic balance and undermine the rights and culture of the indigenous Assamese population.
The provision was challenged in the Supreme Court on these grounds, and the decision has now reaffirmed that the law, as part of the Assam Accord, holds constitutional legitimacy.
What Happens Next?
With the Supreme Court’s ruling, Section 6A remains in force, meaning that people who entered Assam before March 24, 1971, will continue to be eligible for Indian citizenship under the criteria set out by the Assam Accord. Those who entered after this date are still subject to detection and deportation.
This decision is expected to have far-reaching implications on Assam’s political and social landscape, as the issue of illegal immigration has been a deeply emotional and contentious topic for decades. The verdict may also influence future debates on citizenship laws and immigration policies in India.
4o
