Supreme Court to hear TODAY the petitions challenging the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019. The matter to be heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice UU Lalit, Justices Ravindra Bhat and Bela M. TrivediThe 2019 Act amends the Citizenship Act 1955 to liberalize the norms for granting citizenship to non-Muslim migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan. The petitions filed by the...
Supreme Court to hear TODAY the petitions challenging the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019.
The matter to be heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice UU Lalit, Justices Ravindra Bhat and Bela M. Trivedi
The 2019 Act amends the Citizenship Act 1955 to liberalize the norms for granting citizenship to non-Muslim migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.
The petitions filed by the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) and others state that while they do not oppose the grant of citizenship to migrants, they are aggrieved by the discrimination and illegal classification based on religion. The exclusion of Muslims from the Act amounted to religion based discrimination.
As per the petitions, the religious segregation made by the Act is without any reasonable differentiation and results in violation of Article 14 and also the very idea of India as a country which treats people of all faiths equally. The Indian Constitution only recognises citizenship by birth, descent or acquisition by bonafide residence. The Act makes religion a criteria for citizenship. The linking of religion to citizenship is opposed to secularism, which is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
FOLLOW LIVE UPDATES HERE
CJI Lalit: The counsel for Assam and Tripura shall file reply within 3 weeks. Nodal counsels shall then comply it within 2 weeks thereafter. List these matters before appropriate court in Dec 6 2022.
CJI Lalit: We also request all counsels to file submissions in 3 pages with time required for their submissions. After this, the nodal counsel may consider designated some other matters as lead matters keeping in view grounds of geographical and religious classifications etc.
CJI Lalit: We have been appraised that the WP filed by IUML have been complete. The petition has been filed by Adv Pallavi Pratap. We therefore appoint her and Mr. Kanu Agarawal as nodal counsels.
CJI Lalit: ...are taken as lead matters and convenience compilations are prepared well in advance.such process will make the conduct of the proceedings easy
CJI: He further submits that responses by State of Assam and Tripura have not been filed and accommodation be granted on that. Having noted that there are various matters projecting multiple issues, in our view the resolution to instant controversy can be achieved if 2-3 matters-
CJI Lalit [reads the order]:
In keeping with the directions issued by this court, these matters are listed today. At the outset, the SG has submitted that he may be given additional time to comply with directions issued by this court
CJI Lalit: What we're suggesting is that there be one common compilation and we designate time, allocate it to individual counsels and thereafter hear the entire matter.
CJI: We will say that let all copies to be mailed to Mr. Kanu Agarawal.
Sr. Adv Indira Jaising: Let Mr. Sibal's matter be the lead matter. Otherwise there will be overlap.
SG Mehta: She's right.
CJI: Mr. SG if you can nominate someone from your end? We can see Mr. Kanu Agarawal standing behind you, is that okay?
SG Mehta: yes
CJI: IUML is the lead matter. Who's the leading counsel? Pallavi Pratap? So we'll appoint her as the nodal counsel. Let her compile everything. It'll become easier for everyone.