Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process in Determining Citizenship Status

Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process in Determining Citizenship Status

#GS-2 #Indian Polity & Constitution #Constitution #Governance & Social Justice #Regulatory Bodies #GS-3 #Current Events #National #Citizenship #Foreigners Act #Foreigners Tribunals

Why in News?

  • In the case of **Sabitri Dey @ Swasthi Dey vs Union of India (2026)**, the **Supreme Court** ruled that deciding a person's citizenship or foreigner status requires a fair, lawful, and reasoned process.
  • The Supreme Court set aside **27 Gauhati High Court judgments** that had confirmed orders from **Foreigners Tribunals** declaring several individuals in Assam as foreigners, and directed new hearings following proper legal principles.

What is the Supreme Court's Ruling Regarding Citizenship Determination?

  • The case began when an **Illegal Migrants (Determination) Tribunal (IMDT)** declared **Sabitri Dey and her husband** as illegal migrants in **1997** after they failed to appear.
  • The couples challenged this order in the **Gauhati High Court** in **2019**, stating they never received notice and that the ruling relied on unverified hearsay, but the High Court dismissed their plea in **2020** due to a **23-year delay**.
  • The **Supreme Court** clarified that proceedings under the **Foreigners Act, 1946** must remain fair and lawful rather than being one-sided or done without proper thought.
  • The Court held that constitutional protections under **Article 14** for equality and **Article 21** for personal liberty apply to non-citizens as well.
  • Referring to **Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946**, the Court noted that while the person must prove their citizenship, the tribunal cannot make an automatic declaration just because the individual was absent.
  • The Tribunal must independently verify evidence from the State, ensure proper notice delivery, grant a fair hearing, explain the grounds, and write down clear reasons before declaring someone a foreigner.
  • This ruling ensures that citizenship cases focus on constitutional fairness rather than procedural technicalities, making tribunals more accountable.
  • It protects people from being declared foreigners without a hearing, preventing severe outcomes like detention, deportation, and statelessness.
  • This decision will shape future citizenship disputes across the country, especially in **Assam**.

Jurisprudence Regarding the Burden of Proof in Citizenship Determination

  • **Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946** introduced the reverse burden of proof, requiring the accused individual to prove that they are an Indian citizen.
  • The **Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983** applied only to **Assam** and shifted the burden of proof to the government, making deportation harder.
  • In **State of Arunachal Pradesh v. Khudiram Chakma (1994)**, the **Supreme Court** held that any person claiming Indian citizenship must prove it.
  • In **Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2005)**, the **Supreme Court** struck down the **IMDT Act, 1983** under **Article 355** and restored **Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946**.

What are Foreigners Tribunals (FTs)?

  • **Foreigners Tribunals** are quasi-judicial bodies established under the **Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964** using powers from **Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946**.
  • While the order applies nationwide, these tribunals mainly operate in **Assam** to decide citizenship cases linked to the **National Register of Citizens (NRC)**.
  • A judicial officer, experienced advocate, or civil servant with legal expertise heads each tribunal.
  • These tribunals hold civil court powers, allowing them to summon witnesses, take oaths, and inspect documents.
  • Under the **Immigration and Foreigners Order, 2025**, tribunal members also exercise powers of a **Judicial Magistrate First Class** to issue arrest warrants and order detention.
  • When receiving a case, the tribunal issues a notice, hears the evidence, and gives a reasoned order that could lead to detention and deportation if the person is declared a foreigner.

New Deportation Policy, 2026

  • The **Ministry of Home Affairs** introduced the **New Deportation Policy, 2026** to create a uniform procedure for identifying, detaining, and deporting illegal migrants from **Bangladesh and Myanmar**.
  • This policy covers undocumented migrants, individuals staying past their visa expiry, and individuals declared as foreigners by tribunals.
  • States and Union Territories must create district **Special Task Forces**, operate **Holding Centres**, and use the **Foreigners Identification Portal** for biometric records.
  • The government must complete nationality verification for suspected illegal migrants from **Bangladesh and Myanmar** within **90 days**.

How has India's Citizenship Framework Evolved from Jus Soli to Jus Sanguinis?

  • In **1950**, the **Constituent Assembly** chose a birth-based approach under **Articles 5 to 11** of the Constitution.
  • The **Citizenship Act, 1955** set legal pathways to gain citizenship through birth, descent, registration, naturalisation, and territory acquisition.
  • Following the **Assam Accord (1985)**, the **Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1986** required at least one parent to be an Indian citizen, moving toward citizenship by bloodline.
  • The **Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2003** required that one parent be an Indian citizen and the other not be an illegal migrant.
  • The **2003 Amendment** also defined illegal migrants, created **Section 14A** for the **National Register of Indian Citizens**, and introduced **Overseas Citizen of India** status.
  • The **Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019** allowed fast-track citizenship for persecuted minorities from **Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan**, cutting the naturalisation requirement from **11 years to 5 years**.
  • Citizens acquiring status through birth or descent do not get formal certificates, whereas those joining through registration or naturalisation receive official citizenship certificates.
  • For people born between **26th January 1950 and 1st July 1987**, birth in India granted citizenship regardless of parentage.
  • For people born between **1st July 1987 and 3rd December 2004**, at least one parent had to be an Indian citizen.
  • For people born on or after **3rd December 2004**, one parent must be an Indian citizen and the other parent must not be an illegal migrant.
  • People born outside India gain citizenship by descent if their parents register the birth at an Indian consulate within the specified timeline.
  • Foreign nationals and **Persons of Indian Origin** can apply through registration or naturalisation after living in India for **12 years**, as India does not allow dual citizenship.