 |
| Photo by Naveed Ahmed on Unsplash |
The Constitution of India begins with 'We the people of India...', reaffirming that the power and function of the Indian State is derived from the people of this country. But have you ever wondered? Who are considered the people of this country, or to be specific, the citizens of this country?
Citizenship forms a bedrock of the relationship between an individual
and any state. It defines who belongs to a particular nation and what rights
and responsibilities an individual is bestowed upon. In India, citizenship is
not merely a legal status; it has become a part of both domestic and foreign
political discourse. The importance of this entitlement can be assessed by the
fact that the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, had made headlines in both
national and international media and led to mass protests in various parts of
the country, including the national capital. This issue of giving citizenship
to immigrants is a more contentious topic amongst the northeastern states,
which do not want any individual to be granted Indian citizenship regardless of
their religion or other identities, because of their inherent fear that their
political, cultural and land rights will be affected by such demographic
changes.
Moreover, the recent Special Intensive Revision (SIP) by the Election
Commission of India (ECI) in the state of Bihar has again sparked a discourse
of citizenship and the issues that come with it. Therefore, it becomes
imperative for any person in this country to know the legal basis for this
entitlement. This blog will try to uncover these legal dynamics, which are not
restricted to the constitutional and statutory law but also to the recent
developments in this area.
CONSTITUTIONAL
FRAMEWORK
Part II of the Indian Constitution, comprising Articles
5 to 11, deals with citizenship. It establishes the initial parameters
for determining who qualified as Indian Citizens at the commencement of the
Constitution on 26 January 1950. Unlike many other federal constitutions, India
had adopted a single citizenship model. Thereby, rejecting dual citizenship and
state-based citizenship. This unified model ensures that citizens of India are
treated as a whole, rather than citizens of individual states, promoting
national integration.
Article 5 established citizenship for persons
domiciled in Indian territory who were either born in India, had at least one
parent born in India, or had been ordinarily resident for at least five years
immediately before the Constitution's commencement [1]. Articles 6 and 7
addressed the complex citizenship issues arising from Partition, providing for
the citizenship rights of persons who migrated between India and Pakistan [2]. Article
8 extended recognition to persons of Indian origin residing outside
India[3].
Article 9 prohibits dual citizenship by
stipulating that any person who voluntarily acquires the citizenship of a
foreign country will cease to be an Indian citizen [4]. Article 10 ensures
the continuance of citizenship rights acquired under the preceding provisions
[5], while Article 11 empowers Parliament to regulate citizenship through
legislation [6]. This particular Article deliberately avoided creating
permanent citizenship provisions and delegated comprehensive legislative
authority to Parliament.
THE CITIZENSHIP ACT,
1955: STATUTORY REGULATION
In pursuance of Article 11, Parliament enacted the Citizenship Act,
1955, which till this date remains the primary statutory framework
governing the acquisition, determination, and termination of Indian
Citizenship. This legislation provides five modes of acquiring citizenship: by
birth, descent, registration, naturalisation, and incorporation of territory.
- Citizenship by birth
(Section 3) in India has undergone a major shift from jus soli (right of
soil) to jus sanguinis (right of blood) principles.
Originally, a person born in India between 26 January 1950 to 1 July 1987
would be considered an Indian citizen regardless of parental nationality.
The 1986 Amendment brought a requirement for at least one parent to be an
Indian citizen for those born between 1 July 1987 and 2 December 2004.
This parental requirement was further expanded by the 2003 Amendment,
mandating that a person is an Indian citizen only if at least one
parent is an Indian citizen and the other is not an illegal migrant [7].
- Citizenship by descent
(Section 4) applies to those persons born outside India,
provided their parents are Indian citizens at the time of birth, subject
to registration requirements [8].
- Citizenship by registration
(Section 5) is available to persons of Indian origin who
have resided in India for seven years, foreign spouses of Indian citizens
after seven years of marriage and residence, minor children of Indian
citizens, and registered Overseas Citizens of India after five years
[9].
- Citizenship by
naturalisation (Section 6) requires a foreigner (not
being an illegal migrant) to be ordinarily resident in India for twelve
years and fulfil the qualifications specified in the Third Schedule [10].
- Citizenship
by incorporation of territory (Section 7)
arises when a new territory becomes part of India. In such cases, the
Government of India specifies by order the persons who shall become
citizens of India by virtue of their connection with that territory. A
historical example is the incorporation of Puducherry in 1962, where
residents were granted Indian citizenship through such an order [11].
In order to curb the influx of illegal migrants from nearby countries
like Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, the government of India came up with the 2003
Amendment, thereby introducing the definition of "illegal migrant"
as a foreigner who enters India without valid documents or stays beyond the
permitted limit. This definition became pivotal in Indian citizenship
jurisprudence, as illegal migrants are now explicitly prohibited from acquiring
citizenship through naturalisation or registration.
TERMINATION AND LOSS
OF CITIZENSHIP
The Indian citizenship of a person can be terminated through any of the
three mechanisms given below.
Renunciation (Section 8):
The termination occurs when any citizen of full age and capacity makes a
declaration renouncing the citizenship, which is then registered. It is
important to note that when a person renounces their citizenship, their minor
children also lose Indian citizenship. Although those children may resume their
citizenship within one year after attaining the age of eighteen [12].
Termination (Section 9):
The termination activates automatically when an Indian citizen
voluntarily acquires the citizenship of another country (reflecting the Indian
prohibition on dual citizenship). This provision does not apply during wartime
unless directed by the Central Government [13].
Deprivation (Section 10):
The Central Government may deprive a person of Indian citizenship
(acquired by registration or naturalisation) under specific conditions, such
as—
- Citizenship obtained by
fraud, false representation, or concealment of facts;
- Disloyalty
or disaffection towards the Constitution of India;
- Unlawful
communication or trade with the enemy during war;
- Imprisonment
for two years or more within five years after naturalisation; or
- Continuous
residence outside India for seven years without obtaining government
permission.
Before deprivation, the person concerned is given an opportunity to be
heard through a Committee of Inquiry, ensuring procedural fairness. Except in
cases where prolonged absence makes such an inquiry impracticable [14].
RIGHTS CONFERRED BY
CITIZENSHIP
Indian Citizenship confers both universal rights (available to all) and
exclusive rights (available only to citizens). Certain fundamental rights under
Part III of the Indian Constitution are specifically for citizens, such as
Article 15 (prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste,
sex, or place of birth), Article 16 (equality of opportunity in public
employment), Article 19 (freedoms of speech, assembly, association, movement,
residence, and profession), and Articles 29-30 (cultural and educational
rights) [15].
Non-citizens do not enjoy these political and civil rights but benefit
from other fundamental rights such as Article 14 (equality before law), Article
21 (protection of life and personal liberty), and Article 20 (protection
against conviction for offences). This distinction underscores citizenship as
the gateway to full political participation and civil liberties in the Indian
constitutional order [16].
OVERSEAS CITIZENSHIP
OF INDIA: A QUASI-ALTERNATIVE
In order to fulfil
the needs of the Indian diaspora while maintaining the prohibition of dual
citizenship, the government of India in 2005 introduced the Overseas
Citizenship of India (OCI) scheme. The OCI is not truly a citizenship status
but rather an immigration status providing certain benefits to foreign citizens
with Indian roots who acquire an OCI card.
OCI cardholders enjoy
multiple benefits, such as lifelong visa-free travel to India, exemption from
registration requirements, and parity with Non-Resident Indians in economic,
financial, and educational fields, except for the acquisition of agricultural property.
However, OCI holders cannot vote, hold constitutional offices (President, Vice
President, judges), or secure government employment [17]. Furthermore, the 2015
Amendment merged the Person of Indian Origin (PIO) card scheme with OCI,
creating a unified "Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder" scheme
THE CITIZENSHIP
AMENDMENT ACT, 2019: RELIGIOUS CRITERIA AND CONTROVERSY
The Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 (CAA) was passed with the intention
of accelerating the pathway for the persecuted minorities (Hindus, Sikhs,
Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians) from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and
Pakistan, who entered India before 31 December 2014, by reducing their
naturalisation period from eleven to five years. The exclusion of Muslims and
other communities had triggered controversy, which gave rise to nationwide
protests in 2019, with over 100 fatalities, and it still faces multiple legal
challenges in various legal courts [18].
The government justified the CAA as a way to address religious
persecution of minorities in the Islamic-majority neighbouring countries.
Whereas the critique of this amendment argues that it is against the
constitutional mandates, such as Article 14 and Article 15, which provide a
guarantee of equality before law and a prohibition on religious
discrimination.
PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP
AND JUDICIAL SAFEGUARDS
In essence, India doesn't have a singular universal document that
conclusively establishes citizenship for all individuals, which often creates
significant challenges in verifying citizenship status. Cards like Aadhar, PAN,
Ration and Voter IDs serve as various administrative and welfare purposes, but
none of them is conclusive proof of Indian citizenship. The government has
clarified that only birth certificates issued under the Registration of Births
and Deaths Act, 1969, and domicile certificates issued by the state government
serve as fundamental documents "indicating" Indian citizenship.
Indian passports also constitute definitive proof of citizenship for those who
possess them [19]. This distinction became particularly relevant when the Bombay
High Court ruled in August 2025 that merely possessing Aadhaar, PAN, or voter
ID cards cannot establish citizenship, as these documents primarily verify
identity or serve fiscal purposes rather than confirm nationality [20].
It is interesting to note that under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act,
1946, when the government presents credible evidence raising reasonable
suspicion about a person's citizenship, the burden of proof shifts to the
individual to produce satisfactory documentary evidence establishing their Indian
nationality [21]. Therefore, the Supreme Court in Rahim Ali v. State of
Assam has established some procedural safeguards to prevent arbitrary
citizenship challenges. The Court held that authorities cannot arbitrarily
question citizenship without presenting substantive material evidence to
support their suspicions. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Vikram Nath
emphasised that Section 9 of the Foreigners Act "does not empower the
executive to pick a person at random, knock at his/her door" and demand
proof of citizenship without any foundational evidence. The Court ruled that
minor discrepancies in name spellings and dates in official documents, which
are common throughout India due to linguistic transliteration, clerical errors,
and low literacy rates, cannot be sufficient grounds to doubt citizenship
claims [22]. This judgment had addressed the apprehensions that came with the
Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 and proposed nationwide National Register of
Citizenship (NRC) exercise, thereby affirming the principles of natural justice
and the doctrine of audi alteram parterm (no one shall be condemned unheard).
CONCLUSION
Indian citizenship law stands at a critical juncture where
constitutional guarantees of equality and due process are being tested against
administrative imperatives of national security and demographic verification.
While the constitutional and statutory framework offers clarity on the
acquisition, termination, and retention of citizenship, contemporary
controversies surrounding the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, and
verification drives such as Bihar's Special Intensive Revision reveal the
challenges of implementing these provisions in a document-deficient
society. The judiciary's insistence on procedural fairness, contextual
interpretation, and the presumption of citizenship in doubtful cases reaffirms
the constitutional vision that citizenship in India is not merely a matter of
paperwork but a reflection of belonging within a democratic and pluralistic
polity.
___________________________________________________________________________________
REFERENCES
[1] India
Constitution, Article 5.
[2] India Constitution, Articles 6–7.
[3] India Constitution, Article 8.
[4] India Constitution, Article 9.
[5] India Constitution, Article 10.
[6] India Constitution, Article 11.
[7] Drishti Learning. “75 Years: Laws
that Shaped India | The Citizenship Act, 1955.” Drishti IAS, August 11,
2022. https://www.drishtiias.com/loksabha-rajyasabha-discussions/75-years-laws-that-shaped-india-the-citizenship-act-1955.
[8] The Citizenship Act, No. 57
of 1955, § 4 (India).
[9] The Citizenship Act, No. 57
of 1955, § 5 (India).
[10] The Citizenship Act, No. 57
of 1955, § 6 (India).
[11] The Citizenship Act, No. 57
of 1955, § 7 (India).
[12] The Citizenship Act, No. 57
of 1955, § 8 (India).
[13] The Citizenship Act, No. 57
of 1955, § 9 (India).
[14] The Citizenship Act, No. 57
of 1955, § 10 (India).
[15] India Constitution, Part III.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ministry of External Affairs.
“Overseas Citizenship of India Scheme.” https://www.mea.gov.in/overseas-citizenship-of-india-scheme.htm (last visited October 25, 2025).
[18] Surabhi Yadav and Diksha Arya.
“Citizenship Amendment Act: Navigating Controversy, Legal Debates, and Societal
Impacts in India.” Centre for Development Policy & Practice, August
13, 2024. https://www.cdpp.co.in/articles/citizenship-amendment-act-navigating-controversy-legal-debates-and-societal-impacts-in-india.
[19] India Today Information Desk.
“Aadhaar, PAN, Ration Card Not Enough: Government Lists Valid Citizenship
Documents.” India Today, April 29, 2025. https://www.indiatoday.in/information/story/aadhaar-pan-ration-card-not-enough-government-lists-valid-citizenship-documents-2716924-2025-04-29.
[20] Narsi Benwal. “Merely Possessing
Aadhaar Card, PAN Card, Voter ID Card Not Proof of Being Indian Citizen: Bombay
High Court.” LiveLaw, August 12, 2025. https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/bombay-high-court/aadhar-not-proof-of-indian-citizenship-pan-card-voter-id-citizenship-act-300662.
[21] The Foreigners Act, No. 31
of 1946, § 9 (India).
[22] Md. Rahim Ali @ Abdur Rahim v.
State of Assam & Ors., (2024) 7 S.C.R. 2337 (India).
0 Comments