Author: Haripriya Rajendra Tiwari (Reshma), Adv Balasaheb Apte college of law
To the Point
The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) seeks to correct a historical wrong by fast-tracking Indian citizenship for persecuted religious minorities—Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians—from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. These minorities, often reduced to second-class citizens or subjected to outright persecution in Islamic theocracies, have lived as stateless people in India for decades. The Act recognizes the humanitarian need to protect these communities, who have sought shelter in India due to forced conversions, violence, denial of civil rights, or blasphemy prosecutions in their countries of origin. The cut-off date of 31st December 2014 ensures that only those who fled due to genuine persecution before a particular time are eligible. Contrary to popular misrepresentation, the Act does not touch existing Indian Muslims or alter any current citizenship status.
Further, the CAA must be seen not in isolation, but within the broader context of India’s sovereign right to frame its citizenship policy. Every nation has the right to decide whom to include in its polity based on historical, cultural, and humanitarian grounds. India has always extended refuge—from Tibetan Buddhists to Bangladeshi Hindus—without a legal framework. The CAA provides a formal legal structure for such inclusivity. It does not create a new class of citizens, but merely expedites naturalisation for a historically displaced and vulnerable group. It also does not apply to Indian territory covered under the Inner Line Permit or Sixth Schedule, respecting the federal and tribal concerns of the Northeast. Thus, the Act stands not as a threat to secularism or equality, but as a law rooted in compassion, reflective of India’s civilisational values.
Use of Legal Jargon
The CAA operates as an amendment to the Citizenship Act, 1955, altering the definition of “illegal migrants” under Section 2(1)(b) and inserting Section 6B, which offers a pathway to naturalization. It upholds the doctrine of classification under Article 14, drawing a rational nexus between persecuted religious minorities and the object of the legislation. The Act does not violate the principle of secularism, as the preamble of the Constitution allows for positive discrimination to uphold substantive equality.
The Proof
The CAA applies to Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, and Christians who fled to India due to religious persecution on or before 31st December 2014 from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh.
All three nations are Islamic states, where these minorities lack constitutional safeguards.
The legislation does not affect Indian Muslims or alter the citizenship of any Indian national.
India is not bound by the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol since it is not a signatory. This gives India complete sovereign discretion to create and implement its own asylum and citizenship policies without any legal obligation under those international treaties.
The 1950 Nehru-Liaquat Pact was a bilateral agreement between India and Pakistan to safeguard the rights and security of minorities in both countries after Partition, reflecting a shared responsibility to prevent communal violence and ensure protection.
Abstract
The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 is a narrowly tailored legal reform with a moral and humanitarian objective. It seeks to provide sanctuary to religious minorities from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh, where theocracies do not uphold religious freedom for non-Muslims. The amendment is limited in scope and applies only to those who entered India before the end of 2014, ensuring that it does not become an open-ended invitation for mass immigration. What makes this legislation significant is its attempt to grant legal recognition and citizenship rights to people who have lived in legal limbo for decades—often without access to education, employment, or healthcare.
By drawing a clear distinction between illegal immigrants and persecuted minorities, the Act introduces a rational classification, upheld by constitutional jurisprudence under Article 14. It does not strip citizenship from anyone but merely grants citizenship to a vulnerable section of stateless people. Importantly, it does not introduce religion as a criterion for Indian citizenship in general, but only in this exceptional and targeted instance. The Act reflects both compassion and constitutional restraint, and should be interpreted as a step toward legal clarity and justice, rather than division. The CAA thus represents India’s commitment to humanitarian ideals, without breaching its secular or democratic principles.
Case Laws
Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992 Supp (3) SCC 217)
– It affirmed that Article 14 permits reasonable classification, as long as it is based on intelligible differentia and has a rational link to the objective of the law.
State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar (AIR 1952 SC 75)
– Laid down that equal protection does not mean identical treatment.
Ahmedabad St. Xavier’s College Society v. State of Gujarat (1974 AIR 1389)
– Emphasized that the principle of secularism is not anti-religion but allows for religious liberty and protection.
Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2005 (5) SCC 665)
– Discussed the threat of illegal immigration and its socio-political impact in Assam, which led to policy overhaul.
Conclusion
The Citizenship (Amendment) Act is neither anti-Muslim nor anti-secular; it is a limited legislative cure for an identifiable humanitarian crisis. India’s tradition of offering shelter to the persecuted is deeply rooted in its civilizational values, where compassion and hospitality toward the oppressed have been practiced for centuries, regardless of their origin or faith.. The law must not be conflated with the National Register of Citizens (NRC) or misrepresented as a tool for disenfranchisement. Instead, the Act should be seen as a moral obligation fulfilled by the Indian State towards persecuted minorities in the neighbourhood.
FAQS
Q1: Does the CAA affect any Indian citizen, especially Muslims?
A1: No, the Act does not apply to Indian citizens of any religion, including Muslims. It only provides a path to citizenship for specific persecuted minorities from three countries.
Q2: Why are Muslims from these countries not included in the Act?
A2: The Act targets religious persecution in Islamic countries where minorities such as Hindus and Christians face systematic discrimination. Muslims, being the majority in these nations, are not typically subject to religious persecution on that basis.
Q3: Is the Act unconstitutional under Article 14?
A3: No, the Act creates a reasonable classification based on intelligible differentia and has a rational nexus with the object of the law. It passes the twin test of Article 14.
Q4: Does the Act violate the secular character of India?
A4: No, secularism under the Indian Constitution means equal respect for all religions, not absence of religion. Providing relief to persecuted minorities does not undermine secularism.
Q5: How is the cut-off date of 31st December 2014 justified?
A5: The cut-off is a legislative policy decision, aimed at closing the process for citizenship claims. It ensures finality and administrative feasibility.
Sources
The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 – Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India.
https://egazette.nic.in
Constitution of India (Article 14 and Article 15) – Government of India, 1950.
Available at: https://legislative.gov.in/constitution-of-india
Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, (1992 Supp (3) SCC 217) – Supreme Court of India.
Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India, (2005) 5 SCC 665 – regarding illegal immigration in Assam.
Jawaharlal Nehru-Liaquat Pact (1950) – Treaty between India and Pakistan on minority rights.
Ahmedabad St. Xavier’s College Society v. State of Gujarat, (1974 AIR 1389).
Lok Sabha Debates and Parliamentary Record on CAA, 2019 – https://loksabha.nic.in
Press Information Bureau, Government of India: Clarifications on CAA.
https://pib.gov.in
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) – India not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention.
https://www.unhcr.org
