The Supreme Court has upheld Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which acknowledges the Assam Accord, with Justice JB Pardiwala dissenting from the majority decision.
Supreme Court on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act: On Thursday, October 17, a five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, which was added through a 1985 amendment as part of the Assam Accord.
In a 4-1 ruling, a Supreme Court Constitution bench affirmed the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, which provides citizenship benefits to illegal immigrants—primarily from Bangladesh—who entered Assam between January 1, 1966, and March 25, 1971.
A five-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud stated that the Assam Accord served as a political solution to the issue of illegal migration.
In the majority verdict, Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh, and Manoj Misra affirmed that Parliament had the legislative authority to enact the provision.
Justice Pardiwala issued a dissenting opinion, declaring Section 6A unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court noted in its ruling on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, “The mere presence of different ethnic groups in a state does not constitute an infringement of Article 29(1).”
### What is Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955?
Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, was introduced in 1985 as part of the Assam Accord to tackle illegal immigration from Bangladesh into Assam.
It grants Indian citizenship to individuals who entered Assam before January 1, 1966, while allowing those who arrived between January 1, 1966, and March 24, 1971, to register as citizens after a 10-year waiting period, during which they are ineligible to vote.
Individuals who entered after March 24, 1971, are to be identified and deported.
The provision has sparked controversy, with its constitutionality being challenged in the Supreme Court due to concerns over demographic changes.
