On October 17, 2024, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which was introduced as part of the Assam Accord in 1985. The 4-1 majority ruling affirmed that Parliament had the legislative competence to enact this provision, which grants citizenship benefits to individuals, mainly from Bangladesh, who entered Assam between January 1, 1966, and March 25, 1971.
Section 6A allows those who arrived between 1966 and 1971 to register as citizens after a 10-year waiting period, during which they cannot vote. Those arriving after March 24, 1971, are to be detected and deported. The Supreme Court’s decision has ended a long-standing debate over the constitutionality of the section, with Justice JB Pardiwala dissenting in the ruling.
Key Highlights:
- Section 6A grants citizenship to individuals, mainly from Bangladesh, who entered Assam between January 1, 1966, and March 25, 1971. Those arriving after this period are to be detected and deported.
- The bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, held that Parliament had the legislative competence to enact this provision as part of the Assam Accord, which was a political solution aimed at addressing illegal immigration.
- Justices Surya Kant, MM Sundresh, and Manoj Misra delivered the majority verdict, affirming the validity of Section 6A.
- Justice Pardiwala, in his dissenting judgment, ruled the section unconstitutional.
The Assam Accord and Section 6A have long been contentious due to concerns about the demographic changes in Assam caused by immigration. Despite these challenges, the court’s majority ruled that the provision stands as a legitimate legal mechanism to address the historical issue of migration in the region.
