Citizenship In India

“Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.” – John F. Kennedy’s timeless words resonate deeply when discussing citizenship.

India, the world’s largest democracy, grants its citizens not just legal status but also fundamental rights and duties. Citizenship defines who belongs to the nation and who can claim its constitutional protections. But how is citizenship acquired, retained, or lost? Let’s break it down.

🟩 Understanding Citizenship – What Does It Mean?

Citizenship, at its core, is not just a legal status but also a deeply emotional concept. It’s the feeling of ‘I belong here,’ a sense of connection and identity. In India, this dual nature of citizenship is deeply rooted in history, politics, and law, making it a powerful and personal concept for all.

So, what makes someone a citizen?

Here are the broad definitions:

• Citizen: A person recognized under the law as a member of a sovereign state with specific rights and obligations.
• Alien: Someone who resides in the country but does not possess citizenship.

Rights Exclusive to Citizens:

• Right to vote (Article 326)
• Right to contest elections
• Protection under Article 19 (Freedom of speech, assembly, etc.)
• Eligibility for government jobs
• Ownership of agricultural land in some states

Rights for All (including non-citizens):

• Right to life and liberty (Article 21)
• Right to equality before the law (Article 14)

This distinction is vital because non-citizens living in India (like tourists, refugees, or migrants) do not enjoy the full basket of constitutional guarantees.

Why is this important?

Because debates around illegal immigration, refugees and foreign nationals hinge on this legal status, for example, the Rohingya refugees in India are not citizens and, hence, not entitled to certain rights under Article 19 or the right to vote.

🟩 Constitutional Provisions on Citizenship – A Foundational Perspective

1. Citizenship at the Commencement of the Constitution (Articles 5-11)

The Constitution primarily addressed citizenship at its inception. It did not provide for the acquisition or loss of citizenship after January 26, 1950. Instead, it empowered Parliament to legislate on the matter.

• Article 5: Citizenship at the commencement of the Constitution. A person domiciled in India and who:
• Was born in the territory of India; or
• Either of whose parents were born in the territory of India or
• Who has been ordinarily resident in the territory of India for not less than five years immediately preceding such commencement,
• Shall be a citizen of India.

• Article 6: Rights of citizenship of certain persons who have migrated to India from Pakistan. This article deals with persons who migrated from Pakistan before and after July 19, 1948 (the date of enforcement of the permit system).
• Article 7: Rights of citizenship of certain migrants to Pakistan. This applies to persons who migrated from India to Pakistan after March 1, 1947, but later returned to India under a resettlement permit.
• Article 8: Rights of citizenship of certain persons of Indian origin residing outside India. Covers persons of Indian origin living outside India.
• Article 9: Persons voluntarily acquiring citizenship of a foreign State not to be citizens. If a person voluntarily acquires citizenship of a foreign country, their Indian citizenship ceases.
• Article 10: Continuance of the rights of citizenship. Every person who is or is deemed to be a citizen under any of the preceding provisions shall continue to be such citizen, subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament.
• Article 11: Parliament to regulate the right of citizenship by law. This is the pivotal article granting Parliament the exclusive power to make any provision concerning the acquisition and termination of citizenship and all other matters relating to citizenship.

🟩 The Citizenship Act, 1955 – Law Beyond the Constitution

After the Constitution laid the basic groundwork, the Parliament stepped in with the Citizenship Act, 1955—a comprehensive statute that provided mechanisms for acquiring and terminating Indian citizenship. While Articles 5 to 11 set the stage, this Act has become the primary law governing citizenship in India today.

Why was the Act needed?

The Constitution gave Parliament the power under Article 11 to make laws regarding citizenship. So, in 1955, the Indian Parliament passed this Act to:

• Define how citizenship could be acquired or lost.
• Handle future cases that weren’t covered by Articles 5–8.
• Give clarity on government roles, eligibility, and procedures.

Key Provisions:

The Act originally provided five ways to acquire Indian citizenship:

1. By Birth
2. By Descent
3. By Registration
4. By Naturalization
5. By Incorporation of Territory

Each method came with specific conditions, and we’ll go into detail in the next section. Over the years, this Act has seen several amendments—some administrative, some highly political.

Important Amendments:

• 1986: Tightened the “by birth” rule. Now, both parents must be Indian citizens, or one must be and the other not an illegal migrant.
• 2003: Introduced the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and the concept of “illegal migrant.”
• 2019: The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) added a religious filter for immigrants from certain countries.

Landmark Case: Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2005)

The Supreme Court struck down the IMDT Act. It reinforced the importance of detecting and deporting illegal immigrants, especially in Assam. This case had direct implications for how the Citizenship Act is interpreted, particularly regarding unlawful migration.

In essence, while the Constitution planted the tree of citizenship, the 1955 Act pruned, shaped, and (in some cases) controversially redirected its branches.

🟩 Modes of Acquiring Citizenship Under the Act

Let’s break down the five ways one can become an Indian citizen under the Citizenship Act of 1955. Each method is rooted in specific conditions, and failure to meet even one can mean exclusion.

1. By Birth

• If born in India before July 1, 1987: Automatically a citizen.
• Between July 1, 1987, and December 3, 2004: One parent must be an Indian citizen.
• After December 3, 2004: One parent must be an Indian citizen, and the other must not be an illegal migrant.

📝 Example: A child born in Delhi in 1995 to a Nepali mother and an Indian father would be a citizen. But a child born in 2005 to two illegal migrants won’t.

2. By Descent

• This applies to those born outside India.
• If either parent is an Indian citizen by birth or descent.
• Birth must be registered with the Indian consulate within one year.

📌 Note: This provision ensures that children born abroad to Indian parents retain their identity.

3. By Registration

Granted to persons of Indian origin or their spouses after living in India for 7 years and fulfilling other conditions.

Eligible groups include:

• People of Indian origin from countries like the UK, Kenya, Fiji, etc.
• Spouses of Indian citizens.

4. By Naturalization

• Foreigners who have resided in India for 12 years (plus other conditions) can apply.
• Must renounce former citizenship.
• Must prove language proficiency and good moral character.

📚 Trivia: A famous example includes Mother Teresa, who became an Indian citizen by Naturalization.

5. By Incorporation of Territory

• If any foreign territory becomes part of India, its residents become Indian citizens.

Case in Point: People of Sikkim became Indian citizens in 1975 after Sikkim was merged into India.

👉 These five modes highlight that while India is open to granting citizenship, it requires legal compliance, historical context, and in some cases—political will.

🟩 Termination of Citizenship – How and Why It Ends

Just as citizenship can be earned, it can also be lost. The Citizenship Act of 1955 lists three primary ways a person can lose Indian citizenship.

1. Renunciation

• Voluntary Act by the citizen.
• Applies mostly to people who take up citizenship in another country.
• Once renounced, minor children also lose citizenship but can regain it later.

2. Termination

• Automatic, when a citizen voluntarily acquires another country’s citizenship.
• Under Article 9 of the Constitution, India doesn’t allow dual citizenship.

💡 Example: If an Indian techie settles in the U.S. and becomes an American citizen, their Indian citizenship ends immediately.

3. Deprivation

• Involuntary removal by the government.
• Grounds include:
• Obtaining citizenship by fraud.
• Showing disloyalty to the Constitution.
• Living abroad for over 7 years without government registration.
• Engaging with an enemy state during the war.

Case Law:

• State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Peer Mohd. (1963) – Citizenship once lost must follow legal procedures for reacquisition

🟩 Key Amendments and the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019

If there’s one amendment that stirred nationwide debate, it’s the CAA 2019.

What does the CAA do?

• Grants Indian citizenship to non-Muslim immigrants (Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, Christians) from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.
• Applicable only if they entered India before December 31, 2014.
• Reduces the residency requirement from 11 to 5 years.

Why is it controversial?

• Excludes Muslims from the specified communities.
• Allegedly violates Article 14 (Right to Equality).
• Criticized as being discriminatory and against India’s secular ethos.

Widespread Protests:

• Major protests erupted in Assam, Delhi, UP, and other parts of the country.
• Students, activists, and civil society groups called it unconstitutional.

Legal Standpoint:

• Multiple petitions pending in the Supreme Court.
• Government defends it as a humanitarian law, not anti-Muslim.

NRC Connection:

• In Assam, National Register of Citizens (NRC) was implemented to identify illegal immigrants.
• Fear grew that CAA + NRC = potential disenfranchisement of certain communities.

4. Companies and Corporations are not Citizens under Article 19

Quote from a famous judgment:

“A company, though a legal person, is not a citizen within the meaning of Article 19 of the Constitution of India, and therefore, cannot claim the fundamental rights guaranteed therein.” The Supreme Court of India has consistently upheld this principle.

• Legal Provision: Article 19 of the Indian Constitution guarantees six fundamental freedoms (e.g., freedom of speech and expression, freedom to assemble peaceably, freedom to reside and settle in any part of India) only to citizens.
• Application: The Supreme Court, in landmark cases like State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. vs. The Commercial Tax Officer** (1963)** and Telco Ltd. vs. State of Bihar** (1965)**, has unequivocally held that a company or a corporation, despite being a legal entity, is not a ‘citizen’ as understood by Part II (Citizenship) and Article 19 of the Constitution.
• Reasoning: The concept of ‘citizen’ in the Constitution primarily refers to natural persons (individuals) and not artificial legal entities. While companies can have legal rights and obligations, they cannot claim fundamental rights that are inherently personal and relate to the political and social existence of individuals. They can, however, claim other constitutional rights available to ‘persons’ (e.g., Article 14 – equality before the law, Article 21 – right to life and personal liberty, through their shareholders).

Illustration (Examples, Current Affairs)

The debates surrounding the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) are a recent example of the dynamic nature of citizenship laws. The CAA aims to grant Indian citizenship to religious minorities (excluding Muslims) who have fled persecution from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan and entered India on or before December 31, 2014. This legislation sparked widespread discussions on the definition of citizenship, secularism, and the treatment of refugees.

• Case Law:
  • Tata Engineering v. State of Bihar (1964) – A corporation cannot claim fundamental rights under Article 19.

Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India (1973)

• Even though companies can’t claim Article 19 rights themselves, they can represent the rights of their stakeholders.
• The court held that newspaper companies can invoke Article 19 to protect the freedom of speech of the press.
  •  

One-Liner: “Justice delayed is justice denied”—similarly, rights denied to corporations ensure citizen-centric protections.

🟩 Case Law Corner – Judicial View on Citizenship

Over the decades, India’s judiciary has played a vital role in interpreting and reshaping the understanding of citizenship. With numerous disputes arising over legal identity, nationality, and fundamental rights, the courts have stepped in to clarify the legal grey areas.

Key Judgments to Remember:

1. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Mohammad Shamsuddin (1962)

• This case explored the rights of migrants from Pakistan and clarified who could claim Indian citizenship under Article 6.
• The court ruled that mere migration or return to India did not guarantee automatic citizenship. Proper documentation and timelines were crucial.

2. Berubari Union Case (1960)

• The Supreme Court ruled that citizenship cannot be altered through executive orders alone. In this case, the issue was about transferring Berubari (a part of West Bengal) to Pakistan.
• It clarified that citizenship laws must flow through constitutional or legislative means, not mere agreements.

3. Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2005)

• A landmark decision on illegal migration in Assam.
• The court scrapped the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act of 1983 for being ineffective in curbing migration.
• It reinforced the need for strict enforcement of the Citizenship Act and immigration laws.

4. National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh (1996)

• Concerned about the rights of Chakma refugees.
• The court ordered the state to ensure the protection of refugees who had applied for citizenship, emphasizing India’s obligation to human rights.

5. Teesta Setalvad v. Union of India (2021)

• This case, while not directly about citizenship, touched upon civil liberties and freedom of expression, showing the interplay between citizenship and constitutional freedoms.
• Table: Snapshot of Judicial Pronouncements

Case	Issue Addressed	Court’s Ruling
State of U.P. v. Shamsuddin (1962)	Citizenship of returnees from Pakistan	Need for documentation and adherence to laws
Berubari Union Case (1960)	Transfer of territory	Citizenship changes need constitutional backing
Sarbananda Sonowal (2005)	Illegal immigration	Struck down weak immigration laws, emphasized enforcement
NHRC v. Arunachal Pradesh (1996)	Refugee rights	State must protect those seeking citizenship
Bennett Coleman v. Union of India	Rights under Article 19	Companies represent citizen rights, but are not citizens

🟩 Citizenship vs Nationality – Are They the Same?

Definitions:

• Nationality: Describes a person’s international identity as part of a nation. It’s more political or ethnic.
• Citizenship: Is a legal status granted by a nation-state under its laws and Constitution, allowing full participation in civil and political life.

Comparison Table:

Aspect	Nationality	Citizenship
Meaning	Belonging to a nation	Legal status within a country
Basis	Ethnic, cultural, or territorial ties	Constitution, laws, and administrative processes
Legal Recognition	Often informal in some states	Always formal and codified
Rights	Symbolic rights	Full civil and political rights

🟩 Contemporary Issues and Debates on Citizenship

In recent years, debates around Indian citizenship have become polarizing and political. Issues like the NRC, CAA, and refugee treatment have taken center stage in media and courtrooms alike.

Major Controversies:

1. NRC (National Register of Citizens) in Assam:
2. Aimed to identify illegal immigrants.
3. Over 19 lakh people were excluded from the final list.
4. Critics call it a “citizenship witch-hunt.”
5. CAA Protests (2019–2020):
6. Nationwide protests erupted, especially in Delhi, Mumbai, and major university campuses.
7. Protestors alleged discrimination and communal targeting.
8. Statelessness Crisis:
9. Rohingya refugees and undocumented immigrants from Bangladesh face uncertainty.
10. Stateless people cannot vote, work in public sectors, or access social security.
11. Legal Delays:
12. Thousands wait for years for their citizenship applications to be processed.
13. “Justice delayed is justice denied” rings true here too.

Political Tension:

Citizenship laws have become election issues. While one side argues for national security, others raise concerns over human rights and constitutional morality.

Global Comparisons:

• India’s no-dual citizenship policy is unlike countries like the U.S., Canada, or Australia.
• European countries are revisiting citizenship tests and integrations, much like India.

📌 Final Thought: Citizenship, once a legal status, is now a battleground for identity, belonging, and inclusion.

🟩 Citizenship for Corporates – A Myth?

It might seem obvious that a company isn’t a citizen, but this principle has deep constitutional implications.

Why a Company Is Not a Citizen:

• The Citizenship Act, 1955 defines a citizen as a natural person.
• Corporations are juristic persons, meaning they can:
  • Sue or be sued.
  • Own property.
  • Enter contracts.
    But they cannot vote, hold public office, or claim fundamental rights meant for humans.

Article 19 and Corporate Limits:

• Corporations cannot claim rights like freedom of movement, residence, or profession.
• But they may argue through derivative rights (e.g., freedom of the press in Bennett Coleman case).

Relevant Case:

• Tata Iron & Steel Co. v. State of Bihar (1958): The court clarified that corporations, being non-citizens, couldn’t enjoy Article 19 freedoms.
• State Trading Corporation v. CTO: Reinforced that juristic persons do not enjoy all constitutional protections of citizens.

Final Verdict:

While corporations are powerful entities, they are not citizens under the Indian legal framework.

Suggestions for Reform

India’s citizenship framework needs to evolve to meet modern challenges. Let’s look at reform ideas that can balance security, inclusivity, and legality.

1. Legal Reforms

• Update the Citizenship Act to reflect changing demographics and international norms.
• Define “illegal immigrant” and “stateless person” clearly.
• Reconsider dual citizenship for NRIs and OCI holders with strict safeguards.

2. Administrative Improvements

• Simplify the citizenship application process—especially for poor and marginalized communities.
• Digitize records but avoid over-dependence on flawed legacy documents.
• Create a Grievance Redressal Mechanism to help those wrongly excluded.

3. Technological Innovations

• Use AI and blockchain for identity verification, ensuring security without human bias.
• Establish citizenship help centers in rural areas to educate people.

4. Awareness & Education

• Run awareness campaigns explaining the difference between Aadhaar, voter ID, and citizenship.
• Include citizenship education in school curriculums.

India needs to move from exclusion to inclusion, while still protecting its borders and sovereignty.

Conclusion – A Balanced Perspective

Citizenship in India is not just a legal status—it is a claim to identity, protection, and purpose. It binds an individual to the State and the State to its people.

On one hand, India must safeguard its national interests and prevent illegal immigration. On the other, it must ensure no citizen is left behind due to bureaucratic hurdles or political biases.

Let’s not forget: “A nation is not defined by its borders or the boundaries of its landmass, but by the collective spirit of its people.”

For India to thrive as a truly democratic and inclusive nation, its citizenship laws must reflect:

• Justice
• Equality
• Human dignity

Only then will we fulfill the vision of our Constitution and the spirit of our nation.