Citizenship Amendment Act constitutionally valid? Supreme Court to hear all challenges on Monday
Over 200 petitions challenging the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019 constitutional validity will be heard by a two-judge bench headed by CJI UU Lalit and also comprising Justice Ravindra Bhatt
Supreme Court of India. PTI
New Delhi: The Supreme Court will hear over 200 petitions challenging the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019 on Monday, 12 September. The pleas will be heard by the bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) UU Lalit and comprising Justice S Ravindra Bhatt.
The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, or CAA, was notified on 12 December, 2019, and it came into force on January 10, 2020. It aims to give citizenship to migrants belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian communities from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan,
CAA evoked widespread protests across the country as it was perceived as an attempt to deprive Muslims of Indian citizenship.
For the unversed, in January 2020, the apex court had issued notice over the batch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the CAA.
In December 2019, the top court bench comprising the then CJI Sharad A. Bobde and Justices BR Gavai and Surya Kant had asked the Centre to file a response by the second week of January. The court had said the CAA, 2019, is “uppermost in everybody’s minds”, but refused to stay the law without hearing the government first.
The petitions before the Supreme Court stated that the Act which liberalises and fast-tracks the grant of citizenship to non-Muslim migrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan “promotes religion-based discrimination”.
After this, the apex court in January 2020 granted four weeks time to the Central government to respond to the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the CAA.
“CAA is a specific amendment which seeks to tackle a specific problem prevalent in the specified countries i.e. persecution on the ground of religion in light of the undisputable theocratic constitutional position in the specified countries..:, the government’s affidavit said.
It further clarified that the CAA does not impinge upon any existing right that may have existed prior to the enactment of the amendment and further, in no manner whatsoever, seeks to affect the legal, democratic or secular rights of any of the Indian citizens.
With inputs from agencies.
Read all the Latest News, Trending News, Cricket News, Bollywood News,
India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
also read
Central Board of Direct Taxes to analyse Supreme Court’s verdict on benami transaction law
The apex court on Tuesday ruled that the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act of 2016 cannot be imposed from before 2016 and said the taxman cannot initiate or continue criminal prosecution or confiscation proceedings for transactions entered into prior to the law coming into force
Pegasus Row: SC panels suggest amending laws to protect privacy rights, enhance nation's cyber security
A bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana, which had ordered a probe into the allegations of use of Israeli spyware by the Centre for targeted surveillance of politicians, journalists, and activists, Thursday took note of the report of the two panels, one technical and one overseeing committee
Congress leader P Chidambaram calls Teesta Setalvad 'a courageous fighter for justice'
The Supreme Court granted interim bail to activist Teesta Setalvad in a case where she was arrested for allegedly fabricating documents to frame innocent people in the 2002 Gujarat riots