Citizenship at the Commencement of Constitution for CLAT MCQ

Solve by difficulty

Read the following passage and answer the question.
The population of a state is divided into two categories: citizens and non-citizens. A citizen of a state enjoys all civil and political rights. A non-citizen, on the other hand, doesn’t enjoy all these rights. Under the Indian Constitution,certain fundamental rights are available only to citizens, namely: Right against discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth (Article 15); right to equality of opportunity in matters of public employment (Article 16); freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence and profession (Article 19); cultural and educational rights (Articles 29 and 30); and the right to vote and become members of the union and state legislatures. Several offices can also be occupied exclusively by citizens: president (Article 58(1)(a)), vice president (Article 66(2)), judges of the Supreme Court (Article 124(3)) and high courts (Article 217(2)), governor of a state (Article 157), attorney general (Article 76(1)) and advocate general (Article 165). Equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India (Article 14) and protection of life or personal liberty (Article 21) are applicable to non-citizens as well. The Indian Constitution doesn’t prescribe a permanent provision relating to citizenship in India. It simply describes categories of persons who are deemed to be citizens of India on the day the Indian Constitution was promulgated on January 26, 1950, and leaves citizenship to be regulated by law made by Parliament. Article 11 of the Constitution confers power in Parliament to make laws regarding citizenship. The Indian Citizenship Act, of 1955 was enacted in the exercise of this provision. By the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2003, Section 3 of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955 was amended to provide that person born after December 3, 2004, would be deemed to be citizens of India, if both their parents are Indian citizens or one of their parents, is a citizen of India and the other is not an illegal migrant, at the time of the person’s birth. “Illegal migrant” under the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955 means a foreigner who has entered India: without a valid passport or travel documents; or with a valid passport or travel documents but remained in the country beyond the permitted period of time. If the Central Government is of the opinion that an applicant is a person who has rendered distinguished service to the cause of science, philosophy, art, literature, world peace or human progress generally, it may, under Section 6, waive all or any conditions specified to attain Indian citizenship.
Question :
Sheila is an English citizen, who has made remarkable discoveries in the field of robotics. Sheila’s parents were both English citizens throughout their life. Sheila now wishes to apply for Indian citizenship. Which of the following would most likely help Will her application succeed?

Since Sheila’s parents were both citizens throughout their life, and were not illegal migrants at any time, she should be given Indian citizenship.

While Sheila may be an English citizen, she is of Indian ethnicity, and so, should be allowed to become a citizen of India.

Since Sheila is keen to acquire Indian citizenship despite being a citizen of a first-world country, the Government should allow her to become an Indian citizen as this will increase India’s international stature.

Since Sheila has made significant contributions to science, the Government should use its powers under Section 6 when considering her application.

View Solution

A person who was born in India on 15th July 1942, moved to the United States in 1955, and became a U.S. citizen. They returned to India in 1965. What is their citizenship status according to the commencement of the Indian Constitution?

Indian citizen by birth

Not a citizen

Indian citizen by registration

Indian citizen by naturalization

View Solution

Concepts Covered - 1

Citizenship at the Commencement of Constitution

Types of Citizenship:

Citizenship by Birth:
- This principle, known as jus soli, means that if a person is born within the territory of India on or after January 26, 1950, they automatically become an Indian citizen.
- This rule applies regardless of the nationality or citizenship status of their parents. For example, a child born to non-Indian parents visiting India would still be an Indian citizen by birth if born within Indian territory.
Citizenship by Descent:
- Jus sanguinis, or citizenship by descent, applies to individuals born outside India to at least one parent who is an Indian citizen at the time of their birth.
- This means that even if you are born outside India, you can claim Indian citizenship if one of your parents is an Indian citizen.
- This is important for the Indian diaspora and individuals of Indian origin living abroad.

Single Citizenship:

India follows the principle of single citizenship, which means that every citizen of India enjoys the same set of rights and obligations throughout the country.
Unlike some countries with federal structures where citizens have both federal and state-level citizenship, India's single citizenship ensures uniformity of rights across the nation.

Rights of Citizens:

Right to Equality: This includes equality before the law, equal protection of the law, and the prohibition of discrimination on various grounds.
Right to Freedom: This includes freedom of speech and expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of movement, and more.
Right to Freedom of Religion: Citizens have the right to profess, practice, and propagate any religion of their choice.
Right against Exploitation: This prohibits practices like forced labor and child labor.
Cultural and Educational Rights: These are designed to protect the rights of linguistic and religious minorities.
Right to Constitutional Remedies: Citizens have the right to move the courts if their fundamental rights are violated.

Case Law Example: Shankari Prasad v. Union of India (1951):

Background:
- Shankari Prasad Bhattacharya challenged the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, which introduced amendments to the Indian Constitution, including changes to Fundamental Rights.
Key Issue:
- The central issue was whether the Indian Parliament had the authority to amend the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, or if these rights were immune to amendment.
Arguments:
- The petitioner argued that Fundamental Rights, including citizenship-related rights, were beyond amendment. The government argued that the Parliament had the power to amend any part of the Constitution, following the prescribed procedure.
Court's Decision:
- The Supreme Court ruled that the Indian Parliament had the authority to amend the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights. It established that there were no implied limitations on the amending power unless explicitly mentioned in the Constitution.
Significance:
- The case established the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty in India, affirming that Parliament could amend the Constitution within its framework. It emphasized that there were no "basic features" of the Constitution immune to amendments, as long as the prescribed procedure was followed.
Impact on Citizenship:
- The case reinforced the idea that even provisions related to citizenship could be amended by the Indian Parliament, subject to constitutional procedures.
Conclusion:
- Shankari Prasad is a landmark case clarifying the scope of the Parliament's amending power and its authority to make changes to the Constitution, including citizenship provisions. It set a precedent for subsequent constitutional amendments, highlighting the flexibility of the Indian Constitution in adapting to changing circumstances

Loss of Citizenship:

Citizenship at the commencement of the Constitution could be lost by voluntarily acquiring the citizenship of another country or by renouncing Indian citizenship.
It's important to note that subsequent amendments to citizenship laws have introduced additional grounds for the loss of citizenship.

Case Law Example: M. C. Raja v. Secretary of State (1947):

Single Citizenship Principle: The case underscores the principle that Indian citizenship is governed by the concept of single citizenship, meaning that individuals can hold only Indian citizenship and cannot simultaneously hold the citizenship of another country.
Voluntary Acquisition of Foreign Citizenship: It emphasizes that when an Indian citizen voluntarily acquires the citizenship of another country, they automatically lose their Indian citizenship. This loss of Indian citizenship is contingent upon the individual's voluntary decision to acquire foreign citizenship.
No Dual Citizenship: Indian citizenship is not dual citizenship, and it cannot be held concurrently with the citizenship of another country. Once an individual voluntarily acquires foreign citizenship, their Indian citizenship is considered forfeited.
Consequences of Losing Indian Citizenship: Individuals who lose their Indian citizenship by acquiring foreign citizenship voluntarily are no longer entitled to the rights and privileges of an Indian citizen. This may include restrictions on property ownership, voting rights, and other privileges.
Possible Reacquisition of Indian Citizenship: In some cases, individuals who have lost their Indian citizenship may be eligible to reacquire it through specific legal procedures, such as renouncing their foreign citizenship and applying for Indian citizenship again.

Special Provisions:

The Constitution contained special provisions for individuals who migrated to India from Pakistan during or after partition.
These provisions specified conditions under which such individuals could become Indian citizens.

Evolving Citizenship Laws:

Over time, India has amended its citizenship laws to address various issues, including the grant of citizenship by registration and naturalization, as well as addressing citizenship for individuals from specific regions or communities.
Amendments like the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, have introduced significant changes to citizenship laws, and students should stay updated on such developments.