Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: citizenship constitution of india Court: allahabad Page 3 of about 76 results (0.016 seconds)

Mar 22 1973 (HC)

Niaz Khan Vs. the State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 1973CriLJ1344

..... cannot rely on this. it is thus| clear that the petitioner does not satisfy the ingredients of article 5 of the constitution and was not a citizen of india at the commencement of the constitution. he does not claim to have acquired indian citizenship in any other manner. it therefore follows that he is a 'foreigner' and paragraph 3 of the order makes the ..... 'foreigner' means a person who 'is not a citizen of india.'11. article 5 of the constitution defines citizenship at the commencement of the constitution. it reads as under:5. at the commencement of this constitution every person who has his domicile in the territory of india and(a) who was born in the territory of india:(b) either of whose parents was born in the territory ..... of india; or(c) who has been ordinarily resident in the territory ..... of india for not less than .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1999 (HC)

U.P. Madhyamik Shikshak Sangh, Ghazipur Unit and Others Vs. State of U ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 1999(3)AWC1935; (1999)2UPLBEC1296

..... a condition precedent for claiming the right to administer the institution. prior to the commencement of the constitution of india, there was no settled concept of indian citizenship.minority, under article 30, must necessarily mean those who form a distinct and identifiable groups of citizens of india. whether it is 'old stuff or 'new product', the object of the institution should be genuine ..... of an order passed by director of education, u. p., declaring jai narain inter college, varanasi, to be a minority institution within the meaning of article 30 of the constitution of india. the other writ petition no. 18398 of 1988 was filed by a teacher working in the said college, who was appointed as ad hoc principal of the college, questioning ..... inter college. ghazipur, has been challenged primarily on the ground that the order aforesaid has been passed in complete disregard of the provisions of article 30(1) of the constitution of india and the various judicial pronouncements interpreting the said article. the following facts are necessary to appreciate the real import of the controversy.2. there is a registered society under ..... it is now the time to consider the question whether the state government has granted minority status to the respondent-institution in accordance with the constitutional mandate contained in article 30(1) of the constitution of india and section 16ff of the act, and the guidelines issued to regulate the matter. the provisions of section 16ff of the act appear to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 1960 (HC)

Shri Mustaq HusaIn Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1960All559; 1960CriLJ1176

..... india, who has; at any time between 26-1-1950, and the ..... may be assumed that he is not a citizen of india.'13. before migrating to pakistan in 1951 the petitioner was a citizen of india under article 5 of the! constitution. the question now is whether, he is still a citizen of india, notwithstanding his avowed pakistani nationality.14. sub-section (1) of section 9, citizenship act, 1955, declares inter alia that any citizen of ..... commencement of that act. voluntarily acquired the citizenship of another country, shall cease to ..... is scarcely fair for the petitioner to turn round and insist on residing in india permanently by the sanction of the court's writ,18. article 226 of the constitution is not addressed to the court in the language of an inexorable command. by it the court is constituted the; trustee of a high' power for the high purpose of maintaining equilibrity between .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 24 1959 (HC)

Wahid Mian Hiddan Mian Vs. the State

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1961All111; 1961CriLJ206

..... citizenship subsequently or with the loss of citizenship. for these matters provision has been made in the citizenship act of 1955. section 9(1) of the ..... act provides that any citizen of india who voluntarily acquires after 26-1-1950 ..... with a case coming within the scope of either of them. a person who migrated from india to pakistan after 1-3-1947 is not to be deemed to be a citizen of india even though he retains his indian domicile or has returned to india before 19-7-1948. the constitution deals with citizenship on the relevant date and not with the acquisition of ..... the citizenship of another country ceases to be a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1965 (HC)

Hadi Hasan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1966All127

..... to pakistan is a finding of fact that is binding on this court and cannot be challenged in a writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of india. the argument appears to be obviously misconceived. the principle that a finding of fact cannot be re-opened at the writ stage except under ..... . the matter cannot, therefore, be re-opened in these proceedings without contravening the express provisions of law as contained in section 9(2) of the citizenship act read with rule 30 framed thereunder.5. for the above reasons, i am of opinionthat this writ petition has no force. i, accordingly dismiss it ..... criminal appeal. any finding given by the sessions judge cannot, therefore, be treated binding in these proceedings. moreover, section 9(2) of the indian citizenship act states that the decision on this question is to be given by the central government; hence, in any case the finding that would be binding ..... the 28th december, 1963, and has been filed on behalf of the opposite-party. according to the said order, the petitioner has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of pakistan after the 26th january, 1950, but before the 25th may, 1955.2. the first argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner before me ..... to pakistan. there was a further prayer that in case the central government happened to pass an order under section 9(2) of the indian citizenship act during the pendency of the writ petition, the said order may also be quashed by a writ of certiorari. it appears that during the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 1954 (HC)

Najib Khan Vs. State Through D.M., Meerut

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1954All458

..... decided on the basis that the petitioner has failed to satisfy the court that he had not migrated from india. further, there is no assertion that, after migration, the petitioner again acquired indian citizenship in accordance with the proviso to article 7 of the constitution. it must, therefore, be held for the purpose of this petition that the petitioner is not an indian ..... pakistan. such being the circumstances it is not possible to accept the petitioner's contention that he never migrated from india. evidence cannot be recorded and the question cannot be gone into in detail in these proceedings under article 226 of the constitution. the criminal court has already examined the position and if the petitioner thinks that he has a remedy in ..... now being taken to arrest the petitioner in order to deport him to pakistan. the proceedings for deportation are challenged on the allegation that the petitioner is a citizen of india and consequently section 7 of the influx from pakistan (control) act cannot be applied to him. the question whether the petitioner is or is not la citizen of ..... india is a question of fact. the petitioner contends that he is still a citizen of india and he never migrated from india. his case in the affidavit is that he left for pakistan because his sister's son was one of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 1962 (HC)

Samiullah Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1963All482

..... the central government may justify.' 6. that suit involved the determination of two questions--first, whether the plaintiffs were citizens of india at the commencement of the constitution and secondly, whether they lost this citizenship subsequently by reason of having acquired voluntarily the citizenship of another country. in the present case, as far as i can see, the only question is whether the plaintiffs ..... voluntarily acquired the citizenship of pakistan, for it is common ground that the plaintiffs were citizens of india at the commencement of the constitution. hut there is virtually no difference between a case in which the plaintiff proves that he was a citizen of ..... muzaffarnagar police asked him to return to pakistan. he was threatened with deportation and moved the high court for relief under article 226 of the constitution on the ground that he had not lost his indian citizenship. but his petition was dismissed on an undertaking by the government that if at any time it wanted to deport him it would give ..... india at the commencement of the constitution and one in which the plaintiff's claim is admitted, and in both the question for determination is whether he subsequently lost his indian citizenship by acquiring that of another country. therefore the principles and directions laid down by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 1955 (HC)

Amrita Bazar Patrika Ltd. Vs. Board of High School and Intermediate Ed ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1955All595

..... court and in my opinion a corporation cannot be held to be a 'citizen' within the meaning of article 19 of the constitution of india.33. learned counsel for respondent no. 1 cited certain well-known text-books in support of the contention that in the united ..... , article 5 says :'(5) at the commencement of this constitution, every person 'who has his domicile in the territory of india and (a) who was born in the territory of india, or(b) either of whose ..... right of having access to the results of the respondent board. learned counsel relies on clauses (a) and (g) of article 19(1) of the constitution of india which read as follows :'19(1) ah citizens shall have the right -- (a) to freedom of speech and expression; * * * *(g) ..... case would have to be considered in deciding the questions that arose.10. reference was made to article 19(1) (a) and (g) of the constitution of india, learned counsel urged that the petitioner had a fundamental right of freedom of expression. learned counsel relied on -- 'lovell v. griffin', (1937) 303 ..... to practise any profession, or to carry onany occupation, trade or business.' 21. the first question which requires consideration is whether the petitioner is a 'citizen.' within the meaning of the article, citizenship is dealt with in part ii of the constitution .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 10 1967 (HC)

Abdul Salam Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1969All223

..... alleged in his plaint that he was born in aligarh and domiciled there at the commencement of the constitution of india and is a citizen of india as defined in article 5 of the constitution; that in march 1950, there was an outbreak of serious communal disturbances at aligarh and several other ..... supreme court that as these persons had admittedly obtained passports of a foreign country, this raised a conclusive presumption that they had acquired the citizenship of that country and it was not necessary to refer the question for the decision of the central government. rejecting this argument the supreme ..... has been 'obtained' within the meaning of paragraph 3 of schedule iii and that a conclusive presumption must arise that he has acquired voluntarily citizenship of that country'. this observation has no application here. it is not the appellant's case that he was compelled to obtain a pakistani ..... court below with a direction that it should remit to the central government for its decision, the question whether the appellant had obtained the citizenship of pakistan. but during the pendency of this appeal the government of uttar pradesh remitted this very question for the decision of the central ..... .6. during the pendency of this appeal, the respondent governments filed an application alleging that the question whether the appellant had acquired the citizenship of pakistan had been decided by the central government by its order dated 8-7-1963, and asking this court to take this document .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 1957 (HC)

Abdul Rahman S/O, Alla Bux Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh Through Its Secr ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1958All165

..... a pakistan national can be determined under the provisions of the citizenship act, 1955. section 9(1) of that act clearly lays down that 'any citizen of india who by naturalisation, registration or otherwise voluntarily acquires, or has at any time between the 26 january, 1950, and ..... acquisition or, as the case may be, such commencement cease to be a citizen of india: provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to a citizen of india who, during any war in which india may be engaged, voluntarily acquires the citizenship of another country, until the central government otherwise directs.' under the provisions of this sub ..... indian national was under consideration. from the various applications and from the fact that the petitioner himself obtained a passport as a pakistan national to come to india, the petitioner's contention that all this he did under a bona fide mistake cannot be accepted. the question whether the petitioner was an indian national or ..... adopt the course laid down and prescribed by the statute and not seek a remedy by approaching this court un-der article 226 of the constitution.8. for the reasons given above, i haveseen no merits in this petition which i accordingly dismiss. ..... ordermukerji, j. 1. this is a petition by haflz ab-dul rahman under article 226 of the constitution praying for a writ of certiorari to quash an order made by respondent no. 1 and for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents, .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //