Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jan-30-1962
Reported in : AIR1962All621
..... to pakistan in 1950 and if he migrated in that year before the 26th of january he could never acquire indian citizenship under the constitution of india.under article 7 of the constitution he would be deemed never to have been a citizen of india.it was for the appellant to show that he did not in fact migrate before the 26th of january 1950 ..... only presumption would be that he tried to do so because as a result of migration he never acquired indian citizenship which means that he left india before the 26th of january 1950, and since he migrated to pakistan, article 7 of the constitution became applicable to his case. while such a possibility exists, it is impossible to hold that the appellant was ..... . that however does not militate against his declaration that he migrated to pakistan in 1950. it is quite possible that having, migrated in 1950 and having lost indian citizenship he sneaked into india sometime in 1952 and then continued to live here surreptitiously until he again sneaked back into pakistan in the year 1955. if this happened the facts as given by ..... ever a citizen of india so that even in september, 1956, when he came back to india, even though he might not have acquired citizenship of any other country and might not have become a .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Apr-16-1962
Reported in : AIR1963All260; 1963CriLJ724
..... of loyalties to breaking point in some individual families. in these exceptional circumstances, the framers of the constitution provided that during these three years even a wife would lose her citizenship if she migrated to pakistan leaving her husband behind in india. the laws of many other countries recognise exceptions to the general rule that the domicile of the wife ..... five years). therefore loss of citizenship means the loss of the essential ingredient of citizenship-- domicile (the fact of birth or previous residence could not be ..... made compulsory in all cases without exception, and there could be no citizenship of india at the commencement of the constitution without an indian domicile. in 1951, section 3 (d) of the pakistan citizenship act provided that person who before the commencement of that act had migrated from india to pakistan with the intention of residing there permanently acquired thecitizenship of pakistan ..... such persons by enjoining that a person who acquired the citizenship of another country shall cease to be a citizen of india.but what is the legal effect of a person ceasing to be a citizen of india? we have seen that citizenship of india at the commencement of the constitution was based on two qualifications-- domicile and birth (or residence for .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Mar-29-1962
Reported in : AIR1963All205; 1963CriLJ562
..... that he never migrated to pakistan and, therefore, did not lose his citizenship rights as provided by article 7 of the constitution. he asked the court to declare that he is a citizen of india. 2. both the union of india and the state of uttar pradesh resisted the suit and filed a ..... if so, did ne lose all his citizenship rights? 3. is the suit bad for misjoinder of parties? 4. do the provisions of influx of pakistan act directing deportation of the plaint.ff lead to the infringement of his fundamental rights under the constitution of india? if so, are they void and ultra ..... vires? 5. to what relief, if any, is the plaintiff entitled? 3. the trial court rejected the plaintiffs version that he never intended to migrate to pakistan and disbelieved his witnesses. it held that he did migrate to pakistan and by reason of this conduct lost his citizenship ..... rights as provided under article 7 of the constitution. in appeal learned district judge took a different view of the plaintiff's evidence and believed his witnesses who had ..... of the court is not ousted. in this case the plaintiff contended in his plaint that he had not lost his citizenship by reason of article 7 of the constitution as he had never migrated to pakistan. the defendants in their written statement challenged the veracity of his assertion and alleged .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Apr-12-1962
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!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Aug-03-1962
Reported in : 52ITR271(All)
..... commissioner and the decision of the second appeal by the appellate tribunal were all proceedings under the rampur act (though carried out by authorities constituted under the indian act). we find that the first appeal was decided under section 31 and the second appeal under section 33 of the ..... be ascertained first, as the power is conferred upon the officer, authority, etc., who is found to correspond with the officer, authority, etc., constituted under the rampur act; it is evident that in ascertaining the correspondence we must not take into account the nature of the power to be conferred ..... act we come across a reference to an officer, authority, court or tribunal, we must find the corresponding officer, authority, court or tribunal constituted under the indian act and for this purpose only we must refer to the indian act. we must caution ourselves against enforcing the provisions of ..... law to an officer, authority, tribunal or court shall be construed as a reference to the corresponding officer, authority, tribunal or court appointed or constituted by or under the indian income-tax act, 1922........provided further that if any question arises as to who such corresponding officer, authority, tribunal ..... a tentative decision subject only to the decision of the central government. section 9(2) of the citizenship act, 1955, which was interpreted by the supreme court recently in akbar khan v. union of india, at page 70, reads as follow :'if any question arises as to whether, when or how .....Tag this Judgment!