Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: citizenship constitution of india Court: punjab and haryana Page 1 of about 48 results (0.027 seconds)

Mar 18 2010 (HC)

Sorab Singh Gill Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR2010P& H83

..... territory of india and-a) who was born in the territory of india; orb) either of whose parents was born in the territory of ..... time being residing on an application made by him therefor to such diplomatic or consular representative, whether before or after the commencement of this constitution, in the form and manner prescribed by the government of the dominion of india or the government of india.9. persons voluntarily acquiring citizenship of a foreign state not to be citizens.- no person shall be a citizen of ..... . sidhu based on article 9 of the constitution of india is concerned that relates to voluntary relinquishment by a citizen of india. this has to be understood in the context of articles 5, 6, 8 and 9 of the constitution of india which read as follow:5. citizenship at the commencement of the constitution: at the commencement of this constitution every person who has his domicile in the ..... he is not an indian citizen. at the out set, mr. sidhu also contended that it is not disputed that a nri can represent india. he based his pleas on an interpretation of article 9 of the constitution of india which reads as under:9. persons voluntarily acquiring citizenship of a foreign state not to be citizens.- no person shall be a citizen of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1961 (HC)

State of Punjab and ors. Vs. Sher Mohammad Relu

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1962P& H333

..... inferred from it that the petitioner there had migrated from indian to pakistan in the year 1948 and had lost his citizenship by virtue of the provisions embodied in article 7 of the constitution. that apart, the fact that he came to india on a pakistani passport with a visa endorsed, was held to indicate that he was a foreigner. this was based ..... this court to decide whether a person, who was admittedly a citizen of india at the time when the constitution came into force, had lost the citizenship and had become a foreigner when the impugned order was made against him. section 9 of the citizenship act lays down that any citizen of india who by naturalisation, registration or otherwise voluntarily acquires, or has at any ..... had continued to reside here till after the enforcement of the constitution and had been granted a passport by the government of india as an indian national. the case set up in the return was that the respondent had acquired the citizenship of pakistan after he left india and this according to the learned counsel, was only after the year 1953. it is submitted ..... ?) a foreigner, by proving that he was born and domiciled in india prior to 26th january, 1950, and that he had become an indian citizen under article 5(a) of the constitution. there is no order of the central government, which had been made, giving a decision under section 9 of the citizenship act that he had acquired a foreign nationality. consequently, we .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 1958 (HC)

Nasir Ahmed Vs. the Chief Commissioner, Delhi and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1959P& H261

..... facts of the case i may describe the provisions of law which are relevant for this purpose.6. articles 5, 6 and 8 of the constitution lay down provisions for acquiring citizenship of india at the commencement of the constitution on 26-1-1950. article 7 lays down that any person migrating to pakistan after 1-3-1947, shall not be deemed to be ..... conclusion that no order under the foreigners act 1946 can be passed against a person who admittedly at the commencement of the constitution was a citizen of india unless his citizenship had been previously terminated by the central government under the citizenship act and the rules framed thereunder. i may make it clear that if a person at the commencement of the contitution is ..... this provision in the present case as it is not denied that the petitioner and his family members are citizens of india under the constitution and the certificate under section 13 states only this fact. this certificate in respect of a person's citizenship under the 1955 act has no application to the present case as the petitioner being a citizen under the ..... 10).in case of doubt the central government may certify that a person with respect to whose citizenship a doubt exists has prima facie satisfied the government that, the person concerned is a citizen of india under the constitution or under the citizenship act, 1955 and is recognised as such. (section 13 read with form vi of the rules). if there is any dispute .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 03 1958 (HC)

Mangal SaIn Vs. Shanno Devi

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1959P& H175

..... -1950 would, however, also negatives the earlier contention of the learned counsel for the appellant with respect to the acquisition of citizenship rights under article 5 of the constitution. whether or not the appellant had his domicile in the territory of india, he could certainly not be said to have been ordinarily resident in the said territory for not less than five years ..... 5(c) of the representation of the people act, 1951. the respondent hails from burma and ho never acquired the citizenship of india. his parents still reside at 24c, block, zeago bazar mandalay (burma). '(b) that under article 191 of the constitution a person shall be disqualified for being chosen as and for being a member of the legislative assembly as he is ..... not a citizen of india, or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign state, or is under any acknowledgment of allegiance or adherence toa foreign ..... with the next contention.16. the learned counsel for the appellant also claims citizenship rights for his client under article 6 of the constitution. he submits that the appellant had migrated from pakistan before the 19th day of july, 1948 and had been ordinarily resident in the territory of india since the date of his migration up to december 1949 or january 1950 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 10 1952 (HC)

Ajaib Singh Lehna Singh Vs. the State of Punjab and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1952P& H309

..... with the object of conferring the same fundamental rights on a citizen of india as have been conferred upon citizens of other independent ..... when the abducted person is conveyed out of india he or she loses all her rights of citizenship and indeed is deprived of the status of a citizen. there is no provision in the constitution against a citizen being sent out of india. indeed, item 19 read with item 14 ..... point for decision in the present case is whether the abducted persons (recovery and restoration) act, 1949, is inconsistent with or violative of the constitution of india. 2. in june 1951 the police entered the house of ajaib singh petitioner, arrested mst. mukhtiar kaur 'alias' sardaran under section 4 of ..... of willis on constitutional law that it is a privilege of the united states citizenship to remain in the united states so that deportation is illegal unless a person has first forfeited his citizenship.27. it would appear at first sight that article 19 of the constitution of india has been enacted ..... of list i of the seventh schedule would appear to indicate that the union parliament is competent to pass laws whereby the citizens of india .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 05 2013 (HC)

Rakesh Rishi Vs. Bakhshish Kaur

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... section 13-b and section 2 (dd) of the rent act are contrary to the provisions of the citizenship act as well as constitution of india and various notifications issued by the government of india; and are liable to be struck-down. the petitioner further raised a ground that the eviction petition was ..... another contention of the respondent that the notification vide which the amendment act of 2001 was extended to ut of chandigarh is ultra vires of the constitution and is unconstitutional is concerned, the same also stands repelled because the said notification has not been declared ultra vires and unconstitutional by any court ..... the case of baldev singh bajwa s case (supra) wherein it has been held that the citizenship is totally irrelevant as a person of indian origin living abroad, who is having immovable property in india, is an nri. learned counsel for the respondent has further submitted that there is no dispute ..... be the indian citizens. the definition in fact embraces all those categories of indians living abroad whether citizens or non-citizens, whether born in india or abroad, whether carrying indian or foreign passport. it appears that as long as he is owner of a property in the state of ..... not included in the definition of not resident indian because an nri is a person who is an indian citizen ordinarily and is residing outside india holding an indian passport. since the respondent-landlady is neither an indian citizen not she holds an indian passport, she does not fulfill the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 14 1959 (HC)

S. Hardial Singh Vs. State of Pepsu

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1960P& H644

..... taken place after the formation of the patiala and east punjab states union and even after the constitution of india had been in force granting equal rights of citizenship to all the subjects of the union of india. the repudiation could be justified only as an act of state which could be exercised by ..... another state, including its relations with the subjects of that state, unless they are temporarily within the allegiance of the crown'. (wade and phillips on constitutional law, fourth edn. p. 193). an act of state to be such can be exercised only against the subjects of another state unless it be ..... instances when acts of parliament in england have been passed for the benefit of persons seeking divorce, and it cannot be denied that such an act would constitute 'law;. (salmond on jurisprudence pp. 38-39, 1957 edn.). so long as it emanates from the sovereign power a rule, even if applicable to ..... subjects of that sovereign. in other words, as regards the residents of territories which come under the dominion of anew sovereign, the right of citizenship commences when the act of state terminates and the two therefore cannot co-exist.' the covenant was signed between the eight rulers of the state of ..... the united provinces (now uttar pradesh) by an order of the governor-general. the government of uttar pradesh in consultation with the government of india repudiated the grant which had been made by the rulers of sarila and chakhari states. it was held by the supreme court that the confiscation .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 20 1971 (HC)

Karnal Distillery Company Ltd. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1972P& H210

..... . we are of opinion that these two provisions must be exhaustive of the citizens of this country, part ii dealing with citizens on the date the constitution came into force and the citizenship act dealing with citizens thereafter. we must, therefore, hold that these two provisions are completely exhaustive of the citizens of this country and these citizens can only be natural ..... should be given to the concerned government servant to show cause against his compulsory retirement. a government servant serving under the union of india hold his office at the pleasure of the president provided in art. 310 of the constitution. but this 'pleasure' doctrine is subject to the rules or law made under art. 309 as well as to the conditions prescribed ..... to the citizens and to incorporate bodies like the petitioner-company. this point was considered by a bench of nine judges of the supreme court in state trading corpn. of india ltd. v. the commercial tax officer. air 1963 sc 1811. their lordships observed as follows:--'it seems to us, in view of what we have said already as to the ..... claim of a government servant, whose tenure of office was not extended beyond 55, when he completed the age of superannuating, their lordships of the supreme court in union of india v. j. n. sinha, air 1971 sc 40 repelled that claim in the following terms:--'fundamental rule 56(j) (civil services fundamental rules) in terms does not require that opportunity .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1959 (HC)

Miss Shanti Singh Vs. Governor of Punjab and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1959P& H375; 1959CriLJ1018

..... after the 15th of august 1947 it can be said that the petitioner had acquired the domicile of the indian dominion and the domicile of the republic of india at the commencement of the constitution, there is absolutely noreliable and trustworthy material which can show that the petitioner acquired such domicile. mr. partap singh submits that the petitioner's statement that she ..... of a passport from a foreign country be not considered to be conclusive proof of the nationality of the applicant, it certainly raises a strong presumption in favour of the citizenship asserted by him or her, as the case may be, for the purpose of securing the passport.in the present case the petitioner secured a passport from pakistan and entered ..... , however, deals with the power of the high court to interfere under article 226 and the latter case lays down that according to rule 3 of schedule 3 of the citizenship rules, 1956, the acquirement of a passport of another country is conclusive proof that the person acquiring that passport, even though he might be of indian origin before the partition ..... business. after the division of inida, under pressure from; the local police and without proper guidance and appreciation of his citizenship rights, he applied in india for a passport and received one under the seal of the high commissioner for pakistan in india, new delhi, dated 7-3-1953. it was on these facts that subba rao c. j., observed that this did .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 1963 (HC)

Mohd. Iqbal Alim UddIn Vs. the State

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1963P& H520; 1963CriLJ666

..... is depending not merely on the acquisition of pakistani citizenship by the petitioner but on the fact that he migrated from india in the year 1947, with the result that under article 7 of the constitution he could not be deemed to be a citizen of india. migration is something distinct from the act of ..... not be regarded to be a citizen of india by virtue of article 7 of the constitution. in these circumstances as prima facie he was not a citizen of india there was no question of the central government deciding first under section 9(2) of the citizenship act, 1955, whether the petitioner had lost ..... petitioner went to pakistan in 1947, his domicile remained indian and as his parents were indian, he was a citizen of india within the meaning of article 5 of the constitution. a similar contention was advanced in the above case decided by me and i observed:'there may be substance in this ..... is nowhere alleged in the charge that the petitioner was originally an indian citizen and he bad acquired pakistani nationality under section 9(1) of the citizenship act. therefore, prima facie the rule laid down in the aforesaid supreme court judgment would not be applicable.4. the other ground on which mr ..... is a matter which cannot be decided by the courts and it is the central government alone that can decide whether he has lost his indian citizenship by virtue of having adopted pakistani nationality.on the first point my attention has been invited to my own decision in mohd. rafiq v. administration .....

Tag this Judgment!


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