Court : Karnataka
..... . on this ground, the pleadings in the petition are liable to be struck off. 26. it is further submitted that the matter relating to citizenship cannot be construed as pure and simple civil litigation and deprive the constitutional right of a citizen by declaring that he is not an indian citizen by erroneous presumption that non-denial of allegation amounts to acceptance ..... ) and (iv), 33 (4) and (5), 33-a 36, 5(c) and 9-a of the representation of people's act, 1951 and articles 9 and 173 of the constitution of india, by one sri.abraham t.j., petitioner: candidate (party-in-person), challenging of election of the respondent, sri.ashok kheny to the karnataka legislature from no.49, bidar (south) assembly ..... the representation of peoples act,1951 and articles 9 and 173 of the constitution of india. 2. the case of the petitioner in brief is that election relates to 49-bidar south assembly constituency. the respondent having voluntarily accepted the citizenship of united states, he is not a citizen of india and that the respondent having undertaken the work on behalf or for the ..... government of karnataka, the respondent is not entitled but disqualified to contest the election in view of the provisions under articles 9 and 173 of the constitution of india and section 9-a of the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1964MP272; 1965MPLJ329
..... of india either by virtue of any of the provisions in the constitution or the citizenship act 1955. -- (see frioz meharuddin v. sub-divisional officer (mp), air 1961 madh pra 110.)it is true ..... amendment of section 2(a) of the foreigners act in 1957. be treated as 'foreigners'; but the effect of the provisions of article 7 of the constitution is that all persons who had migrated from the territory of india to the territory now included in pakistan after the 1st day of march, 1947 had to be deemed not to be citizens of ..... amendment of the definition of 'foreigner' in section 2 (a) of the foreigners act, 1946 by the foreigners laws (amendment) act, 1957. the citizenship act, 1955, however, makes a distinction between a commonwealth citizen and a citizen of india. under section 11 of that act every person who is a citizen of a commonwealth country specified in the first schedule shall, by ..... government under section 12 of the citizenship act by an order notified in the official gazette. no such notification has been issued by the central government conferring rights of citizens of india on citizens of pakistan. persons who migrated to pakistan after 1-3-1947 and who did not return to india till the commencement of the constitution cannot be considered to be citizens .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC1918; JT1994(2)SC215; 1994(2)SCALE37; (1994)3SCC1; 2SCR644
..... an independent or autonomous existence of a state. it must also be realised that unlike the constitution of the united states of america which recognises dual citizenship (section 1(1), fourteenth amendment), the constitution of india, article 5, does not recognise the concept of dual citizenship. under the american constitution all persons born or naturalised in the united states, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are ..... immediately preceding such commencement shall be a citizen of india. article 9 makes it clear that if any person voluntarily acquires the citizenship of any foreign country, he will cease to be a citizen of india. these provisions clearly negative the concept of dual citizenship, a concept expressly recognised under the american constitution. the concept of citizenship assumes some importance in a federation because in a ..... country which recognises dual citizenship, the individual would owe allegiance both to the federal government as well as the state government but a .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1971Cal507
..... continues to be an indian citizen. the petitioner was born as an indian citizen and was an indian citizen at the commencement of the constitution of india and continues to be an indian citizen. the indian citizenship of the petitioner was never terminated. the fact that the father of the petitioner obtained a chinese passport in 1952 could not affect the ..... the 26th january, 1950. the petitioner became an indian citizen under article 5(a) and (c) of the constitution of india.4. the petitioner's case is that the petitioner's parents by long residence in india acquired indian citizenship. the said citizenship was never terminated. in any event the petitioner continued to be indian citizen. the petitioner's father settled down at ..... the affidavit-in-opposite filed on behalf of the state of west bengal, it is denied that the parents of the petitioner were domiciled in india or that the petitioner was domiciled in india when the constitution of india came into force. both the father and the mother of the petitioner were chinese nationals. the father held a chinese passport bearing no. 1 ..... , in my opinion do not entitle the applicant for equitable relief of injunction claimed in the instant application. section 9 of the citizenship act provides as follows:--'9. termination of citizenship--(1) any citizen of india who by naturalisation, registration or otherwise voluntarily acquires, or has at any time between the 26th january, 1950, and the commencement of this act voluntarily acquired .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
..... as is permitted in his own country. he would have to abide by the mandate of the said act. it is common ground that articles 5 to 11 of the constitution of india inserted in part ii deal with citizenship. by article 5, it is clarified that every person who has his domicile in the territory of ..... satisfied. article 7 reads as under: article 7. - rights of citizenship of certain migrants to pakistan. notwithstanding anything in articles 5 and 6, a person who has after the first day of march, 1947, migrated ..... such commencement shall be a citizen of india. by article 6, rights of citizenship of certain persons who have migrated to india from pakistan have been dealt with. any such person migrated to the territory of india from the territory now included in pakistan shall be deemed to be a citizen of india at the commencement of the constitution of india if the conditions stipulated therein are ..... as proof of myt's british citizenship. the reserve bank of india is no authority to certify citizenship. further, we do not see any reason for both ayt and myt executing certain documents including power of attorneys before a notary public at karachi. at the same time, myt's application to the reserve bank of india is through her constituted attorney yusufbhai ismailji vadiwala, a .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1960All431; 1960CriLJ875
..... there was in the eye of law, indian citizenship. consequently, a person who had migrated to pakistan before 26th of january, 1950 was not a citizen ..... this section are that the person concerned should be at one lime a citizen of india and voluntarily acquire or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of another country between the 26th january, 1950 and the commencement of the act. before the commencement of the constitution of india the citizens of india were termed as british subjects and it was from the 26th january 1950 that ..... by section 9(2) of this act. sub-section (2) of section 9 shall be read along with sub-section (1). section 9 runs as below:'9. termination of citizenship.-- (1) any citizen of india who by naturalisation, registration or otherwise voluntarily acquires, or has at any time between the 26th january, 1950, and the commencement of this act voluntarily acquired, the ..... before 26-1-1950. the first part of the sub-section (1) of section 9 applies to citizens of india voluntarily acquiring the citizenship of another country. this will have reference to the acquisition of citizenship of another country after the commencement of the citizenship act, 1955 and not before this act came into force.the other part is not general, its scope has .....Tag this Judgment!
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!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1965Cal302,1965CriLJ676,69CWN126
..... the division bench with the foregoing observation, per bachawat, j.14. in my opinion, article 7 of the constitution applies in this case, and the petitioner cannot, therefore, be deemed to be a citizen of india under article 5. section 9(2) of the citizenship act is not also applicable, for the same reason.15. this application must, accordingly, fail. in view of ..... government under section 9(2) of the citizenship act, and that the rejection of his application under section 5(1) by the state government ..... as clause (b) of article 5.6. but, even where article 5 is prima facie attracted, a person cannot be held to have been a citizen of india at the commencement of the constitution in a case where article 7 is applicable. in short, article 5 is subject to and controlled by article 7, and so it has been held by the ..... and this has bean followed by the impugned order to quit india, which was served on the petitioner on 26-8-1962.4. the primary ground upon which the petitioner challenges the impugned order is that he is a citizen of india under article 5 of the constitution and that, accordingly, that citizenship can be terminated only by a determination made by the central .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (2004)3UPLBEC3070
..... . if the son of an englishman is born upon a journey, his domicile will follow that of his father.'(7) it was argued that under the constitution there can be only a single citizenship for the whole of india, and that it would run counter to that notion to hold that the state could make laws based on domicile within their territory. but ..... within their own territorial jurisdiction subject to constitutional limitations. there is nothing in our constitution like domicile of state, the citizenship and domicile both are different things/article 5 of the constitution deals with citizenship and comicile. for convenience article 5 of the constitution of india is reproduced as under :-'article 5. citizenship at the commencement of the constitution.-at 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 parents was .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1963Cal527
..... , 1955, bars the election tribunal from deciding that the petitioner was rot a citizen of india. section 9(1) of the citizenship act, 1955, states that a person who was a citizen of india at the commencement of the constitution may subsequently acquire the citizenship of some other country. section 9(2) of the said act describes the authority having exclusive jurisdiction ..... he never became a citizen of india. 2. the contention of the petitioner that ..... living in india. as the petitioner migrated from india to pakistan after the first day of march, 1947 and before the constitution of india came into force, he must be deemed not to be a citizen of india having regard to article 7 of the constitution. the election tribunal rightly held that the petitioner never acquired the citizenship of india under the constitution and that ..... to determine it e citizen of india has acquired the citizenship of some other country. if the petitioner was ever a citizen of india the election tribunal was not .....Tag this Judgment!