Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-23-1958
Reported in : AIR1959Bom359; (1959)61BOMLR164; 1959CriLJ1053; ILR1959Bom875
..... was raised by the learned government pleader was that in view of rule 3 specified in schedule iii of the citizenship rules, 1956, made under section 18 of the citizenship act, 1955, the fact that the respondent (though originally a citizen of india) had obtained a passport on 9-6-1952 from the government of pakistan shall be conclusive proof of his having ..... of the constitution, the respondent was a citizen of india and not a foreigner. accordingly, on 30-11-1957 he acquitted the respondent of the offence with which he had been charged. 9. the state has ..... section 3 to any authority subordinate to it. the notification s.r.o. no. 1562 issued by the government of india, so far as material, states that in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (i) of article 258 of the constitution, 'the president with the consent of the government of ..... bombay hereby entrusts to that government the functions of the central ..... in the district of broach and that he left india either towards the end of 1951 or in early 1952. he also held that the prosecution had not proved that the respondent migrated from india to pakistan with the intention of residing and settling in pakistan and that therefore article 7 of the constitution did not apply and in view of article 5 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jul-21-1958
Reported in : AIR1959All79
..... he had opted for pakistan, he had never renounced nor he has been deprived of his india citizenship nor had his indian citizenship terminated under the citizenship act, 1955. it was further his case that he had not migrated from india to pakistan, so that article 5 of the constitution applied to him and he became an indian citizen at the time of the commencement of ..... the parties in this case.4. we have already indicated above when discussing the provisions of the constitution that the appellant did not become a citizen of india at thecommencement of the constitution or when he returned to india in february, 1948. subsequently, he could only acquire citizenship, as has been mentioned above, by obtaining an appropriate certificate under section 5 or section 6 of ..... into account the provisions contained in the constitution and the provisions of the citizenship act, 1955. prior to the commencement of the constitution, persons residing in the territory of india were british subjects.the citizenship of india came into existence, for the first time, under the constitution when india became a republic. article 5 of the constitution recognised as a citizen of india every person who had his domicile in .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-27-1958
Reported in : AIR1959AP241; 1959CriLJ561
..... aliens act, 1914, or (ii) has not been granted a certificate of naturalization as a british subject under any law for the time being in force in india or (iii) is not a citizen of india.' in dealing with citizenship as at the commencement of the constitution of india article 5 is relevant to be noticed. it reads as follows: 'at the commencement of this ..... . government of andhra pradesh, air 1957 andh-pra 1047 that the passport obtained from the high commissioner for pakistan in india is not evidence.6. had the law of citizenship merely rested upon the articles of the constitution, no further consideration in regard to a migrant from india to pakistan would arise. but having regard to article 11 itself, and the passing of the ..... case of a person who has migrated to pakistan after the coming into force of the constitution of india, hut has not obtained a permit as mentioned in the proviso to article 7, will have to be treated as having lost the rights to citizenship of india and has become ipso facto a 'foreigner' in spite of the fact that he had the qualifications ..... , it is manifest that a person born in the territory of india, or either of whose parents was born in the territory of india, or who has been ordinarily a resident of india for not less than five years in the territory of india before the commencement of the constitution, shall be entitled to citizenship rights but subject to his losing such rights on his migrating .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-22-1958
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!
Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Apr-08-1958
Reported in : AIR1958Raj172
..... be ordinarily residents in india and even section 5(1)(a) did not apply to them. as or the order asking ..... the applicants held passports from pakistan, that is conclusive proof of their having voluntarily aquired citizenship of pakistan before the dale they obt lined the passports from pakistan. the applicants thus cannot be deemed to be citizens of india by virtue of article 7 of the constitution. they are citizens of pakistan by virtue of rule 3 of schedule iii on account of ..... them to leave india, it was said that as the applicants were not citizens of india, they were asked to leave ..... jurisdiction to grant the certificates of citizenship under section 5(1)(a). reliance in this connection was placed on explanation (3) to section 5(1). it is also urged that as the applicants had migrated from india to pakistan after march 1957, they lost their indian citizenship and became citizens of pakistan under article 7 of the constitution therelore, they cannot be said to .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Oct-03-1958
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 : Mumbai
Decided on : Apr-23-1958
Reported in : AIR1959Bom192; (1958)60BOMLR1186; 1959CriLJ577; ILR1958Bom1422
..... have certain rights. article 19 does not envisage the position that would arise if the citizenship of india is abandoned and citizenship of another country is acquired. if a question arises whether the person concerned has acquired the ..... have come to the conclusion that clause 3, schedule iii of the citizenship rules, 1956, is not ultra vires articles 19 of the constitution. it is true that articles 19 of the constitution provides, amongst other things, that all citizens shall have the right to move freely throughout the territory of india and to reside and settle in any part of the territory of ..... , 1956, is ultra vires article 19 of the constitution and therefore he could not be said to have committed an infringement of clause 7 of the foreigners order, 1948. 3. now, clause 3, schedule iii of the citizenship rules, 1956, is in these words:'the fact that a citizen of india has obtained on any date a passport from the government of any ..... acquired the citizenship of another country, the authority to determine such question shall be the central government; and then there is sub-rule (2) which says that the central government shall in determining any such question have due regard to the rules of evidence specified in schedule iii. all that articles 19 of the constitution says is that a citizen of india shall .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-09-1958
Reported in : AIR1959Bom525; (1959)61BOMLR803; 1959CriLJ1416; ILR1959Bom1323
..... to be a citizen of india. the learned magistrate observed that the respondent by 'physically migrating to pakistan', did not lose his indian ..... 1946, being a natural born british subject he was not a foreigner. the definition of the word 'foreigner' was amended by the adaptation of laws order, 1950 when the constitution of india came into operation and clause (iii) and (iv) and the proviso of the original definition were deleted and substituted by a new clause in the following words: 'is not ..... citizenship and the respondent was, therefore, not a foreigner and had not infringed the provisions of section 14 of the ..... was born in the territory of india and there was no evidence to show that he had renounced his citizenship of india, or that he had voluntarily acquired by naturalisation, registration or otherwise, at any time between 26-6-1950. and 30-12-1955, citizenship of pakistan, by virtue of the presumption contained in article 10 of the constitution, the respondent must be deemed .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Nov-21-1958
Reported in : AIR1960Kant1; AIR1960Mys1; ILR1959KAR57
..... then merely by the coming into force of art. 5, the defendant cannot be said to be a citizen of india, that is bharat. besides, we have to consider the status of citizenship as conferred by part iii of the constitution but with reference to the question as to whether the court of calcutta was a foreign court. the material provision in the ..... and the territory of india shall comprise of 'the territories of the states as well as other ..... on 26-11-49, is art. 5 which relates to citizenship. it reads as under:'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 parents was born in the territory of india; or (c) who has been ordinarily resident in the territory ..... ) again, article 5 of the indian constitution came into force on 26-1-1950 and hence at the time of the execution of the decree, there was no common citizenship between the defendant who was a resident of the mysore state and the plaintiffs who are residents of calcutta. (42) article 1 of the constitution provides that india shall be a union of states .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-16-1958
Reported in : AIR1959P& H265
..... strong bias in favour of a unitary government. the constitution, however, does not treat all the states on equal footing but treates ..... they are sought to be enforced are within the territories of india. in my opinion, this fact by itself is not sufficient to lead to the conclusion that a decree passed in one state within india cannot be considered to be a foreign decree in another state of india. under our constitution india as a union of states is a federation though, with a ..... reasons : -- (1) the definition of 'foreign court' as given in the civil procedure code applicable to india and in the civil procedure code applicable to pepsu must be held subservient to the provisions in the constitution of india, namely article 5, which confers on all the persons residing in india the right of citizenship of india, and clause (3) of article 261 by which final judgments or orders delivered or ..... passed by civil courts in any part of the territory of india are made capable of execution anywhere within that territory .....Tag this Judgment!