Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Sep-12-1961
Reported in : AIR1963Guj226; 1963CriLJ265; (1963)0GLR1073
..... india and -(a) who was born in the territory of india; or (b) either of whose parents was born in the ..... parliament. but on the question as to who is a citizen of india on the date of the constitution, the constitution is the sole law. the citizenship act refers to citizenship after the commencement of the constitution and on the question as to who is a citizen of india on the date of the constitution, we have to read for purposes of this appeal articles 5, 7 ..... derogate from the power of parliament to make any provision with respect to the acquisition and termination of citizenship and all other matters relating to citizenship'.article 10 of the constitution provides that every person who is deemed to be a citizen of india under the constitution shall continue to be such citizen, subject to the provisions of any law that may be made ..... , therefore, on the respondent to prove that he was a citizen of india on 13-10-1957. at this stage, it is necessary to turn to the relevant provisions m the constitution of india and the citizenship act referring to citizenship. article 3 of the constitution of india provides that -'at the commencement of this constitution, every person who has his domicile in the territory of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jan-16-1961
Reported in : AIR1961Ori174; 1961CriLJ658
..... and in his application for b visa he described himself as a pakistan national and wanted permission to visit india for a period of one year, to see his parents.by virtue of article 7 of the constitution he clearly lost his indian citizenship when he stayed in pakisthan after attaining majority. the true meaning of the expression 'migrated from the territory of ..... residing in that country permanently when he went there and accepted a government service, was not stated in the affidavit. the legal position therefore is that though a citizen of india the petitioner lost his citizenship by virtue of article 7 of the constitution when he went to east pakistan and remained there even after attaining majority.if after his return to ..... : india' occurring in article 7 of the constitution has been explained by their lordships of the supreme court in a very recent (unreported ..... india he wanted to acquire indian citizenship, it was open to him to apply to the authorities concerned, under section 5 of the citizenship act. section 9(1) of that act makes it 'clear that once a citizen of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : May-12-1961
Reported in : AIR1962All383
..... the territory now included in pakistan after 1st march, 1947 with the 'intention' of migrating from india to pakistan, he would lose his citizenship of india which might have accrued to him by reason of article 5 of the constitution. thus articles 5 and 7 have to be read together. article 7 is really in the nature of a proviso to article 5.article ..... .10. the learned counsel argued that clause 3 of schedule iii framed under rule 30 of the citizenship act, was arbitrary and constituted unreasonable abridgment of the fundamental rights of a citizen. clause 3 of schedule iii reads :'the fact that a citizen of india has obtained on any date a passport from the government of any other country shall be conclusive proof ..... property in pakistan; or (d) if he has obtained a temporary permit for entry into india from pakistan'. 13. the learned advocate-general pointed out that the question of acquisition of citizenship of another country is a question of status and that article 11 of the constitution gave very wide powers to parliament for making the law with respect to the acquisition and ..... foreign state he would not beconsidered or deemed to be a citizen of india by birth or by reason of domicile. article 9 refers to the voluntary acquisition of the citizenship of any foreign state before the commencement of the constitution and not after the coming into force of the constitution. in other words, a person of indian domicile would be deemed to be .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Aug-29-1961
Reported in : AIR1962Guj194; (1962)0GLR85
..... application for the pakistani passport as also his declaration while obtaining visa 'c' from the office of the high commissioner of india in pakistan would constitute prima facie evidence of his having renounced his citizenship of india and his having acquired the citizenship of pakistan. it is true that in a case where it is alleged by the state government that i a person ..... was final and conclusive, establishing renunciation on his part of the citizenship of india. but, it is the case of the learned government pleader that though the petitioner was a citizen of this country on the date when the constitution came into force he subsequently renounced the indian citizenship and acquired the citizenship of pakistan, it would be the central government, as a tribunal ..... and was also educated there. in view of that statement it is quite clear that the petitioner was, by virtue of article 5 of the constitution, a citizen of india at the time of the commencement of the constitution.6. it was, however, urged by the learned government pleader that there was a dispute between the parties as to when exactly the petitioner ..... under section 9(2) of the citizenship act of 1955, which would have .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-03-1961
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!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-04-1961
Reported in : AIR1961SC1467; 1961CriLJ573a; (1961)63PLR751; 1SCR737
..... words of art. 7 to arts. 5 and 6 taken in conjunction with the fact that both arts. 5 and 6 are concerned with citizenship (at the commencement of the constitution) apart from various other considerations would appear to point to the conclusion that the migration referred to in art. 7 is one before january ..... as on the facts of this case he must be held to have been an indian citizen on the promulgation of the constitution, the passport can shows no more than that he renounced indian citizenship and acquired pakistani nationality. such evidence would be of no use in the present case for, in view of s. ..... would like to point out one thing, namely, that the high court seems to have been of the opinion that art. 7 of the constitution contemplates migration from india to pakistan even after january 26, 1950. we desire to make it clear that we should not be taken to have accepted or endorsed the ..... is, the respondent before us, 'in applying for extension of time shows that he is not a citizen of india and that he has acquired citizenship of pakistan. if he were a citizen of india, he could have raised this plea and this question could have been decided by the central government as envisaged by ..... the citizenship of another country. 13. the position then is this. the respondent has clearly discharged the onus that lay on him under s. 9 of the foreigners act to prove that he was not a foreigner, by proving that he was born and domiciled in india prior to january 26, 1950, when the constitution .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-05-1961
Reported in : AIR1962SC70; (1961)63PLR830; 1SCR779
..... . it seems to us however that the suit raised other questions also. the appellants' claim to the citizenship of india was resisted on the ground that having migrated to pakistan in 1948, they had never acquired indian citizenship. that might follow from art. 7 of the constitution. the jurisdiction of a civil court to decide that question is not in any way affected by ..... that it cannot be decided by anyone else. the only question, however, which a civil court is prevented by s. 9(2) of the citizenship act from determining is the question whether a citizen of india has acquired citizenship of another country or when or how he acquired it. the civil courts are not prevented by this provision from determining other questions concerning ..... extended from time to time and ultimately up to about october, 1955, and thereafter they were served with orders to quit india. the defendants further stated that the appellants were not citizens of india as they had voluntarily acquired pakistani citizenship by obtaining passports from that country. 4. the suit was dismissed as it was held not to be maintainable in view of ..... s. 9(2) of the citizenship act. therefore it seems to us that the entire suit should not have .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jan-19-1961
Reported in : AIR1961Cal482
..... holding that he ever voluntarily acquired pakistan citizenship. from this it follows that he has not forfeited his indian citizenship under section 9 of the citizenship act and he is still entitled to the rights of residence and free movement in india guaranteed by article 19 of the constitution.' 4. it will appear, therefore ..... order be not given effect to.2. in my opinion, this application ought to, be rejected. the matter comes under article 7 of the constitution. the petitioner migrated to eastern pakistan after the 1st day of march, 1947. assuming that he intended to retain his indian nationality he should ..... , that this case was decided on its peculiar facts. it is unnecessary for me to decide the question as to whether the provision of clause 3 of schedule iii of the citizenship rules, 1956, ..... fact that he applied for and obtained a pakistan passport, mere applying for such a passport ..... is no proof of the acquisition of pakistan citizenship. presumably the petitioner must have declared himself to be a pakistani in his application tor the passport, but this at best was nothing more ..... back to india to take care of his widowed mother and family, and be obtained a pakistani passport making the usual declaration. broome, j., held that the passport raised only a rebuttable presumption of nationality and that the provision of clause 3 of schedule iii of the citizenship rules, 1956 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-20-1961
Reported in : AIR1962AP247
..... indian citizen. where, however, it is denied that he is ever an indian citizen and the claim is for a declaration that heis one whether under the constitution or under the provisions of the citizenship act, civil courts cannot refuse to entertain the petition to determine that question. the learned second government advocate sri shankar rao, on the other hand contends that ..... appellants, on the other hand, states that the question whether a person is an indian citizen or not, is governed by the constitution, and under the constitution the question whether a person was a domicile in india on the date of the constitution, or whether he migrated between march, 1947, and 26th january 1960, arequestions of fact which must be determine before he can ..... section 9(2)of the act in as much as the central government alone can determine whether the respondent before their lordships,who was admittedly an indian citizen after the constitution, had lost his nationality. that question it was held, cannot be decided by a court. the two proposition which emerge from the aforesaid decision may be stated in tbe language ..... namely that the said article contemplates migration from india to pakistan even after january 26, 1950. it was observed that the reference in the opening words of article 7, to arts. 5 and 6 taken in conjunction with the fact that both articles 5 and 6 are concerned with citizenship(at the commencement of the constitution apart from various other considerations, would appear .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Oct-31-1961
Reported in : 1963CriLJ817
..... national; but on the facts of the case abdul qayum must be held to have been an indian citizen on the promulgation of the constitution. the passport, therefore, can show no more than that he renounced indian citizenship and acquired pakistani nationality. such evidence, as observed by the supreme court in the above referred case, would be of no use in the ..... the state counsel that abdul qayum in applying for extension of time conducted himself in a manner as to show that he was not the citizen of india and that he had acquired the citizenship of pakistan. as mentioned earlier that is not a question which is open to a court to decide and there is no evidence to show that it ..... . the learned magistrate found that abdul qayum was not a foreigner and therefore acquitted him,5. admittedly abdul qayum was born in india long before the commencement of the constitution. his parents and other members of the family always resided in india. the evidence on record proved that abdul qayum was a member of the nyaya panchayat lohta, upto the year 1953 and ..... under article 5(a) of the constitution. as his family all along remained in india and he went to pakistan for a short time it cannot be said that he had migrated to pakistan. it has not been shown that the central government had made any decision with regard to him under section 9 of the citizenship act that he has acquired a .....Tag this Judgment!