Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-18-1967
Reported in : AIR1967SC1143; 1967CriLJ1074; 2SCR401
..... the citizenship of pakistan and had actually acquired such citizenship could, therefore, be determined by the government of india alone under section 9(2) of the citizenship act. the order dated 18th august, 1965 passed by the government of ..... two representations was sent by him in the month of may, 1965. the government of india, on 18th august, 1965, issued an order holding that the appellant had voluntarily acquired the citizenship of pakistan. the appellant challenged this order by another petition under article 226 of the constitution before the high court of andhra pradesh, and that petition was dismissed by the order ..... as it could not be disputed in this case, that the government of india was competent under section 9(2) of the citizenship act, 1955 to determine whether the appellant had acquired the citizenship of pakistan. admittedly, the appellant had gone to pakistan in august 1951, after the enforcement of the constitution. the question whether he had migrated with the intention of voluntarily acquiring .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Sep-01-1967
Reported in : AIR1969Guj79
..... constitution was that of his father, as he was a minor then. his further case was that his father having ..... the plaintiff on the ground that the plaintiff was not proved to be a citizen of india on january 26, 1950. in the first appeal before diwan, j. the plaintiff sought to make out his case of indian citizenship on the basis of article 5 of the constitution of india. the case before diwan j. was that his domicile at the commencement of the ..... and came to the conclusion that the learned trial judge was right when he held that the plaintiff has not established his claim of being the citizen of india under article 5 of the constitution. diwan j. accordingly dismissed the appeal of the plaintiff. it is against that decision of diwan j. that this letters patent appeal has been filed by the ..... domicile in pakistan from that date. it was also urged that the plaintiff's father has not acquired any other domicile namely, the domicile in india after august 15, 1947. therefore, at the time when the constitution of india commenced, that is, on november 26, 1949 the plaintiff's father had his domicile in pakistan and consequently the plaintiff had also his domicile .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Sep-13-1967
Reported in : AIR1969Cal267
..... constitution. article 6 deals with rights of citizenship of certain persons who have migrated to india from pakistan and the proviso to this article says that no person shall be registered as ..... by an appropriate legislature. learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 stated that he could find only one disqualification under the constitution. article 326 provides that a person shall be entitled to be registered as a voter if, inter alia, he is a citizen of india. new provisions regarding citizenship have been made in articles 5 to 11 in part ii of the ..... a voter unless he has been resident in the territory of india for at least 6 months immediately preceding the date of ..... his application. this proviso is undoubtedly a disqualification under the constitution as envisaged by .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Apr-10-1967
Reported in : AIR1969All223
..... alleged in his plaint that he was born in aligarh and domiciled there at the commencement of the constitution of india and is a citizen of india as defined in article 5 of the constitution; that in march 1950, there was an outbreak of serious communal disturbances at aligarh and several other ..... supreme court that as these persons had admittedly obtained passports of a foreign country, this raised a conclusive presumption that they had acquired the citizenship of that country and it was not necessary to refer the question for the decision of the central government. rejecting this argument the supreme ..... has been 'obtained' within the meaning of paragraph 3 of schedule iii and that a conclusive presumption must arise that he has acquired voluntarily citizenship of that country'. this observation has no application here. it is not the appellant's case that he was compelled to obtain a pakistani ..... court below with a direction that it should remit to the central government for its decision, the question whether the appellant had obtained the citizenship of pakistan. but during the pendency of this appeal the government of uttar pradesh remitted this very question for the decision of the central ..... .6. during the pendency of this appeal, the respondent governments filed an application alleging that the question whether the appellant had acquired the citizenship of pakistan had been decided by the central government by its order dated 8-7-1963, and asking this court to take this document .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-27-1967
Reported in : AIR1967SC1643; 1967(0)BLJR818; 2SCR762
..... both and the rights of the minorities and the backward classes are clearly laid down. this social document is headed by a preamble (preamble -wf, the people of india, having solemnly resolved to constitute india into a sovereign democratic republic and to secure all its citizens; justice, social, economical and political; liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; equality of ..... requirements of the particular state. there is no article in any of the constitutions referred to us similar to article 13(2) of our constitution. india adopted a different system altogether : it empowered the parliament to amend the constitution by the legislative process subject to fundamental rights. the indian constitution has made the amending process comparatively flexible, but it is made subject ..... that there was no constitutional guarantee against the alteration of boundaries of the states. by ..... so far as the federal character of the constitution is concerned it was held by this court in state of west bengal v. union of india : 1scr371 , that the federal structure is not an essential part of our constitution and there is no compact between the states and there is no dual citizenship in india. it was pointed out in that case .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : May-29-1967
..... of the texas house of representatives thus reported to the house that the amendment's first section "proposes to deprive the states of the right . . . to determine what shall constitute citizenship of a state, and to transfer that right to the federal government." its "object" was, they thought, "to declare negroes to be citizens of the united states." tex. ..... unfair, [ footnote 2/49 ] but congress evidently did not suppose that it was, or would be, unconstitutional. congress simply failed to attribute to the citizenship page 387 u. s. 288 clause the constitutional consequences now discovered by the court. [ footnote 2/50 ] nonetheless, the court urges that the debates which culminated in the expatriation act of 1868 materially support ..... have become naturalized citizens by virtue of acts of congress, a fortiori no act . . . of congress . . . page 387 u. s. 267 can affect citizenship acquired as a birthright, by virtue of the constitution itself. . . . the fourteenth amendment, while it leaves the power where it was before, in congress, to regulate naturalization, has conferred no authority upon congress to ..... support from theirs. in our country the people are sovereign and the government cannot sever its relationship to the people by taking away their citizenship. our constitution governs us and we must never forget that our constitution limits the government to those powers specifically granted or those that are necessary and proper to carry out the specifically granted ones. the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Apr-10-1967
..... of a dispute, page 386 u. s. 531 jurisdiction as lost. but chief justice marshall there purported to construe only "the words of the act of congress," not the constitution itself. [ footnote 6 ] and, in a variety of contexts, this court and the lower courts have concluded that article iii poses no obstacle to the legislative extension of federal ..... interpretation tacitly accepted by congress, persuade us that the statute requires no more. there remains, however, the question whether such a statutory construction is consistent with article iii of our constitution, which extends the federal judicial power to "controversies . . . between citizens of different states . . . and between a state or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects." in ..... the interpleader proceeding was not authorized by 28 u.s.c. 2361, the scope of the litigation being vastly more extensive than the deposited proceeds of the insurance policy which constituted the "fund." pp. 386 u. s. 533 -537. (a) this is not a case where the effect of the interpleader is to confine the litigation to a single ..... the federal courts have jurisdiction, since that provision requires only "minimal diversity," i.e., diversity of citizenship between two or more claimants, without regard to the circumstance that other rival claimants may be co-citizens, and "minimal diversity" is permissible under article iii of the constitution. pp. 386 u. s. 530 -531. 2. section 1335 authorizes interpleader where adverse claimants .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-21-1967
Reported in : AIR1968Bom219; (1967)69BOMLR871; 1967MhLJ954
..... either minister or chief minister, make any reference to deputy minister. the learned counsel also referred to original second schedule to the constitution of india, which in paragraph 6 in part b thereof made a provision for payment of salaries to ministers of any state specified in ..... to the provisions of the law and may also contain such supplemental, incidental and consequential provisions as the parliament may deem necessary. thus, the constitution itself has given express power to parliament to make law to make provision for consequential amendments, if any, for adaptations, if any, in respect ..... of maharastra and was therefore disqualified from being nominated to or becoming a member of the maharastra legislative assembly under article 191 of the constitution. his second ground of attack was that the respondent had himself used his office and taken help of government officials and vehicles to strengthen ..... so declared by a competent court; (c) if he is an undischarged insolvent; (d) if he is not a citizen of india, or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign state, or is under any acknowledgement of allegiance or adherence to a foreign state; (e) if he is disqualified ..... by or under any law made by parliament. (2) for the purposes of this article, a person shall not be deemed to hold an office of profit under the government of india .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : Jan-23-1967
..... it offered. it was stipulated that yet another witness would testify that petitioner opposed communism and was attached to the principles of the constitution. thus, we are confronted with the curious proposition that the speculations of one witness and the hazy memory of another witness as to ..... to the present case, for the petitioner makes no claim that any constitutional issues are involved here. different considerations do not govern merely because this is a naturalization case. when the government seeks to strip a person of citizenship already acquired, [ footnote 9 ] or deport a resident alien and ..... only by the trial court, the rule has particular force. to be sure, this court has not hesitated to undertake independent examination of factual issues when constitutional claims may depend on their resolution. see, e.g., napue v.illinois, 360 u. s. 264 , 360 u. s. 271 -272; fiske ..... the district court specifically refused to accept the government's contention that the petitioner was ineligible for naturalization under the statutory provisions barring communist party members from citizenship. see n 8, supra. mr. justice douglas, with whom the chief justice and mr. justice brennan concur, dissenting. in this case, we ..... the petition up to the time of admission to citizenship, and (3) during all the periods referred to in this subsection has been and still is a person of good moral character, attached to the principles of the constitution of the united states, and well disposed to the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-23-1967
Reported in : AIR1968MP29; 1968CriLJ172
..... able to verify his averment still in the circumstances the ruling of 1964 jab lj 53 (supra) has no application. the petitioner had accepted pa-kistanee citizenship and had come to india on a pakistanee passport with which he was still staying on for ten years in secret; the removal of the photograph only adds to that confusion.18. ..... v. man-gal sain, air 1961 sc 58. the other cases in which it has been held that migration properly so called has the result of taking away indian citizenship are state of bihar v. kumar amarsingh, air 1955 sc 282 and fateh mohommad v. delhi administration, air 1963 sc 1035.16. in the recent decision of the ..... or the guardian in these circumstances the theory that the migralion was volunlary cannol be accepted. if the migralion was voluntary then certainly the declaration of pakis-tanee citizenship was also voluntary and the petitioner is a pakistanee citizen.14. quite a quantity of case law has been placed by the parties but the general lines on ..... that has happened which will in lime be set out in some detail he is a citizen of india and therefore any action on the footing of his being a pakistanee national is ultra vires of the fundamental rights given by the constitution.3. the case has been argued at a very great length: but the questions for decision ..... krishnan, j.1. this is a petition under article 226 of the constitution for a writ of the nature of habeas corpus presented on 10-3-1966, by abdul gafoor who had been arrested on 27-2-1966 moving about .....Tag this Judgment!