Introduction
The country was divided into two pieces, one of which was India and the other was Pakistan, whenever a case for autonomy was made. People were granted the freedom to emigrate to any nation to match their ethnicity. In this way, the situation called for strict measures to lay out India’s identity policy prior to the start of the constitution. The clause granting certain immigrants from Pakistan to India the right to citizenship is enshrined in Article 6.
What is stated in Article 6?
Citizenship rights of some people who immigrated to India from Pakistan Regardless of what is stated in Article 5, a person who immigrated to India from a region that is currently part of Pakistan will be considered an Indian citizen at the time this Constitution takes effect if
(a) He was born in India in accordance with the definition of that country in the Government of India Act, 1935 (as originally passed); and
(b)
(i) in the event that such a person migrated in this manner prior to July 19th, 1948, he has been regularly residing in the Indian subcontinent since the date of his migration, or
(ii) in the case where such person migrated on or after the nineteenth day of July, 1948, he has been registered as a citizen of India by an officer appointed in that regard by the Government of the Dominion of India on an application made by him therefor to such officer prior to the beginning of this Constitution in the form and manner prescribed by that Government: Provided, however, that no person shall be so registered unless he has been resident in the territory of India.
Significant cases involving Article 6
1-In this section, the term “relocated” was defined for the case of Kulathil Mammu v. Province of Kerela. The word was thought to imply a permanent departure from India to Pakistan.
2-In the case of State of Bihar v. Kumar Amar Singh, the wife abandoned her partner and traveled to Karachi. She claimed that she had short traveled to Karachi for medical attention. She eventually returned to India at that moment and was permitted to stay after stating that she was a resident of Pakistan. Then, following the end of the time period, she returned to Pakistan. When her property in India was going to be taken into custody, she needed to obtain the permanent citizenship of India.She will not be granted permanent citizenship because she moved before the date specified in the agreement, it was decided.
3-In the case of State of U.P. v. Rehmatullah, it was decided that the Central Government has the right to take action against people who have obtained foreign citizenship and lost their Indian citizenship but are still residing in the nation.
4-During the Ebrahim Vazir Mavat v. State of Bombay lawsuit, the sanctity of the inundation under the Pakistan Control Act, 1949 was argued. According to this law, a person who has a house in either India or Pakistan is not permitted to enter the territory of either nation without authorization. Additionally, anyone who deviates from the norm will be held accountable for the offense outlined in the presentation. According to Section 7, the Central Government may refuse citizenship to a person for a specific reason.
Article 6 of the Indian Constitution addresses the immigration of a person from Pakistan who, at the time of India’s division and Pakistan’s declaration of independence on January 26, 1950, was considered to be an Indian citizen.