Citizenship under the Indian Constitution [Part-II: Article 5-11]

1. Introduction #

Citizenship forms the legal bond between an individual and the State, signifying full membership in the political community. It determines who belongs to India and who enjoys the full range of constitutional rights, privileges, and obligations.

Under the Indian Constitution, citizenship is dealt with in Part II (Articles 5 to 11).
The framers consciously separated the concept of citizenship from nationality, ensuring that political allegiance rests with the Constitution and not with religion, race, or region.

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar stated in the Constituent Assembly:
“Every person who is born in India or who has his domicile in India must be treated as an Indian.”

2. Citizenship at the Commencement of the Constitution #

At the time the Constitution came into force on 26 January 1950, Articles 5 to 9 governed who would be an Indian citizen.

3. Modes of Acquisition of Citizenship (as per Citizenship Act, 1955) #

The Citizenship Act, 1955, enacted under Article 11, governs the detailed rules of citizenship after 1950.
It provides five modes of acquisition:

4. Termination of Citizenship #

Citizenship may cease in three ways under the Citizenship Act, 1955:

5. Constitutional Principles on Citizenship #

1. Single Citizenship:
   India follows single citizenship—all Indians are citizens of India only, irrespective of the state in which they reside.

   • Ensures unity, equality, and national integration.

   • Borrowed from the British model, unlike the USA which follows dual citizenship.

2. Secular and Non-Discriminatory Basis:

   • Citizenship is not based on religion or caste.

   • Articles 5–8 deliberately use neutral terms like “person” rather than “Hindu” or “Muslim.”

3. Dynamic Nature:

   • The Constitution left future citizenship matters to Parliament (Article 11) to adapt to changing social and political realities.

6. Judicial Interpretation and Case Laws #

(i) State of U.P. v. Rehmatullah (AIR 1971 SC 1382) #

Facts: The respondent claimed Indian citizenship despite his Pakistan passport.
Issue: Whether possession of a foreign passport terminates Indian citizenship.
Rule: Under Article 9, voluntary acquisition of foreign citizenship ends Indian citizenship.
Application: Having a Pakistan passport implies voluntary acceptance of foreign nationality.
Conclusion: The respondent ceased to be an Indian citizen.

Held: Possession of a foreign passport is conclusive evidence of foreign citizenship.

(ii) Izhar Ahmad Khan v. Union of India (AIR 1962 SC 1052) #

Facts: Certain individuals who migrated to Pakistan during Partition returned to India claiming citizenship.
Issue: Whether such persons are citizens under Articles 6 and 7.
Rule: Article 7 disqualifies persons who migrated to Pakistan unless they return under a valid permit.
Application: Mere return without a permit does not revive citizenship.
Conclusion: They were not citizens of India.

Held: Citizenship under Articles 6 and 7 depends upon migration and legal re-entry conditions.

(iii) Kehar Singh v. Union of India (AIR 1989 SC 653) #

Though primarily concerning Article 72 (Presidential clemency), the Court reaffirmed that citizenship carries not only rights but also duties — citizens owe allegiance to the State, which justifies constitutional obedience and responsibility.

7. Amendments and Contemporary Developments #

• 1986 Amendment: Tightened “citizenship by birth” — at least one parent must be an Indian citizen.

• 2003 Amendment: Introduced the concept of Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) and stricter norms for citizenship by registration.

• 2019 Amendment (CAA): Facilitated citizenship for non-Muslim minorities (Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis, Christians) from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh who entered India before 31 December 2014.

  • Controversial for its religious classification, leading to debates on secularism and equality (Articles 14 and 15).

8. Case Analysis (FIRAC): Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India (2005) 5 SCC 665 #

Facts:
The petitioner, a Member of Parliament from Assam, challenged the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983 (IMDT Act), arguing that it made the detection and deportation of illegal migrants—particularly from Bangladesh—virtually impossible. He contended that the Act violated the Constitution’s guarantees of equality (Article 14) and the State’s duty to protect its citizens (Article 355).

Issue:
Whether the IMDT Act was unconstitutional for being discriminatory and ineffective in dealing with illegal immigration, thereby threatening the security and integrity of India.

Rule:
Under Articles 14 and 355, the Union has a duty to protect states from external aggression and internal disturbances. Any law that undermines this obligation or discriminates in enforcement violates constitutional principles.

Application:
The Court found that the IMDT Act applied only to Assam, unlike other states where the Foreigners Act, 1946 applied. This resulted in unequal treatment of citizens and hindered national security efforts. The burden of proof placed on the State (instead of the suspected foreigner) was held to be irrational and contrary to established principles of law.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court struck down the IMDT Act, 1983, as unconstitutional. It held that uncontrolled illegal migration amounted to “external aggression” within the meaning of Article 355 and posed a threat to the sovereignty and integrity of India.

Held: Citizenship and immigration policies must uphold the principles of national integrity, equality, and constitutional duty under Article 355.

9. Constitutional Vision of Citizenship #

The framers envisioned a civic and territorial concept of citizenship, free from communal, racial, or regional distinctions.
Citizenship under the Indian Constitution is thus:

• Inclusive, not exclusive.

• Dynamic, adapting to social realities.

• Unified, ensuring single political identity.

“Citizenship in India is not a privilege of birth alone but a continuing bond of allegiance to the constitutional order.” — Dr. B. R. Ambedkar

10. Conclusion #

Citizenship under the Indian Constitution is the foundation of constitutional identity and political participation.
Through Articles 5–11 and the Citizenship Act, India balances the ideals of national unity, individual equality, and constitutional morality.

It remains a living and evolving concept, reflecting the tension between inclusion and national security, between historical continuity and modern challenges.

Lexmap #

“BORN – DESCENT – REGISTER – NATURALISE – TERRITORY”
(B-D-R-N-T → Five legal doors to Indian citizenship.)