During the hearing of the matter today, Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde appearing for an intervenor, opposed the petitions
He said that citizenship is something that has far-reaching ramifications.
Senior Advocate CU Singh, appearing for another intervenor, argued that Section 6A does not violate Article 14 of the petitioners and may be treated as citizenship by naturalisation as it is based on continuous residence in Assam.
“Citizens of east and west Pakistan were not eligible through this route. In 1971, Bangladesh was not a part of Pakistan and was a friendly nation then. It was no longer Pakistan. We were the midwives who gave birth to that nation. Bangladesh was a sort of a successor,” he said.
Senior Advocate Salman Khurshid appearing for the Assam Jamiat Ulema E Hind, argued that the provision provides a separate solution that was needed for the State of Assam in the circumstances which were prevailing in the State at that time.
Advocate Shadan Farasat argued that the protection of culture of an area cannot be elevated to the extent of denying nationality to others, as the citizenry then moves from civic nationalism to cultural nationalism.
Source: Barandbench
