CITIZENSHIP

●​ Two critical domains of citizenship:​

Citizens as voters – democratic logic of popular sovereignty.​
Citizenship as tied to territorial sovereignty – controlling migration and movement across borders.​

Constitutional Framework of Citizenship

●​ Basis of Citizenship at the Republic’s commencement:​

○​ Birth, descent, and domicile formed the foundation.​

○​ Citizens included:​

■​ Anyone domiciled in India.​

■​ Anyone born in India.​

■​ Anyone born abroad to Indian citizens.​

○​ Constitution also recognized those who crossed over from Pakistan or returned to India intending
permanent settlement.​

●​ Borders: rigid yet flexible:​

○​ Physical borders were established instantly.​

○​ Temporally, however, citizenship rules allowed flexibility to accommodate migration flows.​

○​ Key dates:​

■​ 19 July 1948 – deadline: Those who returned to India after initially migrating to Pakistan had
to apply to a government officer.​

■​ Those who migrated to Pakistan before 1 March 1947 could return with a permit of
permanent return.​

5. Later Amendments to the Citizenship Act

●​ 1985 (Post-Assam Accord):​

○​ Cut-off date: 24 March 1971.​

○​ Anyone entering Assam from Bangladesh after 1 January 1966 could apply for citizenship; but those
after 1971 were excluded.​

●​ 2019 Amendment (CAA):​

○​ Cut-off: 31 December 2014.​

○​ Applies to Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis fleeing religious persecution in
Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Pakistan.​

○​ Such persons no longer treated as illegal migrants and could apply for Indian citizenship.​

6. Cross-Border Territorial Settlements

 ●​ 2015 (119th Amendment to the Constitution):​

○​ Reflected India-Bangladesh Land Boundary Agreement.​

○​ Exchange of enclaves:​

■​ India gave 111 enclaves in Bangladesh; Bangladesh gave 51 enclaves in India.​

○​ Citizenship implications:​

■​ Residents of Indian enclaves in Bangladesh could either:​

■​ Stay in Bangladesh and adopt Bangladeshi citizenship, or​

■​ Move to India to retain Indian citizenship.

4. Interregnum Periods in Citizenship Law

●​ Citizenship as a legal category emerged in two transitional (interregnum) periods:​

○​ 1947–1950: Between the formation of the Indian nation-state and the commencement of the
Constitution.​

○​ 1950–1955: Between the enforcement of the Constitution and the enactment of the Citizenship Act,
1955.​

●​ Nature of the interregnum (1950–1955):​

○​ Generated liminal spaces of indeterminate citizenship.​

○​ Constitution (1950): opened up closures caused by drawing of territorial boundaries (allowed some
flexibility).​

○​ Citizenship Act (1955): attempted to bring legibility and finality for those in uncertain positions.​

Perfect, I see what you mean 🤍

— you don’t just want bullet skeletons, you want them fleshed out into full
explanations with context, analysis, and flow, so that you really understand citizenship in India for exams (instead of
rote memory).

I’ll expand the reference points into a well-developed study guide. I’ll draw from the Anupama Roy reading you
uploaded + Constitution + Citizenship Act + political/legal context.

📘 Citizenship in India – Expanded Notes (Module 3)

1️⃣ Why Citizenship Rules Matter
●​ Citizenship = membership of the political community.​
It decides who belongs and who doesn’t. This isn’t just a legal label: it determines access to rights (vote,
welfare, property, residence, etc.) and participation in the nation’s democratic life.​

●​ Citizenship defines the nation itself.​

The way India sets citizenship rules reflects how it sees its identity — inclusive (open to anyone born here)
or exclusive (based on ancestry, blood, or religion).​

●​ Example: Partition → Who counts as Indian? Hindus fleeing Pakistan were welcomed, but Muslims who
went and returned were treated differently. This shows that law is not neutral — it reflects political
compulsions.​
2️⃣ Norm vs Politics in Citizenship
●​ Normative (principled): Citizenship should ideally be based on equality, fairness, and human dignity (e.g.,
jus soli at independence was inclusive).​

●​ Political (pragmatic/biased): In reality, laws are shaped by social tensions, Partition, Assam migration,
Hindu–Muslim questions.​

👉 Citizenship law in India is a hybrid — sometimes presented as neutral rules, but in practice deeply political.

3️⃣ Constitutional Framework (Articles 5–11)

Article 5 – Broad and Inclusive

●​ Domicile in India + (birth in India / parent born here / 5 yrs residence) = citizen.​

●​ No discrimination. Seen as the true normative vision of citizenship at independence.​

●​ “Domicile” means intent to stay permanently.​

Article 6 – Pakistani Migrants

●​ If migrated before 19 July 1948 → only need ancestor proof.​

●​ If after that date → need residence + certificate.​

●​ Shows tightening of law over time.​

Article 7 – Indians who migrated to Pakistan but returned

●​ If left India for Pakistan after 1 March 1947, lost Indian citizenship.​

●​ Could regain only via special permit of resettlement.​

●​ Implicit bias: affected mostly Muslims → Partition politics.​

Articles 8–10 – Overseas citizens, continuity, etc. (not controversial).

Article 11 – Parliamentary Power

●​ Parliament has full power to make/amend citizenship law.​

●​ Important: Constitution gave temporary framework (Articles 5–10), but intended flexibility for Parliament.​

●​ This explains why citizenship law keeps evolving.​

4️⃣ Citizenship Act, 1955 + Amendments

Section 3 – Citizenship by Birth

●​ 1950–1987 → Jus soli (anyone born in India = citizen).​

●​ 1987–2003 → Jus soli restricted (at least one parent citizen).​

 ●​ 2003 onwards → Jus sanguinis tilt (both parents must be citizens, or one citizen + the other not an “illegal
migrant”).​

●​ Shows shift from inclusive to restrictive.​

Section 6A – Assam Accord (1985)

●​ Response to Assam’s agitation about Bangladeshi migrants.​

●​ Cut-off dates:​

○​ Before 1966 → full citizens.​

○​ 1966–1971 → allowed to stay, citizenship after 10 yrs.​

○​ After 1971 → illegal migrants, never citizens.​

●​ NRC (National Register of Citizens) stems from this.​

●​ Burden of proof = on individual.​

👉
●​ Couldn’t rely on voter rolls/land records.​
Created a bureaucratic nightmare → millions excluded.​

Section 6 – Naturalisation

●​ Usual requirements: residence, knowledge of language, good character.​

●​ BUT religion-based relaxations exist → e.g., later reinforced by CAA (2019).​

Section 8A (short-lived)

●​ Special focus on Hindu migrants.​

●​ First sign of religion-based preference in law.​

5️⃣ Contemporary Shifts – NRC + CAA

NRC (Assam)

●​ Document-based verification of ancestry.​

●​ “Legacy data” → 1951 NRC + 1971 voter rolls.​

●​ People had to prove ancestry with multiple linked documents.​

●​ Even valid IDs (like voter cards, PAN) rejected if not tied to pre-1971 records.​

👉
●​ High Court rulings: blood ties had to be proven via “public” documents, not oral testimony.​
Shift from citizenship as political equality → technical genealogy exercise.​

CAA 2019

●​ Fast-track citizenship for Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis from Pakistan, Bangladesh,
Afghanistan (if entered before 2014).​

●​ Excludes Muslims.​

●​ First time religion explicitly introduced into Indian citizenship law.​

 ●​ Breaks from secular principle of Constitution.​

●​ Critics: “installs an exclusionary nationhood under veneer of liberalism.”​

6️⃣ Jus Soli vs Jus Sanguinis in India

●​ At independence (1950): India = broad jus soli (inclusive, anyone born here).​

●​ After 1987: restrictions begin → one parent must be Indian.​

●​ After 2003: exclusion of children of “illegal migrants.”​

●​ Now: closer to jus sanguinis (blood/descent-based) + religion filters (CAA).​

👉 India has moved from inclusive to restrictive citizenship.

7️⃣ Theories & Debates on Citizenship

Classical Theory

●​ Citizenship = political equality, participation in democratic life.​

Humanist Theory

●​ Citizenship = extension of human dignity; all humans entitled to equality.​

Reality

●​ Citizenship = selective inclusion/exclusion. Law reflects power + politics.​

8️⃣ State, Nation & Identity

●​ India as a State-Nation:​

○​ One state, but many ways of belonging (language, region, religion).​

○​ Citizenship law = tool to manage diversity.​

●​ Constitutional Identity (debated):​

○​ Romantic (Murphy): Identity tied to founding principles (liberal, secular).​

○​ Existentialist (Ackerman): Identity is fluid, redefined by each generation.​

○​ Dialogical (Charles Taylor): Identity shaped by dialogue with community/history.​

👉 Citizenship in India = tension between fixed founding values (secular, democratic) and shifting politics of
belonging (Partition, migration, religion).

9️⃣ Exam-Ready Insights

 ●​ Citizenship in India has never been just neutral law → it’s always tied to Partition politics, migration
fears, and communal undertones.​

●​ The shift from jus soli → jus sanguinis shows move from inclusive belonging → restricted,
ancestry-based belonging.​

●​ Assam NRC + CAA mark turning points: NRC = genealogy-based exclusion; CAA = religion-based
inclusion/exclusion.​

●​ Underlying tension: legal status vs identity and belonging.​

●​ The key question: Is India defining itself as a liberal secular republic (Article 5 vision) or as a bounded
ethnocultural nation (post-2003, CAA 2019 vision)?​

✨ Okay, that’s the expanded, full-context guide. This will cover theory + constitutional law + statutory
evolution + political context.

Do you want me to now make a visual comparative table (Constitution vs Act vs Assam Accord vs CAA) so you
can revise super fast before exams?