Mumbai: A person does not become a citizen of India merely by possessing documents like Aadhaar card, PAN card or a voter ID, the Bombay High Court said on Tuesday, while refusing bail to a man, allegedly from Bangladesh, for entering India illegally.
The man is accused of staying in India for more than a decade with forged and fabricated documents.
A bench of Justice Amit Borkar said provisions of the Citizenship Act lay down who can be a citizen of India and how citizenship can be acquired and documents such as the Aadhaar card, PAN card and voter ID are only meant for identification or availing services.
The court refused bail to Babu Abdul Ruf Sardar, alleged to be a Bangladeshi national, who entered India illegally without a valid passport or travel documents. He allegedly procured forged Indian documents such as Aadhaar card, PAN card, voter ID and also an Indian passport.
In 1955, Parliament passed the Citizenship Act which created a permanent and complete system for acquiring citizenship, Justice Borkar noted.
“In my opinion, the Citizenship Act of 1955 is the main and controlling law for deciding questions about nationality in India today. This is the statute that lays down who can be a citizen, how citizenship can be acquired and in what situations it can be lost,” he said.
“Merely having documents such as Aadhaar card, PAN card or voter ID does not, by itself, make someone a citizen of India. These documents are meant for identification or availing services, but they do not override the basic legal requirements of citizenship as prescribed in the Citizenship Act,” the HC said.
The law draws a clear line between lawful citizens and illegal migrants, the bench said.
People falling in the category of illegal migrants are barred from obtaining citizenship through most of the legal routes mentioned in the Citizenship Act, it added.
“This distinction is important because it protects the sovereignty of the country and ensures that benefits and rights meant for citizens are not wrongfully taken by those who have no legal status to stay in India,” the court said.
The bench, while refusing bail to Sardar, noted that verification of his documents was still on and the investigation was also still continuing, and the police’s fear that he may abscond if granted bail is a genuine apprehension.
The allegations in the case are not small and it is not just about staying in India without permission or overstaying, but it is about making and using fake and forged identity documents with the aim of pretending to be an Indian citizen, the HC said.
Sardar was booked under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Passport (Entry to India) Act and the Foreigners Order.
The court noted the investigation in the case is still going on with regard to genuineness of the Aadhaar card, which is being verified by the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).
Sardar in his bail plea said he was a bona fide citizen of India and that there was no conclusive or reliable evidence to prove he is a national of Bangladesh.
He further claimed his documents are linked with his income tax records and business registration and that he has been residing in Mumbai’s neighbouring Thane district since 2013.
The prosecution opposed the plea, claiming if the accused was released on bail, he may abscond.
The police further said a probe was on to ascertain if there was a larger organised network involving illegal immigration and identity fraud.
The court in its order noted the allegations against Sardar are not limited to a mere technical violation of immigration norms, but indicate a case of deliberate concealment of identity and creation of forged documents for obtaining the Indian citizenship benefits.
When the Constitution of India was being drafted, the country had just gone through a historic transformation and the partition at the time caused a massive movement of people across borders, creating a need to decide who would be accepted as citizens of the new nation, it noted.
Keeping this in mind, framers of the Constitution decided to make an arrangement for deciding citizenship, the high court said.
The Constitution laid down provisions which gave immediate clarity on who would be considered a citizen at the very beginning of the Republic and it gave the elected Parliament the powers to make laws on citizenship in future, the court noted.
