Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
proflie-avatar
Login
exit_to_app
DEEP READ
Schools breeding hatred
access_time 14 Sep 2023 10:37 AM GMT
Ukraine
access_time 16 Aug 2023 5:46 AM GMT
Ramadan: Its essence and lessons
access_time 13 March 2024 9:24 AM GMT
exit_to_app
Homechevron_rightIndiachevron_rightSupreme Court grants...

Supreme Court grants 3-week time to reply on pleas challenging CAA

text_fields
bookmark_border
Supreme Court grants 3-week time to reply on pleas challenging CAA
cancel

The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Centre regarding the Citizenship (Amendment) Act Rules, following applications challenging its implementation. The three-judge bench, presided over by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, also entertained petitions challenging the 2019 Citizenship (Amendment) Act.

While the Court declined to pass any order staying the operation of the rules, it granted the Centre time until April 2 to file its response. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, highlighted that there are a total of 236 petitions challenging the Act and 20 applications challenging the Rules. He urged the court for four weeks to file a comprehensive reply.

Mehta emphasized that the Act and Rules do not revoke the citizenship of any individual. He clarified that only individuals who entered the country before 2014 are being considered for citizenship under the provisions.

However, the bench cautioned Mehta against delving into the merits of the case without giving the petitioners a chance to present their arguments. Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, representing one of the petitioners, urged the Court to halt the granting of citizenship until the final adjudication of the matter or to make any citizenship granted under the Rules subject to the outcome of the petitions.

The Court, however, declined to pass such an order, pointing out the absence of necessary infrastructure for implementing the Act and Rules. Chief Justice Chandrachud highlighted the lack of district-empowered committees and central-empowered committees, emphasizing the need for proper mechanisms before any decision could be made.

Despite the plea from Jaising, the Court refrained from intervening, stressing the importance of procedural requirements.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing another petitioner, sought liberty to approach the Court in case of any adverse developments. The bench granted this request, ensuring that the petitioners have the freedom to seek judicial recourse if needed.

The matter is set to be heard on April 9, when both the Centre and the petitioners will present their arguments before the Court. This development underscores the ongoing legal battle surrounding the contentious Citizenship (Amendment) Act and its associated Rules, which have been subject to intense scrutiny and debate since their enactment.

Show Full Article
TAGS:Citizenship Amendment Act
Next Story