In 10 points, Supreme Court hearing on Citizenship Act petitions explained
The scores of petition challenging and supporting the revamped citizenship law is being heard by the Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice Sanjiv Khanna.Updated: Jan 22, 2020 12:57 IST
The Supreme Court bench on Wednesday stated that there will be no stay on the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) until the Centre is heard on the matter. The three-judge bench was hearing 144 petitions challenging the amended Citizenship act after a jam-packed room delayed the proceedings.
The scores of petition challenging and supporting the revamped citizenship law was heard by the Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice Sanjiv Khanna. While most of the petitions challenge the constitutional validity of CAA, some of them seek a declaration that the act is constitutional.
Follow are the highlights from the big hearing:
• Hearing begins after a delay due to jam-packed room.
• Attorney General Venugopal says there are 140 odd petitions but only 60 petitions have been served on union.
• Senior counsel Kapil Sibal says matter might have to be heard by Constitution Bench. Sibal further states that the process to grant citizenship should be postponed for two or three months while the court hears the case. To which, the Attorney General opposes grant of any interim relief saying centre should be heard before any interim order is passed.
Also Watch l ‘Won’t withdraw CAA; challenge opposition leaders for a debate’: Amit Shah
• Sibal says postpone process under the Act but the Attorney General argued that postponing CAA is as good as a stay. “Fix a date and we will argue it,” AG said.
• Senior advocate KV Viswanathan says postponing implementation of process is not same as stay. “If in NPR anybody is marked as doubtful, then that person could be disenfranchised and that is the concern. It is not a concern of minority alone but of majority as well,” says Vishwanathan.
• AG Venugopal says there should be no more petitions allowed. SG Tushar Mehta says the way out is to allow filing of intervention applications in writ petitions which have already been filed. Court asks Centre when they will file response to the petitions relating to Assam to which Centre asks for two weeks.”Then we will list the matter after two weeks,” says CJI Bobde.
• Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for petitions challenging the act says in 19 districts in UP, people have been marked as doubtful. “If the process could wait for 70 years, can it not wait for 2 more months,” Singhvi.
• Taking into consideration the situation in Assam, the court directs that the petitions from Assam to be segragated from rest. Kapil Sibal to submits list of Assam petitions to court.
• Senior advocate Shyam Divan says court should at least stay issuance of final registration certificates.
• CJI Bobde says won’t pass any orders now and will list the matter after four weeks. Centre has been given four weeks time to file its response.