They Will Get A Right To Vote: Indira Jaising's Objection To Granting Citizenship To Hindus From Balochistan Pending Hearing Of Challenge To CAA

Today, during the hearing of pleas challenging the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) and Citizenship (Amendment) Rules, 2024, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising opposed the grant of Citizenship to Hindus from Balochistan under the CAA on the ground that "they will get a right to vote."

Indira Jaising's objection came when the Supreme Court was told by the lawyer for Balochistan Hindu Panchayat that granting citizenship to Hindus from Balochistan will not affect anyone else's rights.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar, appearing for the respondent, submitted, "I am from Balochistan. I have come here before 2014. We are the Balochistan Hindu Panchayat. I came here before 2014 because I was being prosecuted there. Now, My Lord, if Citizenship is being granted to me here because I am a Hindu from Balochistan. I ask myself only, How does it affect anybody else's Rights?"

Jaising, appearing for a Petitioner, immediately responded by saying, "No! They will get the right to vote; that's how it affects. They'll get the right to vote."

However, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, also appearing for a petitioner challenging the CAA, interjected saying, "No, No, I am not on that."

"I am on that. They will get the right to vote", Indira Jaising persisted.

During the hearing, Jaising strongly pressed for an interim order from the Court restraining the Center from granting citizenship to anyone under the CAA during the pendency of the cases. "In the meantime, let them make a statement that they will not grant Citizenship to anybody", she told the Court when the Center sought time to file pleadings.

However, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta refused, saying, "No, no, we are not making any statement."

To this, CJI said, "They are not willing to make any statement. Therefore, we have kept it in April."

Indira Jaising also sought an interim order making any citizenship granted during the pendency of the matter subject to the outcome of the matter, on the ground that citizenship once granted cannot be taken back. However, the Court refused to pass any such order.

The Bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra today adjourned pleas to April 9 for the Centre to file its counter affidavit to applications for stay. The Bench refused to pass any interim order, staying the grant of citizenship until then.

In October 2022, the Centre had urged the Supreme Court to dismiss pleas challenging the validity of the CAA, stressing that the law does not encourage "illegal migration" in Assam or any future influx of foreigners in the country. It had also vehemently defended the exclusion of certain areas of Assam and other Northeastern states from the application of the CAA, saying it had been done to "protect the ethnic/linguistic rights" of the natives and that this was "not discriminatory."

Cause Title: Indian Union of Muslim League vs. Union Of India and Connected matters [W.P. (C) No. 1470/2019]