Wether CAA is Constitutional or not ? |By: Anjali from Lovely Professional University


The government has the power to make laws for people.CAA is one of them which was first introduced in 2016,and in 2019 it was passed by parliament. It is applicable only for Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Buddhist, Parsi and Christian foreigners, who have migrated from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan into India up to 31.12. 2014, on account of religious persecution.

The CAA is perfectly legal and Constitutional or not…. Under Article 246 of the Constitution, the Parliament has got the exclusive power to make laws with respect to any matters listed in the list one in 7thSchedule.The Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (hereafter ‘CAA’) amends the Citizenship Act, 1955 so as to grant a certain class of illegal migrants a path to Indian citizenship.


*The objective of CAA is to make eligible to make sure the citizenship of person who faced persecution on the ground of religion.

*The law paves way to grant Indian citizenship to certain classes of illegal immigrants from neighbouring countries.

*India is an independent, secular, and peace-loving nation.India is the one nation in the world that has been able to justify the motto of ‘Unity in Diversity’. Maybe this is the reason why people from many nations want Indian Citizenship.

Argument in favour:

  • No discrimination:The government said that this amendment act has not discriminate between people,and there is no inequality.The  Parliament has only got sovereign powers to legislate or make laws on Citizenship.
  • Equality: Article 14, that is equality before law and equal protection before law.Everyone is equal in the eyes of law.Therefore, this CAA does not relate to any Indian,not even Muslims. Neither does it create any citizenship to them nor takes it away.
  • No dispute between people on the bases of religion: The citizenship of a country is presently based on similar principles followed in almost all countries governed by the rule of law.  Citizenship is acquired by birth, descent, naturalisation or by acquisition of territories.If a person acquire citizenship by legal method which is prescribed by government then there is no dispute.

The government , however, maintains that bill aims to grant Citizenship to minorities who have faced religious persecution in Muslim majority foreign countries.


  • Violation of fundamental rights:*The fundamental criticism of this bill has been that it specifically targets Muslims community. Critics argue that it is the violation of Article 14 of the Indian constitution,that is right to equality.
  • Oppose by North East States: The North-east states are against this bill as they believe it wil lead to a greater influx of illegal migrants. In North East States,the prospect of citizenship for massive numbers of illegal Bangladeshi migrants has triggered deep anxieties, including fears of demographics change,loss of many opportunities,and livelihood,erosion of the indigenous culture.
  • Stress on natural resources: Increase in illegal migrants it stress on natural resources and it is also dangerous for national security.
  • Discrimination between Hindus and Muslims: In this way , people said it is discrimination between people so, India doesn’t call them a  “secular state”. The citizenship to illegal migrants only of six communities .It also lower the qualification period for Indian citizenship from eleven to five years.

This act was widely criticized as discrimination on the basis of religion.

View points:

  • It has check on entry, exit and resistance of foreigners or illegal migrants of six communities.
  • It will enable a person who doesn’t have proof of birth of his parents in support of his being of Indian origin to apply for citizenship by naturalisation on completion of six years residency.
  • All cases against a non Muslim illegal migrants before any authority, included foreigners tribunals or courts,shall stand abated. The courts are less burden. Many cases resolve and it low the burden of courts.
  • Some people are supposed CAA because they said they want to protect their culture and religion.But people also criticized it on the basis of violation of fundamental rights and secularism which is the basic structure of the constitution of India. It harms the feeling of people.

“CAA is like double edged sword,it have benefits as well as damages also.”


After the Bill was passed,the Indian union Muslim league filed a petition under article 32 of the Indian constitution challenging the constitutionality of CAA. Soon various other litigants followered and there are around 250 or more than petitions tagged to IUML petition.

The parliament has unfractured powers to make laws for the country when it comes to Citizenship. But the opposition and other political parties allege this Act by the Government violates some of the basic features of the constitution like secularism and equality.

It may reach the doors of the Supreme Court where the Supreme Court will be the “final interpreter”. If it violates the constitutional features it will be struck down, if it is not we will continue to have the law.







Author Details:

Name:Anjali |Course: LL.B |Semester: First Semester |Lovely Professional University

University: Lovely Professional Univer

Leave a Reply