Bombay High Court: Senior Citizen Who Entered India As Minor Can’t Be Rendered Stateless; Not An Illegal Migrant
The Bombay High Court directed the Deputy Collector to consider the Petitioner’s Application for Citizenship.
The Bombay High Court has held that a senior citizen who entered India as a minor child cannot be rendered Stateless, explaining that she is not an ‘illegal migrant.’
The Court directed the Deputy Collector (Respondent) to consider the Petitioner’s Application for Citizenship afresh in accordance with law. The Petitioner sought the quashing and setting aside of an Order by the Respondent which disposed of the Petitioner's application for grant of Indian Citizenship, stating that she does not fulfill the conditions of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955 (the Act).
A Division Bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Neela Gokhale held, “Admittedly, the Petitioner is not an ‘illegal migrant’. She has entered India as a minor, on valid documents of her mother and hence, her stay in India is not illegal. Ideally, the Petitioner ought to have taken steps to regularize her continued stay in India. Be that as it may, in the absence of any illegal act committed by the Petitioner; her husband and children holding valid Indian passport; the Petitioner herself now being a senior citizen having resided in India for the past 60 years, the Petitioner cannot be rendered stateless.”
Advocate Sumedh Ruikar appeared for the Petitioner, while Advocate Ajinkya Jaibhye represented the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Petitioner's case was that she was born in Uganda in 1955. Her parents held British passports, and she accompanied them to India in 1966, at the age of 10. She later married an Indian citizen with a valid Indian passport and had two children who are Indian by birth and held Indian passports.
It was submitted that the Petitioner first applied for an Indian passport in 1997 after submitting her mother's passport as travel documents but received no response. She applied again in 2008, but again received no response. A third application was made in 2012. Consequently, she made an online application for Indian Citizenship in 2019, submitting the necessary documents. However, her application was disposed of by the Respondent, who cited her stateless national status and incorrect visa details.
Court’s Observations
The High Court noted that the Petitioner was not an 'illegal migrant', as she entered India as a minor on valid documents of her mother, making her stay in India not illegal.
The Court stated that the Petitioner should have taken steps to regularise her continued stay in India.
However, considering the absence of any illegal act by the Petitioner, the fact that her husband and children hold valid Indian passports, and that the Petitioner was now a senior citizen who has resided in India for the past 60 years, the Court held that the Petitioner cannot be rendered stateless.
Consequently, the Court ordered, “In view of the aforesaid discussion, we remit the matter back to the Respondent No.3-Deputy Collector (GEN), Mumbai Suburban District, Mumbai to consider the Petitioner’s Application for Citizenship afresh in accordance with law. The Authority concerned is requested to decide the said matter within a period of three weeks from the date of uploading this order, uninfluenced by the earlier order dated 31st December 2019, impugned herein.”
Cause Title: Ila Jatin Popat v. The Union of India & Ors. (WRIT PETITION NO.3434 OF 2022)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Sumedh Ruikar, Aditya Chitale, Prathamesh Bhosale and Prashant Shetty
Respondents: Advocate Ajinkya Jaibhye; Government Pleader P.H. Kantharia
