The Allahabad High Court on September 2 chastised a petitioner for filing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directions to deprive former president of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) Students’ Union Kanhaiya Kumar of his citizenship.
The Court dismissed the petition with costs of Rs.25000/- on the petitioner.
A division bench of Justices Shashi Kant Gupta and Shamim Ahmed said that the petition was filed with the sole motive of gaining cheap publicity, without even going through the relevant provisions of the Constitution of India and the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955.
Petitioner Nageshwar Mishra said that despite the anti-national slogans raised by Kanhaiya Kumar, the Government of India was not taking any action to terminate his Indian Citizenship.
Mishra further argued that Kanhaiya Kumar and his associates are supporting the freedom struggle of terrorist groups who are working on the instigation of Pakistan to destabilize the unity and disturb the peace and tranquility of the country. He also referred to the sedition case against Kumar for alleged anti-national slogans raised on the JNU campus way back in 2016
“Keeping in view the anti-national activities, Kanhaiya Kumar be deprived of citizenship under Clause (2) of Section 10 of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955”, the petitioner argued.
The Court, however, opined that the petitioner before filing the present writ petition had neither gone through the provisions of the Constitution of India nor The Indian Citizenship Act, 1955.
It added Kumar was born in the territory of India, as such, by virtue of Article 5(a) of the Constitution of India, he was a citizen of India and could not be deprived of his citizenship, in as much as he has not become a citizen of India by naturalisation or by virtue only of clause (c) of Article 5 of the Constitution of India or by registration as provided under sub-section (1) of Section 10 the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955
The Court, thus, held the powers under sub-section (2) of Section 10 could not be invoked against him, since they were expressly subject to the provisions of Section 10 and could only be invoked for such citizens as provided for under Sub-section (1) of Section 10.
It added that the question of deprivation of citizenship could not arise, merely because Kumar is facing Trial before the Court in Delhi on charges of allegedly raising the inflammatory slogans.
The Court also said deprivation of citizenship is a serious aspect as it would affect a person’s right to live in India, and it may also result in making the person stateless.
The intention of the petitioner, in our opinion, is not to espouse the interest of the public, but only of his own self, by gaining publicity. Such conduct is highly condemnable. The present public interest litigation is wholly frivolous and an abuse of the process of law, the court said.
Read the Order
http://theleaflet.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/WPILA_801_2020.pdf
