Allahabad High Court Directs Centre To Decide Plea Claiming Ex-Chinese National Obtained Indian Citizenship By Fraud

A bench of Justice Shekhar B Saraf and Justice Indrajeet Shukla passed the order on a writ petition filed by the Maha Bodhi Society of India.

The petitioner has alleged that the respondent no. 6 (a former national of China and now a citizen of India by naturalisation) obtained the certificate of naturalisation through fraud, false representation and the concealment of material facts.

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Ministry of Home Affairs to immediately take action on its application. The petitioner claimed that the certificate of naturalisation was obtained fraudulently within the meaning of Section 10(2)(a) of the Citizenship Act, 1955.

Relying on Section 10(3) of the Act, the petitioner argued that the continuation of the respondent as a citizen of India is not conducive to the public good.

Thus, it was prayed that action be taken against the respondent No.6 as per Section 10 of the 1955 Act, which provided for the entire procedure for depriving a person of citizenship.

During the hearing, the Deputy Solicitor General of India submitted that it would be appropriate for the petitioner to make an application before the Collector, who would thereafter forward a report to the State Government, which would, in turn, be forwarded to the Central Government for action.

However, upon perusing the relevant sections and rules, the bench observed that the application made by the petitioner was required to be entertained and action should be undertaken by the authorities directly.

"If the application has material, it would be incumbent upon the Central Government to initiate an inquiry as provided under Section 10 of the Citizenship Act, 1955. On the other hand, if no material is present in the application made by the petitioner, the Central Government may pass an order of rejection supported by appropriate reasons", the bench stated.

The division bench stated that if the application has material, it would be incumbent upon the Central Government to initiate an inquiry as provided under Section 10. On the other hand, the bench said, if no material is present in the application made by the petitioner, the Central Government may pass an order of rejection supported by appropriate reasons.

The Court directed the Central Government to act in accordance with the law and decide the application by a reasoned order within 4 weeks.

The bench further directed that in the event the Central Government chooses to initiate an inquiry, it shall strictly follow the procedure provided under Rules 25, 26, and 27 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009, and give proper notice to the respondent as per law.

With this, the writ plea was disposed of.