Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Top Stories

Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Petition Challenging Section 8(2) Of Citizenship Act; Gives Liberty To Approach HC

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
3 Nov 2020 2:48 PM GMT
Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Petition Challenging Section 8(2) Of Citizenship Act; Gives Liberty To Approach HC
x

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain a writ petition which challenged the constitutionality of Section 8(2) of the Citizenship Act 1955.A bench headed by Justice L Nageswara Rao asked the petitioner to approach the High Court and granted permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to challenge the provision before the HCAs per Section 8(2), if a person renounces...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain a writ petition which challenged the constitutionality of Section 8(2) of the Citizenship Act 1955.

A bench headed by Justice L Nageswara Rao asked the petitioner to approach the High Court and granted permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to challenge the provision before the HC

As per Section 8(2), if a person renounces Indian citizenship, that will result in the renunciation of the citizenship of the minor child of that person. 

"Where a person ceases to be a citizen of India under sub-section(1) every minor child of that person shall cease to be a citizen of India", states the provision.

The constitutionality of this provision was challenged by a woman who was apprehending that her estranged husband was trying to renounce his Indian citizenship so as to cause the automatic renunciation of the citizenship of her daughter as well, by virtue of Section 8(2).

Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Anita Shenoy submitted that the husband's attempt to renounce Indian citizenship was with the aim to keep the daughter away from the jurisdiction of Indian courts, where matrimonial proceedings are pending.

Even if the petitioner succeeds in the Indian courts, the operation of Section 8(2) will defeat her interests, submitted the counsel.

However, the bench expressed at the outset itself that it was not inclined to entertain the matter and suggested that the petitioner should approach the concerned High Court.

Though Shenoy submitted that the matter was of pan-India importance requiring an authoritative pronouncement from the Supreme Court, the bench was not persuaded.

 The bench, also comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Ajay Rastogi, passed the following order :

"Ms. Anitha Shenoy, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners after arguing for some time, seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to challenge Section 8(2) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 before the High Court.

Permission granted.

Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty".

Click here to read/download the order



Next Story
Share it