The Karnataka High Court today agreed to hear a petition challenging the constitutional validity of the controversial Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA)..A Division Bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar stated that High Court would take up the case as there was no specific order from the Supreme Court barring it from hearing the matter.In December last year, the Supreme Court had issued notice in 60 petitions challenging the CAA.Justice Oka observed today,."In case of maintainability of RERA Act, the Supreme Court had stated that only one high court in the country would first decide the maintainability of the act. As there is no specific order from the Supreme Court barring us from taking up the matter, we will hear the case."Karnataka HC on agreeing to hear the petition against CAA.The matter will be taken up for preliminary hearing on February 25.The plea has been filed by Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and Human Rights Forum (HRF), among others. Advocate Sirajuddin Ahmed will appear on behalf of the petitioners.The petition states that for the first time, religion has been introduced as a reference point for the acquisition of Indian citizenship for illegal/undocumented migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan. This is kind of classification is against the concept of secularism that has been envisaged in the Indian Constitution, the plea states.."Citizenship is being extended to certain a Class of illegal/undocumented migrants belonging to the religion of Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians coming from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Such classification on the basis of religious identity of the individual clearly violates Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Moreover, the classification based on the religious identity of the individual offends the fundamental principle of ‘Secularism’, which is enshrined as basic structure of the Constitution."Petition challenging the validity of CAA.The petition further states that the classification made under the Act is without any intelligible differentia and that there is no rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved i.e., religious persecution.."The impugned Act is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as the proviso in Clause (b) of Sub-Section(1) of Section 2 inserted in the Principal Act suffers from the classification based only on religion. This classification is highly impermissible and discriminatory. It is without any intelligible differentia and rational nexus with the apparent object of classification. Muslims are discriminated even in the case that they come to India due to religious persecution."Petition challenging the validity of CAA.The petition concludes by observing that if the true object of the CAA is to protect the religious minorities who faced religious persecution in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, then the most deserving 'Ahmaddiyya and Shia sections from these countries' should have found a place in the Act.Pleas challenging the Citizenship Amendment Act have been filed before various courts across the country - right from the Supreme Court to the lower courts. The petitions range from appeals for protection from the State to restricting protests sans State permission. Even as the matters remain pending before the courts, widespread protests are taking place across the country.
The Karnataka High Court today agreed to hear a petition challenging the constitutional validity of the controversial Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA)..A Division Bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar stated that High Court would take up the case as there was no specific order from the Supreme Court barring it from hearing the matter.In December last year, the Supreme Court had issued notice in 60 petitions challenging the CAA.Justice Oka observed today,."In case of maintainability of RERA Act, the Supreme Court had stated that only one high court in the country would first decide the maintainability of the act. As there is no specific order from the Supreme Court barring us from taking up the matter, we will hear the case."Karnataka HC on agreeing to hear the petition against CAA.The matter will be taken up for preliminary hearing on February 25.The plea has been filed by Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and Human Rights Forum (HRF), among others. Advocate Sirajuddin Ahmed will appear on behalf of the petitioners.The petition states that for the first time, religion has been introduced as a reference point for the acquisition of Indian citizenship for illegal/undocumented migrants from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan. This is kind of classification is against the concept of secularism that has been envisaged in the Indian Constitution, the plea states.."Citizenship is being extended to certain a Class of illegal/undocumented migrants belonging to the religion of Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians coming from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Such classification on the basis of religious identity of the individual clearly violates Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Moreover, the classification based on the religious identity of the individual offends the fundamental principle of ‘Secularism’, which is enshrined as basic structure of the Constitution."Petition challenging the validity of CAA.The petition further states that the classification made under the Act is without any intelligible differentia and that there is no rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved i.e., religious persecution.."The impugned Act is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as the proviso in Clause (b) of Sub-Section(1) of Section 2 inserted in the Principal Act suffers from the classification based only on religion. This classification is highly impermissible and discriminatory. It is without any intelligible differentia and rational nexus with the apparent object of classification. Muslims are discriminated even in the case that they come to India due to religious persecution."Petition challenging the validity of CAA.The petition concludes by observing that if the true object of the CAA is to protect the religious minorities who faced religious persecution in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh, then the most deserving 'Ahmaddiyya and Shia sections from these countries' should have found a place in the Act.Pleas challenging the Citizenship Amendment Act have been filed before various courts across the country - right from the Supreme Court to the lower courts. The petitions range from appeals for protection from the State to restricting protests sans State permission. Even as the matters remain pending before the courts, widespread protests are taking place across the country.
