India legal 30 march 2020

Coronavirus Plagues the Court System 
Judges and lawyers in courts are struggling to dispense justice even as the fear of transmission of the virus takes hold. India Legal’s special package looks at measures being taken by the Supreme Court and High Courts across the country and how it affects the justice system. 

1. NDIA EGAL L
STORIES THAT COUNT

I
March 30, 2020
Judges and lawyers in courts are struggling to dispense justice even as the fear of transmission of
the virus takes hold.
India Legal’s special package looks at measures being taken by the Supreme
Court and High Courts across the country and how it affects the justice system
Coronavirus Plagues
The Court System
Special Supplement:
The Idea of Citizenship
Analysing SC’s Annual Report:
Prof Upendra Baxi

4. 4March 30, 2020
E are living in extraordinary ti -
mes, facing existential questions
of life and death and absorbing
new words like “social distanc-
ing’’ and “lockdown’’ into our
daily existence. The overall atmosphere is one of
fear, fear of the unknown, fear of discrimination.
Even as we as individuals and a society struggle
to understand and react to the dangers of exclu-
sion and isolation provoked by Covid-19, there is
a question that has been haunting many of our
countrymen and women for some time now, and
it concerns the issue of citizenship.
Our cover story in this issue examines how
the Judiciary is coping with the outbreak of
Covid-19 and imposing restrictions which will
cripple the dispensation of justice, but we also
have an equally compelling analysis to do with
the concept of citizenship and the threat of for -
ced isolation, exclusion and even internment or
expulsion which the Citizenship (Amendment)
Act (CAA) entails. To tackle such a complex and
contentious issue, we felt it deserved to be in the
form of a Special Supplement, the first in a se -
ries of planned specials on the burning issues of
the day.
In today’s India, the spread of Covid-19 has
dominated the mind space of individuals, com-
munities, politicians, civil society, op-ed writers
and television anchors. That has led to a shifting
of focus away from one of the most controversial
and discriminatory legislations any government
has passed. The issue of citizenship has raised
fears and apprehensions, much like Covid-19,
enhanced further by the National Register of
Citizens (NRC).
At India Legal, our focus has always been on
issues of contemporary legal relevance. The
debut of the Special Supplement allows us to
pick subjects that deserve a more rigorous and
in-depth analysis, written and researched by an
acknowledged expert on the subject. The author
of our special supplement on the newly con-
tentious issue of citizenship is Dr. Abhishek
Atrey, a legal expert and Advocate on Record in
the Supreme Court of India. In a detailed and
extensively researched article, he traces the con-
cept of citizenship in India to ancient times, ref-
erencing the Vedas and the Upanishads, as well
as its origins and privileges in ancient Greece,
the Roman Empire, Europe and England. His
analysis is based on the constitutional and legal
definition of citizenship under the Indian Cons -
ti tution, what are the legal privileges and rights
afforded to citizens, the various types of citizen-
ship and who qualifies and who does not.
In essence, Atrey’s essay is an attempt to
clear up misconceptions and controversies sur-
rounding the CAA and the NRC, and explain
frequently asked and all-important questions
about the idea of citizenship. The coronavirus is
the more immediate threat and it may have
pushed other issues like the CAA into the back-
ground, but it still lurks there, like a virus wait-
ing to strike. Both issues represent defining
moments in the country’s history.
DEFINING MOMENTS
W
Letter from the Editor
The debut of the Special Supplement
allows us to pick subjects that
deserve a more rigorous and in-depth
analysis, written by an acknowledged
expert. In this issue, we trace the
concept of citizenship in India.

6. 6March 30, 2020
Contents
VOLUME XIII ISSUE 20
MARCH 30, 2020
OWNED BY E. N. COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD.
A -9, Sector-68, Gautam Buddh Nagar, NOIDA (U.P.) - 201309
Phone: [phone]
127900; Fax: + 91- 0120-2471411
e-mail: [email protected]
website: www.indialegallive.comMUMBAI:Arshie Complex, B-3 & B4, Yari Road, Versova, Andheri,
Mumbai-400058
RANCHI:House No. 130/C, Vidyalaya Marg, Ashoknagar,
Ranchi-834002.
LUCKNOW:First floor, 21/32, A, West View, Tilak Marg, Hazratganj,
Lucknow-226001.
PATNA: Sukh Vihar Apartment, West Boring Canal Road, New Punaichak,
Opposite Lalita Hotel, Patna-800023.
ALLAHABAD:Leader Press, 9-A, Edmonston Road,
Civil Lines, Allahabad-211 001.
Chief Patron Justice MN Venkatachaliah
EditorInderjit Badhwar
Senior Managing EditorDilip Bobb
Deputy Managing EditorShobha John
Executive EditorAshok Damodaran
Contributing EditorRamesh Menon
Deputy EditorPrabir Biswas
Junior Sub-editorNupur Dogra
Art DirectorAnthony Lawrence
Deputy Art EditorAmitava Sen
Senior VisualiserRajender Kumar
PhotographerAnil Shakya
Photo Researcher/Kh Manglembi Devi
News Coordinator
Production Pawan Kumar
Group Brand Adviser
Richa Pandey Mishra
CFO
Anand Raj Singh
Sales & Marketing
Tim Vaughan, K L Satish Rao, James Richard,
Nimish Bhattacharya, Misa Adagini
Circulation Team
Mobile No: 8377009652, Landline No: 0120-612-7900
email: [email protected]
Published by Prof Baldev Raj Gupta on behalf of E N Communications Pvt Ltd
and printed at Acme Tradex India Pvt. Ltd. (Unit Printing Press), B -70, Sector - 80,
Phase II, Noida - 201305 (U.P.). All rights reserved. Reproduction or translation in any
language in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. Requests for
permission should be directed to E N Communications Pvt Ltd . Opinions of
writers in the magazine are not necessarily endorsed by
E N Communications Pvt Ltd . The Publisher assumes no responsibility for the
return of unsolicited material or for material lost or damaged in transit.
All correspondence should be addressed to E N Communications Pvt Ltd .
Judges and lawyers in courts
are struggling to dispense
justice even as the fear of
transmission of COVID-19
takes hold. So benches are
being reduced, crowds
curtailed and only urgent
matters listed
Coronavirus
Plagues the
Court System
LEAD
14

7. | INDIA LEGAL |March 3O, 2020 7
Follow us on
Facebook.com/indialegalmedia
Twitter: @indialegalmedia
Website: www.indialegallive.com
Contact: [email protected]
Cover Design & Illustration:
ANTHONY LAWRENCE
REGULARS
Ringside............................8
Courts .............................10
Law Campus News ........12
International Briefs ........32
Media Watch ..................50
A Brand Called Happiness
48
MY SPACE
The Supreme Court Annual Report 2018-19 is replete with crucial information about the
judicial system, its achievements and innovations. However, we must study both what it
chooses to say and what it does not..., says P
Prof Upendra Baxi
28
Towards Democratic
Judicial Accountability
18
COVID-19 has led to consequences which policymakers should
look at, such as inadequacies in India’s health infrastructure,
deficiencies in distance education and distress among SMEs
Lessons from its
Freakonomics 22
The Idea of Citizenship
The Citizenship (Amendment) Act,
2019 has created much uncertainty
and fear. The supplement traces its
history in India, examines its legal
and constitutional position, and
clears up misconceptions
34
The impact of the coronavirus, financially and psy- chologically, is going to last a long time and change America forever
US Lockdown 26
Corona And Punishment
Tough laws exist in India to deal with violation of quarantine and isolation norms but it does not appear as if anyone has been punished for non-compliance
The move to start a happiness plan is in
line with former CJI Ranjan Gogoi’s state-
ment that such classes should be intro-
duced in judicial academies. Has the cor-
poratisation of this concept begun?
SPECIAL SUPPLEMENT
OPINION

8. 8 March 30, 2020
Anthony Lawrence
RINGSIDE
Safety First

10. 10March 30, 2020
Courts
T
he Supreme Court held
that serving women
Short Service Commission
officers were entitled to be
considered for grant of per-
manent commission in the
Indian Navy.
“The battle for gender
equality is about confronting
the battles of the mind,” a
bench comprising Justices
DY Chandrachud and Ajay
Rastogi said while rejecting
arguments that the current
design of mostly Russian-
origin ships in the Navy
were not sufficient to
accommodate women, call-
ing the explanations “devi -
ces adopted to justify
an action”.
The verdict comes a
month after the top court
had directed the centre to
ensure that women were
given permanent commis-
sion in the Indian Army,
including command post-
ings. If granted permanent
commission, women naval
officers can serve till the
age of retirement and will
be entitled to pension.
Reading out pertinent
portions of the judgments,
Justice Chandrachud said,
“A level playing field en -
sures that women have the
opportunity to overcome
their histories of discrimina-
tion with the surest of res -
ponses based on their com-
petence, ability and per-
formance. Women officers
have worked shoulder to
shoulder with their men
counterparts in every walk
of service.”
First Army, now Navy:
permanent commission
for woman
T
he Supreme Court stated that no self-
assessment or re-assessment of Ad -
justed Gross Revenue (AGR) dues can
be done by telecom companies even as
it turned down the central government’s
plea that telcos be allowed to spread
the payment of their AGR dues over
20 years.
“The court order is clear, no further
objections will be allowed against pay -
able dues,” a three-judge bench consist-
ing of Justices Arun Mishra, SA Nazeer
and MR Shah said, adding that if the tele-
com firms violate the rules, they will be
held for contempt of court. The top court
said this while questioning the Solicitor
General of India on telcos’ self-assess-
ments without the permission of the
Court, calling it contempt.
“Serious fraud is being committed by
telecom companies by asserting to do
self-assessment of AGR dues,” said the
bench while hearing the telecom compa-
nies’ AGR case. The Supreme Court said
that the judgment on AGR dues is full and
final and it should be followed in letter
and spirit. During the hearing, Justice
Mishra said the companies have earned
a lot of money and will have to pay from
2002. “Telcos are usurpers of public
money, you don’t even want to pay a
fraction of the revenue earned. Even the
media is in grossest contempt of court,”
he said.
T
he Supreme Court asked
the centre and the Jam -
mu and Kashmir adminis-
tration about plans to re -
lease former Chief Minister
Omar Abdullah, who has
been under detention since
Aug ust when the abrogation
of Article 370 was ann -
ounced in the state.
A bench of Justices Arun
Mishra and MR Shah told
the counsel appearing for
the centre that Abdullah’s
sister, Sara Abdullah Pilot’s
plea against his detention
will be heard on merit if he
is not released soon.
“If you are releasing him,
then release him soon or we
will hear the matter on mer-
its,” the bench said.
Sara had filed a plea in
the apex court challenging
the detention of her brother
under the Public Safety Act.
Sara contended that ap -
art from the fact that her
brother had disagreements
with the policies of the cen-
tre, it was a lawful right of a
citizen in a democracy
(especially for a member of
the opposition) to demon-
strate and make his point of
view publicly known.
Any plans to release Omar? SC asks centre
Pay up: SC tells telecom firms on AGR

11. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 11
S
even years, three months and three
days after the gruesome rape-cum-
murder, justice was finally delivered when
at 5.30 am on March 20, 2020, the four
death row convicts in the Nirbhaya case
were hanged inside Delhi’s Tihar jail. The
end came after months of delaying tactics
that saw lawyers for the four resorting to
ingenious methods to stall their hanging
which had been confirmed from the lower
courts to the highest court in the land and
the rejection of their mercy petitions by
the President of India.
Nirbhaya’s mother, Asha Devi, who
fought battles on several fronts to get jus-
tice for her daughter, said all women
would definitely feel safer now. She said
though justice was delayed, it was not
denied. "We will request the Supreme
Court to issue guidelines so that no one
can adopt delaying tactics in such cases
in future," she said.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi said
justice had prevailed after all four convicts
were hanged. “Justice has prevailed. It is
of utmost importance to en sure the digni-
ty and safety of women. Our Nari Shakti
has excelled in every field,” he tweeted.
—Compiled by India Legal team
A
Delhi court sent suspended AAP councillor Tahir Hussain to four days
of police custody for the murder of IB
staffer Ankit Sharma during the anti-CAA
riots that rocked Northeast Delhi. It noted
that his custody was required to unearth
the conspiracy behind the riots.
Hussain, who had on three earlier occ -
asions been produced before the judge at
his residence in a riot-related case, was
produced before Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate Pawan Singh Rajawat for the
first time. He was questioned inside the
courtroom for an hour, following which an
application seeking his custody for five
days was moved.
Hussain is one of the prime accused
in the Ankit Sharma murder case.
The police told the Court, “We need to
confront him (Hussain) with Salman
(another accused). Everything was done
on his command.” It said that the custody
was crucial to “unearth the conspiracy
behind the riots which led to the murder
of Ankit Sharma and identify other mem-
bers from the mob”.
Hussain’s lawyers opposed the police
demand, stating that identifying the
other accused and recording Hussain’s
confession could not be a ground for
his remand.
The judge, while granting four-day
police custody, said: “I find force in the
submissions of the IO that to unearth the
conspiracy which led to the riots and
massive loss of life and property, police
remand is required.” T
he Yogi Adityanath government in Uttar Pradesh filed an affidavit in the
Allahabad High Court seeking more time
to file a compliance report in the case
related to hoardings with details of the
anti-CAA protesters put up in Lucknow.
Last week, the High Court had ordered
the Lucknow administration to remove
the hoardings and the banners carrying
photographs and details of over 50 peo-
ple accused of violence during an anti-
CAA protest in the city last year. The
Court also said a report of satisfactory
compliance was required to be submit-
ted by the district magistrate to the reg-
istrar general of the Court on or before
March 16.
“The state government filed an affi-
davit seeking more time to file a compli-
ance report. The state government
also referred in the affidavit about SLP
filed in Supreme Court against the
Allahabad High Court order directing it to
take down name-and-shame hoardings.
We have stated in the affidavit that the
SLP is pending in the Supreme Court,”
said Additional Advocate General
Neeraj Tripathi. On March 12, a two-
judge bench of the Supreme Court,
hearing UP’s challenge of the High Court
order on the hoardings, had referred the
matter to a larger bench.
UP government
seeks more time for
hoardings report
Delhi court sends
Hussain to police
custody
Delayed but
not denied
Akshay Thakur Mukesh Singh
Vinay Sharma Pawan Gupta

12. 12March 30, 2020
LAW
CAMPUSES / UPDATES
Law campuses shut down in the
wake of coronavirus threat
N
ational Law University
Odisha (NLUO) Centre
for Women & Law has
invited contributions
for its edited volume on
“Socio-Legal Andro -
centrism and Gender
Inequalities”.
Centre for Women &
Law at NLUO proposes to
bring out an edited vol-
ume with a multidiscipli-
nary approach on “Socio-
legal Androcentrism and
Gender Inequalities”.
Objective of the proposed
book is to contribute in
the dismantling of the
metanarrative of patri-
archy which relegates
NLUO invites submissions for
its volume on androcentrism
and gender inequalities
I
n the wake of an outbreak of COVID-
19 in India, various law colleges and
campuses have suspended classes and
are encouraging self-quarantining for
students and trying to minimise face-to-
face contact amongst students, teach-
ers and staff members.
Events, competitions and seminars
due across campuses stand suspended
till further notice.
Following a UGC advisory the
National Law Institute University (NLIU),
BhopaL, Maharashtra National Law
University Aurangabad, NLU Ranchi,
NLSUI Bangalore, CNLU Patna, HPNLU
Shimla, ICFAI Law School Dehradun,
NLU-Odisha, etc have either suspended
classes till further notice or have issued
guidelines to minimise contagion.
Amity University has called off all
face-to-face classroom activities until
March 31. Instead they have arranged
for online classes. However, its faculties
and staff would continue to observe
normal working hours until
further notice.

13. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 13
—Compiled by Nupur Dogra
T
he Journal for Environmental
Law Policy and Development
(JELPD), published yearly by the
Centre for Environmental Law
Education, Research and
Advocacy, National Law School of
India University (NLSIU), has invit-
ed authors to send their contribu-
tions for Volume-vii. 2020. The
JELPDis now UGC-CARE certified
(2019).
Authors can contribute short
articles, long articles, book
reviews and case comments. The
contributions are invited on a
broad theme of Environmental Law
Governance and Jurisprudence:
Contemporary issues and chal-
lenges. The authors are requested
to send their submissions on or
before April 10. The selected
authors will be notified by April 20.
postponed due to the sudden outbreak of the COVID-19 virus in the country. The post- poned dates will be announced in due course of time. Inconvenience caused is regretted,” read a notification by the university.
“On account of
health concerns over
the outbreak of
COVID-19 in India, the
University has taken
the tough decision to
postpone the 2nd
NLUJ Deal Mediation
Competition (previously scheduled to
be held from March 19-22, 2020) to
August 20-23, 2020,” read an NLU
Jodhpur notification.
A workshop on blockchain technolo-
gy and e-governance scheduled on
March 14, 2020 at the Gujarat National
Law University (GNLU) through its Cen -
tre for Law and Technology in collabo-
ration with the government of Gujarat
has been deferred till further notice.
Following the UGC notification dated
March 5, instructing students to min-
imise large gatherings on campus and to control any activities that might trig- ger further spread of the novel coron- avirus, law campuses across India are taking such steps to ensure healthy campuses. Sudden outbreak of COVID- 19 highlights the preparedness of campuses to deal with an emergency situation.
It also points at the need for more
online classes as well as the availability
of technical infrastructure across cam-
puses in India to facilitate such classes.
Jamia Milia Islamia University has
directed its teachers to make the study
material available online and has issued
an advisory to minimise face-to-face
contact. The schedule for University
examination remains the same in Jamia.
National Law Institute University (NLIU),
Bhopal has not only been shut down
until further orders but the examinations
have also been cancelled.
Students of the Hidayatullah National
Law University (HNLU), Raipur were
told to leave the University premises
within a day. The University further
issued a notice saying that it would
resume classes once it was sure about
its preparedness to deal with the corona
outbreak. On March 10, the Kerala gov-
ernment ordered a partial lockdown in
the state to curb the outbreak. Foll o wing
which the National University of
Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS), Kochi
suspended its classes as all educational
institutions were directed to be closed
until March 31.
As the classes remain suspended
various events also have been post-
poned. “The NUJS International
Conference on Criminal Justice
Administration: Emerging Issues in 21st
Century which is scheduled to be held
during March 20-22, 2020 has been
women to the ‘second sex’ and hinges their existence relative to the men. Androcentrism and metanarrative of patriarchy has tradi- tionally influenced and shaped social behav- iours, norms and cul- tural outlook.
The authors can
submit on themes like
patriarchal metanarra-
tive and gender
inequalities, epistemol-
ogy of gender, mod-
ernism, post-mod-
ernism and gender,
third and fourth wave
of feminism gender
stereotypes and its
impact on socio-legal
perception of gender,
law and gender
inequalities, customary
practices and gender
discrimination, reli-
gious personal law and
gender discrimination
and so on. Last date
of submission is June
30, 2020.
NLSIU calls for
paper for
JELPD

14. Lead/ COVID-19 & Judiciary
14March 30, 2020
HE global outbreak of
COVID-19 or the corona-
virus, which has been
declared a pandemic, has
had far-rea ching conse-
quences. Eff orts to limit its
spread and treat all those seen with the
slightest symptoms have left govern-
ments worried. The turmoil associated
with it has not only affected the health
of citizens but all spheres of life—eco-
nomic, financial, political, educational,
travel and tourism, aviation…. In fact, it
has simply changed the way we live.
The government through a notifica-
tion on March 5, 2020, advised that
mass gatherings be avoided, and if pos-
sible, be postponed till the spread of
COVID-19 is contained. In these cir-
cumstances, the judiciary too has made
attempts to ensure the safety and well-
being of litigants, judges, advocates, visi-
tors and staff. Notices and circulars have
been issued by different courts in India,
starting with the Supreme Court, with
various directions to curb the spread of
this deadly virus.
A Supreme Court circular on March
13, 2020, said that only six benches
would be sitting. This was further redu -
ced to four on March 19. The Court res -
tricted the functioning of courts to only
urgent matters and directed that only
lawyers who were going to argue a case
be allowed in. It also restricted the visits
of casual visitors and non-essential
work. All cafeterias, including the dep -
art mental canteen in the Court premises
and the Supreme Court Museum, re -
main closed. The guided tour in the
Court too has been suspended. The
Court premises have been stocked with
alcohol-based sanitisers and all common
Coronavirus Plagues
The Court System
Judges and lawyers in courts
are struggling to dispense
justice even as the fear of
transmission of the virus
takes hold. So benches are
being reduced, crowds
curtailed and only urgent
matters listed
By Srishti Ojha
T
Anthony Lawrence

15. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 15
areas such as restrooms, corridors and
staircases are to be sanitised on a
daily basis.
In addition, a self-declaration form
has been introduced for entry into the
premises. Details regarding a visit to a
foreign country in the last 15 days and
any symptoms of fever, sore throat,
runny nose, cough or breathing prob-
lems have to be filled in. The Court has
also asked everyone to be well aware of
the regulations issued in this regard,
par ticularly on “screening” and “dealing
with suspect and symptomatic cases”. It
has also said that the guidelines for
home quarantine, use of masks by the
public and do’s and don’ts issued by the
health ministry be followed.
Every person entering the Supreme
Court has to subject himself to thermal
screening and if anyone is detected with
high body temperature, he will not only
be denied entry but be subject to the
standard operating procedure pres -
cribed by the health ministry. All law -
yers and litigants from across the coun-
try who want to avoid visiting the Court
will be allowed to do so on request and
their matters will not be listed. All those
entering the Courts have been advised
not to crowd at any spot to ensure their
safety and that of others and to exit as
soon as their official business is over.
In a direct interaction with journal-
ists in the Court, Chief Justice of India
(CJI) SA Bobde agreed that there would
be a daily briefing of the day’s news and
prompt uploading of orders on the web-
site. He also stated that restrictions due
to COVID-19 cannot be relaxed for jour-
nalists. The CJI had called an ur gent
meeting to discuss the steps req uired to
be taken for the functioning of all courts
in the country in the wake of the coro-
na-virus. It was attended by Jus tices
Arun Mishra, UU Lalit, DY Chan -
drachud and L Nageswara Rao. He had
stated that there cannot be a complete
shutdown of courts but a limited one is
required as virtual courts are on the
verge of commencement.
Justice Chandrachud, being the
chair man of the Supreme Court E-Com -
m ittee, has assured that soon people-to-
people contact will be reduced and vi -
deo-conferencing will be introduced
where separate rooms for the counsel
for each of the parties will be made av - ailable in the apex court premises. CJI
Bobde along with Justices Nages wara
Rao, Ashok Bhushan and Sanjay K Kaul
took a round of the Supreme Court to
ensure that the directions issued by the
Court were being followed by law yers.
They took note of crowd management
and other matters and questioned
lawyers on why the Court was still
crowded.
S
afety measures are also being
taken by the High Court and dis-
trict courts. Through a notifica-
tion on March 13, the Delhi High Court
informed that it would only be hearing
matters which are urgent and dates
would be given in routine matters before
the Court assembles. It also issued an
advisory to district courts that they
should not insist on the presence of par-
ties unless unavoidable and appropriate
measures should be taken to regulate
the entry of litigants and the public in
the court complex to avoid overcrowd-
ing. In the absence of the parties con-
cerned, adverse orders shall not be
passed by courts and adjournments
should be allowed, it said. Written sub-
missions should be called for and the
time for oral submissions should be
reduced. Video-conferencing should be
put to optimum use for the purposes of
recording of evidence and physical pro-
duction of undertrials from jails should
be avoided.
District and sessions judges were also
advised to consult prison authorities and
take steps to curtail unnecessary crowd-
ing in lock-ups. The High Court has also
advised that medical dispensaries in
courts should be equipped to deal with
the present situation, sanitisers be made
available for everyone and the house-
keeping staff be asked to ensure that the
highest level of hygiene is maintained in
the court complex and disinfectants
sprayed on a regular basis.
CJI SA Bobde agreed to a daily briefing of
the day’s news and prompt uploading of
orders on the website. He called an
urgent meeting to discuss the steps
required for the functioning of all courts.
BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY
A doctor measuring the temperature of a
woman at the Allahabad High Court entrance
UNI

16. Lead/ COVID-19 & Judiciary
16March 30, 2020
Meanwhile, this outbreak has even
affected exam schedules. The Delhi Hi -
gh er Judicial Service (Mains) Examina -
tion-2019, scheduled to be held on Mar -
ch 14 and 15, and the viva voce of the
Delhi Judicial Service Examination-
2019, scheduled to be held from March
23, have been postponed. New dates will
be notified later.
The Coordination Committee of the
District Courts also passed a resolution
on March 15 requesting that court buil -
dings be sanitised regularly, temperature
guns be used at the entry gates and law -
yers be asked to not gather in groups.
Lawyers of district courts have been
asked to abstain from work and attend
urgent hearings only such as bail, stay,
etc. The advisory has also requested
judges to not order any dismissal on
grounds of default or have evidence re - corded, consider the applications for
condonation of limitation period and
adjourn regular matters.
I
n the case of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) benches, they
will only take up matters which
require urgent hearing on request by the
concerned parties. It will adjourn the
remaining matters listed before March
27 and parties and counsel presence will
not be compulsory. An NCLT notice also
directed that there be restricted use of
air conditioners as low temperatures
could aggravate the problem.
The National Consumer Commission
too has decided to adjourn all matters
till April 15 and will only hear urgent
matters. For the convenience of counsel,
the Commission has clarified matters that will be treated as urgent matters,
including the stay of arrest warrants,
orders which cannot be deferred till the
next hearing, etc. Urgent matters will
only be listed after prior approval of the
listing officers and filing of an affidavit
by the applicant. The Commission has
also directed that only advocates who
have to argue, along with one party, will
be allowed to enter the courtrooms.
Fresh matters will only be filed and not
listed till April 15. The Commission has
also clarified that any person suffering
from COVID-19 or showing symptoms
like fever, dry cough or breathlessness
will not be allowed to enter the premis-
es. Also, advocates and litigants entering
the Commission have to ensure that no
material filed or brought by them is con-
taminated in any manner.
The fear of the coronavirus has
begun to grind the scales of justice as
judges and lawyers struggle to balance
the constitutional rights of people
against the concern of transmission to
multiple people. But the steps that are
being taken are required considering the
number of identified cases of COVID-19
in India, the severe risk it poses to the
public and the recommendations of
public health authorities.
Punjab and Haryana High Court:Instructions
from the Court said rotation arrangement of offi-
cials in different sessions divisions be made to
reduce footfall in the premises and all regular list-
ed cases be adjourned. All fresh criminal and
civil matters will be listed by mentioning only.
Medical teams with thermal guns will be dep -
loyed at each entry gate and litigants will not be
required to come unless specifically ordered.
Bombay High Court:Courts in the High Court
as well as benches will listen only to urgent matters, entry of litigants is restricted
and orders of ad interim and interim relief shall continue to operate.
Madhya Pradesh High Court:Only cases filed in 2020 will be listed in the daily
causelist while those filed up to 2019 will stand adjourned. Work will be restricted to
urgent matters. The presence of parties must not be insisted upon.
High Court of Meghalaya:Only urgent matters to be taken up to avoid mass
gathering, video-conferencing to be used at the lock-up, screening for everyone
entering the Court, premises to be vacated at 6 pm and sanitised thereafter.
Patna High Court:Organise an awareness camp in the premises, physical pres-
ence of parties not to be insisted upon, entry of litigants and the public to be regu-
lated, mediation proceedings to be postponed and no functions to be organised.
Kerala High Court: Total restriction on entry unless summoned by the Court.
Mediation and adalatproceedings to be suspended, frequent sanitisation and ther-
mal screening to be ensured.
High courts all over the country have
released a slew of instructions to curb the
spread of the coronavirus
High courts on alert
TAKING PRECAUTIONS
A nurse uses a thermal screening device on
an advocate inside the Patna High Court
UNI

17. Bringing You
The Stories That Count
An ENC Publication
To Stay Abreast With Today,
Pick Up Yesterday’s India Legal
ONLY THE
STORIES THAT COUNT
Every week India Legal will bring you
news, analyses and opinion from
the sharpest investigative reporters
and most incisive legal minds in the
nation on matters that matter to youDon’t miss a single issue of
this independent, scintillating
new weekly magazine and
get special discounts for
yourself and your friends
NDIA EGAL L
STORIES THAT COUNT

I
March 23, 2020
Justice Venkatachaliah, who served as chief justice of India, is one of India’s most respected jurists. An avid
champion of human values and rights, he spoke to RAJSHRI RAI, MD, INDIA LEGAL on the judiciary, religion,
Ayodhya, upbringing of children and why the Supreme Court should be trusted to do the right thing
Justice Venkatachaliah
‘‘Keep Faith in
the Judiciary
’’
Coronavirus:
India’s opportunity
Exclusive Interview
2^]cPRc)4=2^\\d]XRPcX^]b?ec;cS0(BTRc^a%'6PdcP\1dSSW=PVPa=>830D?! "(

18. Lead/ Column/ Coronavirus & Quarantine Laws Dr KK Aggarwal
18March 30, 2020
TALY counts its dead at over 2500
with its stretched resources strug-
gling to grapple with a gargantuan
medical crisis sparked by the coro-
navirus. Reports have emerged
that anyone showing symptoms of
the disease who refuses to self-isolate
risks being charged with causing injury
and being jailed for six months to three
years apart from being slapped with a
fine. And if a “careless” coronavirus suf-
ferer goes on to pass the bug to an elder-
ly person or someone made vulnerable
by a pre-existing health condition, they
can be charged with “intentional mur-
der” and can spend up to 21 years in jail.
Other countries are no less strict
when it comes to dealing with such
cases, though not surprisingly, the
Chinese hand out the harshest punish-
ments. China which had similarly
threatened execution and long jail sen-
tences during the 2002-03 SARS epi-
demic for anyone avoiding quarantine
and spreading the disease has said it
would severely punish 36 crimes related
to the prevention and control of the
epidemic in accordance with the law, in
which violators could face the death
penalty. Spreading rumours about the
outbreak has been linked to “subversion
of state power” and will attract swift and
harsh punishment.
In the United States, depending on
state and local statutes, individuals
could face fines, criminal charges, and
even jail time for breaking quarantine. According to the Centre for Disease
Control and Prevention,
“federal, state, or local
public health orders may
be issued to enforce isola-
tion, quarantine or condi-
tional release.”
In Hong Kong, police
nabbed a part-time securi-
ty guard at a shopping mall
for allegedly writing on
social media that multiple
staff members had caught
a fever and gone on sick
leave. The messages
“caused panic” and helped
“breed paranoia”.
Singapore imposes severe penalties
for non-compliance with the quarantine
order, including fines or jail time. In
Saudi Arabia, a fine of up to 500,000
riyals ($133,000) is imposed on people
who do not disclose their health-related
information and travel details at
entry points.
In India, the central government has
taken several measures to deal with the
epidemic, including setting up of quar-
antine facilities and rescuing Indian
citizens stranded abroad. Both the cen-
tre and state governments are empow-
ered to regulate health-related matters.
The Epidemic Diseases Act is the
main legislative framework at the cen-
Tough laws exist in India to deal with violation of
quarantine and isolation norms but it does not
appear as if anyone has been punished for
non-compliance
I
tral level for the prevention and spread
of dangerous epidemic diseases. The Act
empowers the central government to
take necessary measures to deal with
dangerous epidemic disease at ports of
entry and exit. The Act also empowers
the states to take special measures or
promulgate regulations to deal with epi-
demics within their state jurisdictions.
Powers executed by the Union home
secretary under the disaster manage-
ment Act were “delegated” to the health
ministry to enhance preparedness
against the coronavirus outbreak. The
Union home ministry order said the
powers are exercised by the Union home
secretary under Section 10 of the Act
and he being the Chairman of the
Corona And
Punishment

19. or vessel leaving or arriving at any
port and for the detention of any
person arriving or intending to sail.
Any person who disobeys any regula-
tion or order made under the 1897
Act may be charged with an offence
un der Section 188 of the Indian
Penal Code.
It is not necessary that the
offender should intend to produce
harm or contemplate his disobedi-
ence as likely to produce harm. It is
enough that he knows of the order
which he disobeys, and that his
| INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 19
National Executive Committee (NEC),
the powers are vested with him.
Under the Epidemic Diseases Act
1897, thus, any state government, when
satisfied that any part of its territory is
threatened with an outbreak of a dan-
gerous disease, may adopt or authorise
all measures, including quarantine, to
prevent the outbreak of the disease.
S
imilarly, the central government, when satisfied that there is an
imminent threat of an outbreak of
an epidemic disease and that the provi-
sions of the law at that time are insuffi-
cient to prevent such an outbreak, may
take measures and prescribe regulations
allowing for the inspection of any ship
DEALING WITH A PANDEMIC
People wearing masks waiting in queue at
Patna airport to get tested
In the time of the coronavirus, pan-
icky people have tried to escape quar-
antine and invited legal action
An 18-year-old Kolkata patient of
COVID-19, the son of a top bureaucrat
in West Bengal, has reportedly flouted
norms on returning from the UK. He
was advised by airport authorities to get
admitted to Beliaghata ID Hospital on
March 15. He reportedly defied the
authorities and went on with his social
life and met many people. Finally, on
March 17, the state health department
forced him to get admitted, following
which he tested positive.
A Briton, part of a travel group, was
among 20 passengers who were
offloaded from a Dubai-bound Emirates
flight at Kochi airport. He was under
quarantine at a Kerala resort but left it
and reached Kochi. Authorities stopped
the plane and deplaned him.
Meanwhile, the resort was closed even
as the staff there expressed displeasure
that they were not advised properly.
Authorities were thinking of taking legal
action against the Briton for violating
the Public Health Act, the travel agent
who coordinated the tour programme
and the manager of the resort.
A woman and her husband, a Google
employee, returned to Bengaluru after a
honeymoon in Italy. While the husband,
who tested positive, was placed under
quarantine, she took a flight to Delhi
and then a train to Agra and hid in her
parental home. It was only after the
police was called in that she was taken
to an isolation ward. As she and her
father had misled authorities, they have
been booked by the police under the
Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897.
A man under observation in the isola-
tion ward of a district hospital in
Pathanamthitta, Kerala, fled, but was
tracked and brought back within hours.
A couple from the US who had symp-
toms linked to the coronavirus were
traced to Kochi international airport
and put under isolation after they fled
Alappuzha Medical College.
Tracking them down
UNI

20. 20March 30, 2020
disobedience produces, or is likely to
produce, harm. Such offence, at the dis-
cretion of the trial magistrate, may be
tried summarily. No suit or legal pro-
ceeding lies against any person or
authority for anything done, or in good
faith intended to be done, under this Act.
U
nder Section 270 of the Indian Penal Code, whoever malig-
nantly commits any act which
is, and which he knows or has reason to
believe to be, likely to spread the infec-
tion of any disease dangerous to life,
shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may
extend to two years, or with fine, or
with both.
So far, testing in India has been done
mostly on visitors coming in from
abroad. The process involves a health
officer who is appointed by the central
government posted and empowered at
the port of entry. The health officer may
demand to see the aircraft journey log-
book, which shows the places the air-
craft visited. He may also inspect the
aircraft, its passengers, and its crew, and
subject them to medical examinations
after their arrival.
The officer must follow specific pre-
cautions about communicable diseases
that require a period of quarantine (such as yellow fever, plague, cholera,
smallpox, typhus, and relapsing fever)
and other infectious diseases that do not
require a period of quarantine. He may
prohibit the embarkation on any aircraft
of any person showing symptoms of any
quarantinable disease and any person
whom the health officer considers likely
to transmit infection. Regulations re -
quire that airline staff report any sus-
pected cases or passengers who in their
opinion, from observations made
in-flight, may be suffering from symp-
toms of a quarantinable disease.
It is argued that quarantine affects
the fundamental right “to move freely
throughout the territory of India.”
However, this right is subject to reason-
able restrictions that the state may
impose in the interest of public health.
The Epidemic Diseases Act also gives
wide-ranging powers to the states.
In such emergencies, the state may
delegate some of these powers to the
deputy commissioners in the districts
typically through state health acts or
municipal corporation acts. A state gov-
ernment may also take measures and
prescribe regulations for the inspection,
vaccination, and inoculation of persons
travelling by road or rail, including their
segregation in a hospital, temporary
accommodation, or otherwise, if such
persons are suspected by the inspecting
officer of being infected with any such
disease. A state government, by general
or special order, may also empower a
deputy commissioner to exercise, in
relation to his district, all the powers
under Section 2 of the 1897 Act that are
exercisable by the state government in
relation to the state, other than to deter-
mine the manner in which and by whom
any expenses are to be defrayed.
Many of these powers are prescribed
in municipal corporation acts governing
“major municipal areas,” or public
health acts that also provide municipal-
level commissioners or collectors with
quarantine or other powers. These can
be in relation to removal of a person to
separate premises for medical treat-
ment, cleansing or disinfecting any
building or part of any building or any
articles, taking special measures in case
of the outbreak of dangerous or
epidemic diseases.
The ambit of Section 2 of the
Epidemic Diseases Act is wide enough
to allow a state or a lower functionary
in the administration, in dealing with
an emergency caused by the outbreak of
a dangerous disease, to seek or require
the cooperation of the public or corpo-
rate bodies in the public or private sec-
tors. If the desired cooperation is not
forthcoming, a regulation may be
imposed. Failure to obey or comply
with restrictions imposed by such a reg-
ulation constitutes a punishable
violation. Violations of quarantine laws
(see box) have been reported from some
places in India but it does not appear as
if anyone has been punished.
—The writer is President, Confederation
of Medical Associations of Asia and
Oceania, and Heart Care Foundation
of India and a former national
President, IMA
TREADING WITH CAUTION
An elderly woman being screened by
authorities before entering an airport
Lead/ Column/ Coronavirus & Quarantine Laws/ Dr KK Aggarwal
UNI

21. jaquarlighting.com
COMMERCIAL
INDOOR | OUTDOOR LIGHTING
PRICE LIST EFFECTIVE FROM OCTOBER 2018

22. Lead/ Opinion/ COVID-19 S Narendra
22March 30, 2020
HE government of India
has done well to declare
the existential threat of
corona virus-19 (CV-19) a
national disaster. There
could be two opinions
about the adequacy of measures taken
so far to protect people against this pan-
demic. It is well to remember that it has
overtaken the seven continents with the
least warning and overwhelmed most
countries’ governments. Countries with
enormous financial and health-related
resources are finding it difficult to cope
with the CV-19 challenge.
It is a time for citizens to proactively
support the official measures by follow-
ing the guidelines regarding personal
hygiene and social distancing. The latter
is a tough call in a densely populated
country like India where people live
cheek by jowl. The burden of keeping
the virus away largely falls on the indi-
vidual and the family, calling for a total
transformation of social and personal
behaviour. As of now, the government’s
attention is concentrated on putting in
place policies and programmes to con-
trol its spread and on mitigating the
pandemic’s adverse effects on the econo-
my and people’s livelihoods.
India, like many other countries such
as China, the US, Britain and members
of the Euro pean Union, is contemplat-
ing fiscal and monetary measures to
stimulate the eco nomy. As many econo-
mists have said, economic theory has
no answers as it has never faced, nay,
never contemplated the dislocation of
life caused by the CV-19 pandemic. It is
outside the demand-supply framework
(the invisible hand of market forces) of
the discipline.
Noted American economist Tyler
Cowan in a recent online post wrote
Lessons from its
Freakonomics
The national disaster has led to consequences which policymakers
should look at. These are inadequacies in India’s health infrastruc-
ture, deficiencies in distance education and distress among SMEs
T

23. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 23
that basic economic concepts like “infla-
tion” are no longer useful when toilet
paper, face tissues, sanitisers, soaps and
masks become more valuable than the
commodities in the normal basket of
goods whose prices are studied for
measuring inflation and adjusting lend-
ing interest rates.
G
overnments are now required to
deal with a hydra-headed prob-
lem on an emergency basis.
CV-19 has arrived on the back of an eco-
nomic slowdown that had drastically re -
duced the government’s revenues. The
shutdown of vital economic activities in
most sectors due to the pandemic will
further dim governments’ revenue out-
look. It is a double whammy because
now they are required to deal with a
many-headed problem using massive
resources. Considering the enormity of
the challenge, they will do well not to
rush to bail out businesses which are
making the most noise. Per haps, the
outlines of the economic and social chal-
lenges are yet to emerge fully in order
for a measured response to be thought
of. The world, including India, seems to
be headed for the long haul.
There are likely to be some unin-
tended consequences from the ongoing
“national disaster” which may need to
be reckoned by policymakers. Such con-
sequences are studied under the title of
Freakonomics by some noted econo-
mists. CV-19 is exposing in both rich
and poor countries massive inadequa-
cies in health infrastructure, a key con-
tributor to any nation’s human resour -
ces. It will do a lot of good if the media
and experts are allowed to put the In -
dian public health infrastructure and
the economic model that tilts it in fa -
vour of privatising health to a lot of pub-
lic scrutiny. Perhaps, for the first time,
the nation will be X-raying this sector,
hopefully gaining it the priority it des -
erves in central and state budgets.
Many health sector experts have
lamented that the centre and state gov-
ernments’ combined expenditure on
health is far lower than India’s neigh-
bours’. Economist Joseph Stiglitz has
said that the trend of moving away from
public to private healthcare in India was
pushing more people into poverty fast.
The present situation is a great opportu-
nity for bringing back healthcare into
the national political agenda. Unfor -
tunately, the gains in the health sector
are post-dated, invisible and offer less
scope for political kickbacks that accrue
from building physical infrastructure.
Hence, it tends to receive lip-service.
The COVID-induced closure of edu-
cational institutions also offers an open-
ing for examining the deficiencies of dis-
tance education and utilising the tre -
mendous possibilities offered by tech-
nology for delivering quality education
and skills to the masses at less cost. Its
quality has to be improved vastly and
used for improving the standard of edu-
cation imparted in government schools
and colleges.
The government, academia and tech-
nology innovators need to be brought
together to collaborate in this sector. If
governments care to use a significant
part of the stimulus money for the above
two objectives, it would improve India’s
competitive advantage, encashing the
available demographic dividend.
A third priority should be to bring
relief to the informal sector due to the
shutdown. This sector provides the bulk
of employment to about 472 million
people. The formal sector accounts for
just 10 percent of jobs but has more
A HYDRA-HEADED PROBLEM
(Below left) Ward boys and nurses oversee
preparations in an isolation ward related to the
coronavirus at a Lucknow hospital; a nurse
thermal screening a patient in Patna
CV-19 is exposing in rich and poor coun-
tries the inadequacies in their health
infrastructure. Perhaps for the first time
the nation will be X-raying the sector,
hopefully giving it the priority it deserves.
Photos: UNI

24. 24March 30, 2020
voice in policymaking. The economic
distress caused to workers who have no
job guarantees and no social security
cover is unimaginable because of the
shutdown. Going by the experts’ opin-
ion, the COVID emergency could last
fairly long. Announcements such as
facilitating more credit to SMEs are
conventional solutions which may not
be adequate in this dire situation. The
livelihood of a huge number of wage
earners whose only tradable asset is
physical labour is under threat. How to
fulfil their basic food needs requires
immediate attention. One does not
know whe ther governments should
consider opening something like free
soup kitchens. In New York, according
to a New York Timesreport, some
7,50,000 schoolchildren were depend-
ent on their school which provided one
daily meal. The shutting down of
schools has deprived them of this. If
that is the situation in the US, imagine
the plight of children and their families
in India who have no daily, regular
wage-earning work. This is mentioned
here mainly to point out the enormity of
the problems facing the polity.
T
here was a report that the air quality over China had improved
due to the COVID 19-induced
lockdown. Ironically, global warming
effects will be less due to the economic
shutdown. Every past year this millenni-
um has seen an increase in global tem-
perature; 2020 may be an exception.
This is one of the Freakonomics effects.
Policymakers, if so inclined, can draw
some lessons and build them into post-
COVID policies.
CV-19 is compelling us to change our
social and personal behaviour. We have
the option to resume our life with busi-
ness as usual in the post-COVID era,
leaving our fate and that of the universe
to market forces and climate change. We
also have the option, having come out of
an existential threat, to modify our
lifestyles which were defined by instant
gratification of wants and adopt a more
environment-sustainable one. One
hopes that traditional economic theory,
hinged to consumption-based capitalism
that shapes government policies, learns
lessons from the COVID crisis and its
consequences for people whose life is on
the fringes of the market forces but who
are vital to the overall economy.
The challenge posed by COVID-19
has to be fought at the state, district and
village level without a clash of political
egos. In this humbling moment in the
nation’s history, the sagacity of leaders in
Delhi and state capitals will be tested. It
is time to show a shared vision and
resolve for infusing confidence in the
people that the political system is united
in navigating them out of the pandemic.
—The writer is a former information
adviser to the PM and a government
spokesperson
Lead/ Opinion/ COVID-19/ S Narendra
The closure of educational institutions
due to CV-19 offers an opening for
examining the deficiencies of distance
education and using technology to
deliver quality education at less cost.
TOUGH BUT NECESSARY
(Left) Citizens must follow the
guidelines on personal hygiene and
social distancing; Union Health
Minister Harsh Vardhan has laid
stress on community surveillance

26. Lead/ Global Trends/ Corona Effect
26March 30, 2020
T would be comedy if it weren’t so
painful and deadly. People strip-
ping grocery store shelves bare of
toilet paper and hand sanitiser. A
virus from China named like Mexi -
co’s Corona beer brand has brought
the United States to a state of siege
where the economy is crashing, people
are dying and with it diminishing opti-
mism among Donald Trump’s advisors
and pundits that he can be reelected.
You cannot gaslight a pandemic.
The states of New York, Connecticut
and New Jersey have ordered restau-
rants and clubs to only provide take-
away, no sit-down dining or entertain-
ing. A few days ago, a drive into New
York City and a walking tour indicated
that the Big Apple had lost something,
as Broadway shows were closed and
now the restaurant ban is in effect. The
Broadway show closings alone put near-
ly 250,000 people on leave, most of
whom do not get paid if they don’t
work. Add in all the support business-
es—suppliers of services to the hospitali-
ty business—and it becomes quickly
obvious that without the bells and whis-
tles, New York City is a very quiet and
dismal place.
US Lockdown
The impact of the coronavirus, financially and psychologically,
is going to last a long time and change America forever
By Kenneth Tiven
in Washington
I
A THOUSAND WORDS
(Above) The desolate streets of
New York City, the empty
Columbia University quadrangle
and empty shelves at a store after
shoppers grabbed almost
everthing due to the anxiety
caused by the coronavirus

27. particularly ineffective given the mag-
nitude of the problem. There’s a lot
of confusion about respirators vs
ventilators. And it comes from a lack
of understanding just how few hospital
beds exist in a nation of 330,000,000
people.
Respira tors protect the doctors,
allowing them to breathe safe, filtered
air. Critically ill patients require venti-
lation—hence ventilators, a shortage
that directly results in death. Indirectly,
the respirator shortage will result in
infected healthcare workers, some of
whom will die.
Memories and anger are long-last-
ing when loved ones die and fail to
make the graduation ceremonies. The
impact, both financially and psycholog-
ically, is going to last a long time and
change America forever. The question
no one can answer right now is in
which direction.
— The writer has worked in senior
positions at The Washington Post, NBC,
ABCand CNNand also consults for
several Indian channels
|
INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 27
A Friday afternoon felt like an early
Sunday morning, not much traffic, a few
people jogging in Central Park, while
others sat on the steps of closed muse-
ums and art galleries.
On a warm March day, the Columbia
University quadrangle was empty. Usu -
ally it would have been filled with stu-
dents relaxing in the 17-degree Celsius
sunlight. Schools across America have
been shut for the foreseeable fu ture.
Will there be graduation ceremo nies in
May as promised by a Colum bia poster?
Doubtful and with it goes an entire sub-
set of business services that make grad-
uations festive, from caps and gowns, to
all the food and drink served outdoors
to the graduates and their families.
All of this was in stark contrast to
New York City in the days after the 9/11
terrorist attacks on the World Trade
Cen ter. Then the resilience and bravado
of Americans was on full display with
flags and signs and a desire to rebuild
quickly. Now an air of resignation ele-
vated by fear is on display.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo,
a Democrat and son of a famous former
governor, took a very proactive position
from the start of the health crisis, while
criticising President Trump’s lack of
political leadership. Cuomo emphasised
that the priority must remain slowing
the spread of the virus, saying: “You are
past the time of monetising these deci-
sions. You are at a point of deciding:
how many people are going to live, how
many people are going to die?”
T
he imposition of behavioural
controls doesn’t conform to the
mythology of America—wide-
open roads and spa ces, a go anywhere,
do anything, wherever you want to
sort of a place. And more distressing to
some is that this is an unseen assailant
that knows no class or geographic
boundaries.
What we do know is that it has a
higher fatality rate among elderly peo-
ple, especially those with underlying
health issues. For several weeks, the
president of the United States kept
insisting that it was just like the flu. It is
not flu, it is a lung disease. For the most
part, the health experts assembled aro -
und Trump kept their mouths shut, with
only grim faces and crossed arms con-
tradicting him.
The American health system looks
For several weeks, US President Donald Trump kept insisting it was just like the flu. But
it is not flu but a lung disease. For the most part, the health ex perts assembled ar o und
him kept their mouths shut, with only their grim faces contradicting him.
UNI
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo
took a very proactive position from the
start of the health crisis, while criticising
President Donald Trump’s lack of
political leadership.

28. My Space/ Supreme Court Annual Report 2018-19 Prof Upendra Baxi
28March 30, 2020
HE Supreme Court has
be gun issuing annual re -
ports concerning the ad -
m inistration of justice by
it and High Courts since
2015-16, but the media
and academic journals have largely
main tained an unwelcome discreet si -
lence about these. This frustrates a great
innovation; indeed, I recall as a compar-
atively young research scholar that I had
to perform almost Heraclitan labours in
the eighties even to obtain the irregular-
ly published annual reports on adminis-
tration of justice by High Courts! Diffi -
culties of access accompany even the
new legal regime of right to informa-
tion. Now, this goldmine of information
is simply available at the click of a digi-
tal mouse!
In introducing the 2018-2019 Re -
port, Chief Justice Sharad A Bobde
has ex pressed the institutional commit-
ment of the judiciary towards “a demo-
cratic discourse between all stakeholders
of the Indian Judiciary” and articulated
a hope that this “periodic stock-taking
of our role as ‘Guardians of the Consti -
tu tion’ as entrusted on us by the Cons -
titu tion of India” will generate and
nourish “a symbiotic relationship” am -
ong all “stakeholders” in the “actualisa-
tion of goals set by the Constitution”.
One ho pes that this relationship is
enriched by not only a close study by
many pub lics, including all sections of
the Bar, but by law schools, judicial
academies and students of judicial
process and power everywhere.
An Annual Report comprising 335
pages, with 157 dedicated to the Sup -
reme Court (which this article engages
here because of space constraints), and
replete with crucial information about
the judicial system, its achievements
and technological and managerial inno-
vations makes a fascinating but difficult
reading. Difficult because it is at once a
medium that clarifies but also obscures
information; the interplay of creative
and censorious aspects deserves notice.
For example, most Indians would
never have known that Mohandas
Gandhi appears twice in the Court’s
architecture. He appears first in “a beau-
tiful mural of coloured porcelain tiles in
the Judges Gallery, with the Goddess of
Justice on the right”. This juxtaposition
is of great significance for achieving the
constitutionally desired social order,
an expression that I developed as early
as 1967!
And second, while one does not even
know why the statue of Mohandas
Gandhi was installed as late as August 1,
1996, in the lawns of the Supreme
Court, one at least knows now that it
“was sculpted by the renowned artist
Fredda Brilliant Marshall”. Khushwant
Singh wrote: “The memory of her stand-
ing stranded behind a giant copy of the
statue of Gandhi stuck between the
front door and her studio remains a
telling image of her constant struggle
with her art and the world about her.” In
different ways, the ascetic Mahatma and
the woman artist thus signify a potent
symbol of gender equality and justice.
The reason given why the Goddess of
Justice is not blind-folded “is that as per
Towards Democratic
Judicial Accountability
This goldmine of information is replete with crucial information about the judicial
system, its achievements and innovations. However, we must study both what it
chooses to say and what it does not...
T

29. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 29
Vedic sutras, the deity of Justice does
not close its eyes but allows the graceful
rays from its eyes to illumine the admin-
istration of justice”. This re-symboliza-
tion is of great value, and not just for
the miniscule visual anthropologists!
So is the annotation that the inscrip-
tion surrounding Dharma Chakra
(Wheel of Justice) with 24 spokes is in
Sanskrit: “Satyamevoddhaharamyaham”
which means “Truth alone I uphold”,
which applies to judicial duty and valour
as well. What impact this summation
has on the Bench and the Bar remains a
formidable theme.
An ordinary citizen would also never
have known that there was such a deep
affinity between pigeons and doing of
justice! But we now authoritatively learn
that among the recent initiatives is a
“pigeon protecting mechanism” installed
“outside Court Nos. 16 and 17 on trial
basis”. Doves proverbially carry a mes-
sage of peace, within which alone justice
and good order remain possible. One
also hopes that Article 51—fundamental
duty of all citizens to develop “compas-
sion for all living beings”—is fully borne
in view.
The Report mentions all the present
justices of the Supreme Court and High
Courts, which covers 2018-2019. The
periodic and piecemeal increase in jud -
ge–strength (from eight Justices to 11,
14, 18, 26, 31 and now to 34), is, of
course welcome. But we still do not
know how far the exertions by the Law Commission, especially by Justice DA
Desai (Report 120, 1987) and reinforced
by Justice AP Shah (Report 245, 2014)
were guided by any sense of judicial
“manpower” planning.
Pending a full examination of the
comparative figures, it may be said that
the Collegium system has achieved a
five+ years tenure. This compares rather
favourably with the system of executive-
dominated appointment system.
S
pectacularly, the learned chief jus-
tice will have nearly served full
eight years when he lays down the
august office on April 23, 2021. Among
Justices who would have served the
Court for eight plus years by the time
they retire are Justices NV Ramana, Dr
DY Chandrachud, Uday Umesh Lalit
and Surya Kant. Justices with a six-year-
plus tenure are 12, whereas the rest
mainly serve about four years.
Second, of the 46 chief justices of
India (excluding the present CJI), only
Justice YV Chandrachud served as CJI
for mo re than seven years, while Justice
Bhuv neshwar Prasad Sinha served for five+ years and Justice AN Ray nearly for four years. A considerable number enjoyed nearly a three-year term. The
median term is 1-2 years with some
exasperating terms as short as a few
weeks or mon ths. While the Report has
to let facts speak for themselves, further
institutional development of the judicial
Colle gium system must consider the
issue of appointment of justices in such
a way as best promotes stability of lead-
ership by ensuring at least a two-year
term as CJI. One advantage of the fre-
quently proposed extension of the age of
superannuation to 70 is that it provides
just this sort of stable leadership.
Third, there are only three women
judges (Justices Banumathi, Indu
Malhotra and Indira Banerjee). Justice
Banumathi completes her term (on July
19, 2020) with a six-plus year tenure,
probably the longest for a woman justice
(See my comment in the India Legal
issue of November 26, 2018). It is signif-
icant that the Collegium left it to the
leadership of CJI Dipak Misra to make
two further appointments, one from the
Bench and the very first from the Bar
LONG INNINGS
(From below left) Of the 46 CJIs (excluding the
present one) only Justice YV Chandrachud
served for more than seven years; Among SC
judges who will serve for eight-plus years by
the time they retire are Justices NV Ramana,
UU Lalit, Dr DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant
The reason given why the Goddess of
Justice is not blind-folded “is that as per
Vedic sutras, the deity of Justice does not
close its eyes but allows the graceful rays
from its eyes to illumine the administra-
tion of justice”.

30. 30March 30, 2020
(Justice Malhotra).
The Report does not disclose allega-
tions against the then CJI Ranjan Gogoi
in a workplace sexual harassment case;
these were examined, by an administra-
tive committee of the Court comprising
Justices Bobde, Indira Banerjee and
Indu Malhotra. Ordinary citizens would
never know why it closed the matter
because the entire proceedings and the
final decision remain shrouded in
silence and secrecy. The annual report
does not provide information on the
performance of its own committees on
sexual harassment at the workplace nor
does it offer information on whether
deliberations are underway to devise a
procedure that is fair and accountable
for the future. Surely, so crucial a matter
as allegations of sexual harassment in
the court precincts deserves the dignity
of reasoned elaboration and an articu-
late procedure for all is certainly over-
due after four de cades of the Mathura
Open Letter written by four law aca-
demics (1979) and especially after the
landmark Visakharuling (1997).
The Report gives ample details on
arrears, workload and disposals; this is
welcome and it is good news that the
judiciary is now fully alive to this matter.
While this calls for a detailed analysis, we
cannot but help noting that a large num-
ber of cases are awaiting disposal for over
ten years! Most welcome would have
been an indication of the variety of these
matters and of final disposal. And simple
announcements like the creation of sin-
gle-judge benches (to hear transfer mat-
ters and bail cases carrying up to seven
years imprisonment) do not give us rea-
sons why this is a worthy measure and
why it took five years to notify this am -
end ment to the Supreme Court Rules!
C
hapter 14 lists 16 “landmark judgments” which overall give a
sense of the astonishing norma-
tive work thus accomplished. Naming
many of its leading judgments would be
an easy task—for example, related to
sexual minorities, leprosy patients, adul-
tery, right to privacy, experimental intra -
net access, restricted availability of live
streaming of judicial proceedings, bar
girls and the jurisdiction under the
Right to Information Act as applied to
the Supreme Court. But that cannot be
said for all the hits and misses!
True, the criterion for selection of
decisions as “landmark judgments” even
when explicated will also remain a con-
tested terrain. But, for example, Item 13
referring to the case filed by Dr Ashwani
Kumar for certain facilitative and enab -
ling directions for a standalone com -
prehensive legislation against custodial
torture on the basis of a UN Con ven tion
on Torture remains incomprehensible. It
is a very odd “landmark”, given other
feats and feasts of interpretation.
The Court held that it would not be
“appropriate … to enforce its opinion, be
it in the form of a direction or even a
request, for it would clearly undermine
and conflict with the role assigned to
the judiciary under the Constitution”,
although it would continue to deal with
individual cases. How even a judicial
request for significance may violate con-
stitutional judicial role remains a mys-
tery. The oddity lies not in judicial self-
restraint as such but in the celebration
of judicial comity with the executive,
even as regards a core dignity—reinforc-
ing right against torture which some
eminent international lawyers suggest
rightly has already become an aspect of
international customary law.
—The author is an internationally
renowned law scholar, an acclaimed
teacher and a well-known writer
My Space/ Supreme Court Annual Report 2018-19/ Prof Upendra Baxi
WOMEN POWER
The Report mentions only three women
judges in the SC—(from left) Justices
Banumathi, Indu Malhotra and Indira Banerjee
The report does not provide information on
its own committees on sexual harassment
at the workplace nor does it offer
information on whether deliberations are
underway to devise a procedure that’s fair.

31. NDIA EGAL EEL
STORIES THAT COUNT

NI
February 17, 2020
A Question
of Bail
A five-judge Constitution bench takes a fresh look at pre-conviction bail. By insisting on
avoidance of reflexive reasons for denying bail, the apex court has acted progressively,
says Prof Upendra Baxi
Chhattisgarh: The Scam of all Scams
NO HOLDS BARRED
Don’t miss a single issue of this independent, scintillating new weekly magazine
and get special discounts for yourself and your friends
For advertising & subscription queries
[email protected]
SUBSCRIBE TO INDIA LEGAL GET FABULOUS DISCOUNTSHTb8f^d[S[XZTc^bdQbRaXQTc^8=380;460;\PVPiX]TU^acWT^UUTaX]SXRPcTSQT[^f
CXRZ^]T CTa\HTPab =^^U8bbdTb 2^eTa?aXRT` H^d_Ph` H^dbPeT` BPeX]V
HTPa $!8bbdTb $! !% !% $
!HTPab #8bbdTb # # % %!# %
=P\T)0VT)BTg)
0SSaTbb)


2Xch)BcPcT)?X])
?W^]TATb)>UUXRT)T\PX[)
4]R[^bTS332WT`dT=^)3PcTS)3aPf])U^a`)
2PaS=^)BXV]PcdaT)
5^a^dcbcPcX^]RWT`dT_[TPbTPSS`$
332WT`dTc^QTSaPf]X]UPe^da^U4=2^\\d]XRPcX^]b?ec;cS
C^QTbT]cc^)4=2^\\d]XRPcX^]b?ec;cS0(BTRc^a%'6PdcP\1dSSW=PVPa=>830D?! "(
CTa\bR^]SXcX^]bP__[h?[TPbT_a^eXSTdb#fTTZbc^bcPach^dabdQbRaX_cX^]
GAL
ct
ha
NDIA EGAL EEL
STORIES THAT COUNT

NI
February 24, 2020
Outing the Criminals
Flagging an “alarming rise in the criminalisation of politics,” the Supreme Court lays
down strict instructions on making public details of a candidate’s criminal history.
What impact will it have on political parties and future elections?
Shiv Visvanathan on Shaheen Bagh Mothers
GAL
m
”” t”t
id
tu
NDIA EGAL EEL
STORIES THAT COUNT

NI
March 2, 2020
The Iron Fist
Increasingly, Section 144 is been used by politicians and bureaucrats to
deprive citizens of their fundamental rights. Now the courts have stepped in
to stem the misuse, but is it enough?
Justice Chandrachud:
“Dissent not anti-national”
GAL
an
ou
?
NDIA EGAL EEL
STORIES THAT COUNT

NI
March 9, 2020
Judiciary’s Role in a
Changing World
The International Judicial Conference 2020 was the first of its kind organised by the Supreme
Court to discuss contemporary challenges to the judiciary. The range of speakers, from the
chief justice of India and other senior judges, gave valuable insights onto how the courts view
their responsibilities in rapidly changing times
Coronavirus:
How prepared is India?
GAL
eee
o
or
nge
s o
es
NDIA EGAL EEL
STORIES THAT COUNT

NI
March 16, 2020
Law and Disorder
Crucial matters that came up in the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court indicate a crisis in India’s
basic governance. The CrPC and Police Acts clearly lay down that it is the job of DMs and SDMs to
maintain law and order, but their role has been taken over by the police with questionable results
Fast Track Courts:
New scheme
GAL
oo
tturtt
s thh
ce
NDIA EGAL EL
STORIES THAT COUNT

NI
March 23, 2020
Justice Venkatachaliah, who served as chief justice of India, is one of India’s most respected jurists. An avid
champion of human values and rights, he spoke to RAJSHRI RAI, MD, INDIA LEGAL on the judiciary, religion,
Ayodhya, upbringing of children and why the Supreme Court should be trusted to do the right thing
Justice Venkatachaliah
‘‘Keep Faith in
the Judiciary
’’
Coronavirus:
India’s opportunity
Exclusive Interview
DIIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEEEEEE
2dc7TaT
2dc7TaT
2dc7TaT

32. 32March 30, 2020
A
s in all global crises and pandemics, the
urge to find scapegoats and apportion
blame leads to bizarre, unsubstantiated
conspiracy theories. That is exactly what is
happening in the wake of the coronavirus
outbreak as China and the US blame
each other.
The spokesman at the Chinese Min istry
of Foreign Affairs, Lijian Zhao (above ri -
ght), has claimed that “it might be the US
Army who brought the epidemic to Wu -
han…. US owes us an explanation!” He
then quoted a report from the Center for
Research on Globalization, a Canadian-
based outfit that promotes conspiracy theo-
ries that generally align with Russian prop-
aganda, which said that the virus originated
in the US.
The US, led by President Donald
Trump, directly blames China while conser-
vative politicians and pundits claim that the
Coronavirus is a bio-weapon which may
have been developed in a scientific labora-
tory located in Wuhan.
Republican Senator Tom Cotton has
repeatedly suggested in Congress and on
talk shows that the virus could have come
from the Wuhan lab. President Trump
repeatedly calls Covid-19 “the Chi nese
virus,” a phrase echoed by Secre tary of State
Mike Pompeo. The conspiracy theories have
been debunked by res pected journal Nature
Medicine, which re vealed that scientists,
using public genome sequence data, have
confirmed that the virus was a result of
“natural processes,” subsequently backed by
other credible scientists, communicable dis-
ease experts and specialised publications.
International Briefs
The Conspiracy Clash
T
here are conflicting
reports about exactly
how long the coronavirus
can survive on different
surfaces. In a new
research paper published
in the New England
Journal of Medicine, sci-
entists now say it can stay
alive on plastic and stain-
less steel surfaces for up
to three days. As far as its
longevity in tiny particles
or drop lets in the air rel -
eased by infected people is
concerned, it only lasts for
three hours.
The study, funded by
the US Na tional Institutes
of Heal th, found that the
stability of this virus is
similar to the Severe Acu -
te Respi ratory Syndrome
(SARS) epidemic in
Lasting Effects
UNI

33. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 33
T
ill now, the longest sch -
eduled passenger service
flight was flown by Singapore
Airlines between Singapore
and Newark, a distance of
9,534 miles. Quantas set its
own record flight between
the UK, the US and Austra -
lia, taking more than 19 ho -
urs and covering over 10,000
miles, but this was a test
flight with no passengers.
Now, thanks to the coron-
avirus outbreak, one side eff -
ect has been the setting of a
new world aviation record for
the longest ever scheduled
passenger flight.
On March 14, French air-
line Air Tahiti Nui flew 9,765
miles from Papeete, in Tahiti,
French Polynesia, to Paris'
Charles de Gaulle airport.
The flight, which took
approximately 16 hours, is
now the world’s longest com-
mercial flight in terms of dis-
tance travelled.
The flight, however, was
not a scheduled one—its nor-
mal route inclu des a stopover
at Los Angeles International
Airport where some passen-
gers disembark.
However, thanks to travel
restrictions by the US gov-
ernment, passengers were
not allowed to deplane and
the flight was forced to fly
on, arriving in Paris early
morning on March 15, just
short of 16 hours later.
A
fter actor Tom Hanks
and his wife posted
inspirational messages on
being released from a Syd -
ney hospital, having recov-
ered from the coronavirus, a
host of other celebrities who
have not caught the virus
but are restricted to their
homes have been putting up
messages or live streaming
songs and skits just to keep
spirits up and use their tal-
ents for the greater good.
They include actor
Anthony Hopkins, who has
opted to enliven his self-
imposed quarantine by live
streaming himself playing
the piano while his cat looks
on unappreciatively. Another
famous star, Lady Judi
Dench, 85, posted a video
recording of herself wearing
a bizarre looking hat with a
dog’s face, and saying we
need to have a few laughs in
such times. She was followed
by comedian Mel Brooks
who appeared in his son’s
tweet about the importance
of social distancing. Then
there was the educational
video posted by singer/actor
Elaine Paige which showed
her wearing jokey rubber
gloves while cleaning phones
and bank cards.
Pop stars have joined in
the move to uplift spirits by
posting videos of themselves
singing while under house
quarantine, and include
John Legend singing his hit
Everybody Knows, and
Coldplay’s Chris Martinin
his home studio, who took to
Instagram for a 30-minute
live stream playing some of
the band’s hits in what he
called a solidarity session in
partnership with the World
Health Organisation (WHO)
and Global Citizen.
Celebrities to the Fore
2002. The latest findings
show that the new virus was
viable up to 72 hours after
being placed on stainless
steel and plastic, up to four
hours after being placed on
copper, and 24 hours after
being put on cardboard.
These findings are similar to
experiments done after the
SARS outbreak.
However, a separate
study in The Journal of
Hospital Infectionfound
that human coronaviruses
have been found to persist
on surfaces—including
metal, glass or plastic—for
as long as nine days if the
surface is not disinfected.
The SARS virus bears the
closest resemblance in
terms of infection spread to
the novel coronavirus. The
journals, however, added
that further studies were
ongoing and the findings
could be re-evaluated.
The Longest Flight
I
n Poland, people panicked
after a wave of rumours
surfaced about the govern-
ment cutting off transporta-
tion in cities and a message,
recorded by a man who
claimed to have close ties to
political decision-makers,
which said the president
would introduce an “emer-
gency state” and that people
wouldn’t be able to leave their
houses for three weeks. It
turned out to be fake but
such panic-inducing fake
news and rumours have hit
countries around
the world.
In France, an audio mes-
sage from a woman claiming
sources in high places, said
the whole country would
soon be in full quarantine.
On Facebook, a message that
went viral clai med to be from
a bulletin board in Stanford
University, an Ivy League col-
lege with a recognised scien-
tific temper. It advised that
holding your breath for 10
seconds could show whether
you were in fected or not, and
other seem ingly credible ad -
vice. It turned out to be fake.
Irish Prime Minister Leo
Varadkar reached out to citi-
zens on social me dia: “I am
urging everyone to please
stop sharing unverified info
on WhatsApp groups. These
messages are scaring and
confusing people and causing
real damage.” WhatsApp has
become the major source for
misinformation as it is less
regulated and allows people
to share personal messages
with large groups.
The Fake News Virus

34. 34March 30, 2020
Special
Supplement
The leitmotif of India Legal
magazine has been its focus
on subjects of contemporary
legal relevance. We are now
taking that concept a stage
further by introducing a
Special Supplement on issues
and topics that deserve more
rigorous and in-depth
analysis, written and
researched by an expert on
the subject. The first in the
series app ears in this issue and
concerns citizenship, the issue that
has caused much controversy and
even violence. The author,
Dr Abhishek Atrey, traces the
history of citizenship and its rights
and privileges. In particular, the
author examines the various
aspects of citizenship in India, its
legal and constitutional
interpretation, and the events that
have led to the controversy
surrounding the Citizenship
(Amend ment) Act and the National
Regis ter of Citizens.
The Idea of
Citizenship
Anthony Lawrence

35. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 35
FROM ancient times, citizenship remained a concept
that was sovereign in nature. Even in the Vedasand the
Upanishads, there were several chapters of duties of the
Raja (King) towards his praja(subjects or citizens). To
grant or refuse citizenship is the prerogative of the sover-
eign, which cannot be tested on any scale of equality, arbi-
trariness or reasonableness. According to Kautilya, it was
the king's duty to protect the subjects from both internal
and external insecurities. Amendments to the Citizenship
Act in 2019 have been brought in to protect Indian citizens
from illegal migrants and the threats arising out of their
uncontrolled invasion into the country. Citizens are a
part of a sovereign state and the state cannot be called
a state until it is sovereign and the sovereign has the right
to command.
Citizenship is the most privileged form of nationality. This
broader term denotes various relations between an individ-
ual and the State that do not necessarily confer political
rights but imply other privileges, particularly protection
abroad. It is the term used in international law to denote all
persons whom a state is entitled to protect. Nationality also
serves to denote the relationship to a state of entities other
than individuals; corporations, ships and aircraft, for
example, possess a nationality.
The concept of citizenship first arose in towns and city-
states of ancient Greece, where it generally applied to prop-
erty owners but not to women, slaves, or the poorer mem-
bers of the community. A citizen in a Greek city-state was
entitled to vote and was liable to taxation and military serv-
ice. The Romans first used citizenship as a device to distin-
guish the residents of the city of Rome from those
whose territories Rome had conquered and incorporated.
As their empire continued to grow, the Romans granted
citizenship to their allies throughout Italy proper and then
to people in other Roman provinces, until in AD 212, citi-
zenship was extended to all free inhabitants of the empire.
Roman citizenship conferred important legal privileges
within the empire.
The concept of national citizenship virtually disappeared in
Europe during the Middle Ages, replaced as it was by a sys-
tem of feudal rights and obligations. In the late Middle
Ages and the Renaissance, the holding of citizenship in
various cities and towns of Italy and Germany became a
guarantee of immunity for merchants and other privileged
persons from the claims and prerogatives of feudal over-
lords. Modern concepts of citizenship crystallized in the
18th century during the American and French Revolutions,
when the term citizen came to suggest the possession of
certain liberties in the face of the coercive powers of abso-
lutist monarchs.
In England, the term citizen originally referred to member-
ship of a borough or local municipal corporation, while the
word subject was used to emphasise the individual’s subor-
dinate position relative to the monarch or state. The word
subject is still used in preference to citizen in British com-
mon-law usage and nationality legislation, but the two
terms are virtually equivalent as British constitutional mo -
n archy is now a ceremonial one that has lost its former poli -
ti cal powers over its subjects.
Citizenship in a democracy (a) gives membership status to
individuals within a political unit; (b) confers an identity
on individuals; (c) constitutes a set of values, usually inter-
preted as a commitment to the common good of a particu-
lar political unit; (d) involves practising a degree of partic-
ipation in the process of political life; (e) implies gaining
and using knowledge and understanding of laws, docu-
ments, structures, and processes of governance.
The legal status of citizenship includes the entitlement of
civil rights and protection by the rule of law in the corre-
sponding political community or polity. It is, by all intents
and purposes, a membership, with benefits, values and
entitlements. The bestowal of rights, obligations and legis-
lation revolves around this dimension of citizenship. Citi -
zenship is a source of identity, the ties of belonging to a par-
ticular community and in a general sense related to our
present political paradigm which is centred around the
nation state. The rights a citizen enjoys will partly define
the range of available political activities, while explaining
how citizenship can be a source of identity by strengthen-
ing a person’s sense of self-respect.
Citizenship Under the Indian Constitution
Citizenship is defined in Articles 5 to 11 of our Constitution. Article 5 says that at the commencement of this Consti -
tution, every person who is residing in the territory of India
and who is born in India or either of his parents is born in
India or who has been ordinarily resident in the territory of
India for not less than five years immediately before com-
mencement of the Constitution shall be a citizen of India. It
means that any person who is born in India or any of his
parents is born in India is a citizen of India by birth and his
citizenship is guaranteed by no other document except the
Constitution which is the supreme law of the land.
Therefore, the fear of any person who is born in India
or either of his parents is born in India that he can be
deprived of his citizenship by any act or rule is baseless. It
is devoid of merit because any Act of Parliament or any
state or any rules made thereunder cannot supersede the
Indian Constitution.
Article 6 of the Constitution provides citizenship to per-
THE FEAR OF ANY PERSON,
WHO IS BORN IN INDIA OR
EITHER OF HIS PARENTS IS
BORN IN INDIA, THAT HE
CAN BE DEPRIVED OF HIS
CITIZENSHIP BY ANY ACT OR
RULE IS BASELESS.

36. 36March 30, 2020
sons who do not fulfil the criteria of Article 5 but migrated
to India from Pakistan at the time of division. Article 6 pro-
vides that any such person who migrated to India from
Pakistan, who or either of his parents or either of his grand-
parents is born in India as defined in the Government of
India Act, 1935 and (i) if he migrated before July 19, 1948,
he has been ordinarily resident in India since the date of his
migration, or if such a person migrated to India after July
19, 1948 and he has been registered as a citizen of India by
an officer appointed by the central government on an appli-
cation made by him before commencement of this
Constitution. However, the only condition for such an app -
li cation is that the person concerned must be residing in
India at least six months before he applies.
Article 7 provides that notwithstanding anything in Arti -
cles 5 and 6, a person who after March 1, 1947, migrated to
Pakistan, shall not be deemed a citizen of India provided
that after migration, he returned to India under a permit
for resettlement or permanent return issued by or under
the authority of any law and shall also be deemed to be so
migrated to India under Article 6(b) after July 19, 1948.
With the intention to restore and recognise the rights of cit-
izenship of the persons who are residing out of India, our
Constitution under Article 8 provides that if any person
who or either of whose parents or any of his grandparents
was born in undivided India and who is residing in any
country outside India shall be deemed to be a citizen of
India, if he is so registered by the diplomatic or consular
representative of India in that country. As such, Article 8
provides an opportunity to the persons of Indian origin
who are residing outside India if any of his parents or
grandparents are born in India to apply to an Indian con-
sulate and take up citizenship of India if he so chooses. No
doubt in that condition he has to leave the citizenship of the
country in which he is residing for the basic reason that a
person cannot hold citizenship of two countries.
The same principle is also there in Article 9 which says that
if a person voluntarily acquired citizenship of any other
country, he shall not be deemed to be a citizen of India by
virtue of Article 5 or 6 or 8. Article 10 provides continuance
of the right of citizenship subject to any law made by Parlia -
ment. Article 11 read with entry 17 of the Central List of the
Seventh Schedule of the Constitution says that it is only
Parliament which can make a law to regulate citizenship.
India is a federal state and there is no concept of dual citi-
zenship in India. Therefore, states have no role to play in
granting or refusing citizenship to any person. Citizenship
is a subject which squarely falls in the domain of Par -
liament only.
Nehru-Liaquat Agreement
In order to protect the rights of minorities in both India
and Pakistan, an agreement was entered into between both
the governments on 8.4.1950, which was commonly known
as the Nehru-Liaquat agreement.
This agreement was done after incidents of looting,
destruction of property, killing, kidnapping and rape in
both countries after their division. In order to bring harmo-
ny among the people of both mino rities and majority com-
munities and to punish the offenders and to protect per-
SIGNIFICANT TREATY The Nehru-Liaquat pact was signed on April 8, 1950, to protect the rights of minorities in India and Pakistan
Special
Supplement

37. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 37
sonal and property rights of the migrating people, it was
decided by both the governments that they would ensure to
the minorities throughout their territories complete equal-
ity of citizenship, irrespective of religion, a full sense of
security in respect of life, culture, property and personal
honour, freedom of movement within each country and
freedom of occupation, speech and worship subject to law
and morality. Minorities shall have equal opportunity along
with the majority community to participate in the public
life of their country, to hold political or other office and to
serve in their country’s civil and armed forces.
Both governments declared these rights to be fundamental
and undertook to enforce them effectively. It was the policy
of both the governments that the enjoyment of these dem-
ocratic rights shall be assured to all their nationals without
distinction. Both governments emphasised that the alle-
giance and loyalty of the minorities is to the state of which
they are citizens and it is to the government of their own
state that they should look for
redress of their grievances.
By this agreement, it was also agreed
by the governments of both the
countries that they shall ensure free-
dom of movement and protection in
transit, rights of their moveable and
immoveable properties, to restore
their immoveable properties if they
return till 31.12.1950.
Especially in East Bengal, West Bengal, Assam and
Tripura, it was decided to establish Special Courts to
restore normal life and to punish the offenders, to restore
looted property and abducted women, not to recognise
forced conversions, to appoint a Commission of Inquiry
with a High Court judge as its head at once, to enquire into
causes and extent of disturbances and to appoint Minority
Commissions to look into the grievances and welfare
of minorities.
Citizenship and Rights of Minorities in
Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh
The three neighbouring countries of India—Afghanistan,
Pak istan and Bangladesh—are Islamic countries by
their Constitutions. Still, in the Constitutions or in the
Citizenship Acts of these countries, there is no apparent
discrimination against the minorities in getting citizen-
ship, right to vote, right to profess religion or to enjoy
other rights equally with that of the majority. Seats are
reserved for non-Muslims in their National and Provincial
Assemblies. But by comparing the census data of these
countries and media reports, there is a steep depletion in
the percentage of non-Muslims of these countries in the
last few decades due to atrocities and religious persecution.
However, the claim of the governments of these countries
is contrary.
Citizenship in India Under Citizenship Act, 1955
While exercising the powers given under Article 11 read
with Entry 17 of the Central List of the Constitution, the
Indian Parliament enacted the Citizenship Act, 1955, which
received the assent of the President on December 30, 1955
and came into force since then. Since its inception, the
Citizenship Act has been amended 10 times—firstly in 1957
w.e.f. 27.12.1957, then in 1960 w.e.f. 26.12.1960, then in
1985 w.e.f. 7.12.1985, again in 1986 w.e.f. 15.5.1986, then in
1987 w.e.f. 1.7.1987, then in 1992 w.e.f. 10.12.1992, then in
2004 w.e.f. 3.12.2004, then in 2005 w.e.f. 28.6.2005, then
in 2015 w.e.f. 6.1.2015 and now in 2019 w.e.f. 12.12.2019.
Before coming to the controversial Citizenship (Amend -
ment) Act of 2019, we have to first understand the provi-
sions of the Citizenship Act, 1955 and what amendments
were done in 2019. The Citizenship Act is a very small Act
comprising of only 19 provisions. Section 2 of this Act is a
definition clause. In subsection (a), the government of
India is defined as the central as well
as the state government. In subsec-
tion (b), an “illegal migrant” is
defined, which is very important to
understand in the present atmos-
phere of controversy. Only two cate-
gories of persons were held as illegal
migrants—any foreigner who enters
India without a valid passport or
any other travel document and
those who enter India with a valid passport or any other
travel document but remain in India beyond the permitted
period of time. In the present Amendment Act, 2019, a pro-
viso was added to the definition of illegal migrants. By
implication, it means any person belonging to the Hindu,
Sikh, Budd hist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community from
Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan who entered India on
or before Dec ember 31, 2014 and who has been exempted
by the central government under Section 3 of the Passport
Entry Into India Act, 1920 or from the application of the
provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 or any rule made
thereunder, shall not be treated as an illegal migrant for
this purpose. There fore, persons of these six communities
from these three countries shall not be treated as illegal
migrants if they fulfil two criteria—firstly they entered
India before December 31, 2014 and on an application,
they are exempted by the central government under the
Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 or Foreigners Act,
1946. Therefore, by virtue of this amendment, these per-
sons shall not automatically become citizens of India but
first they have to prove they entered into India before
December 31, 2014 and take permission from the central
government.
According to the Citizenship Act, the citizenship of India
can be provided in four ways—citizenship by birth, by
descent, by registration and by naturalisation.
CITIZENSHIP OF INDIA
CAN BE PROVIDED IN
FOUR WAYS—BY BIRTH,
BY DESCENT, BY
REGISTRATION AND BY
NATURALISATION.

38. 38March 30, 2020
Citizenship by Birth
According to Section 3, every person who is born in India
after January 26, 1950, but before July 1, 1987 or is born
after July 1, 1987 but before December 3, 2004, and either
of his parents is a citizen of India at the time of his birth or
he was born after December 3, 2004 and both his parents
are citizens of India or one of his parents is a citizen of
India and the other is not an illegal migrant at the time of
his birth, shall be deemed to be a citizen of India by birth.
However the validity of Section 3 (1) (a) and (b) are under
challenge before the Supreme Court and has been referred
to a Constitution Bench.
This Section was amended firstly in 1987 and then in 2003.
Subsection (2) of this section further provides that a person
shall not be deemed to be a citizen of India by virtue of this
Act as a result of his birth if at the time of his birth, any of
his parents possesses such immunity from suits or legal
process as is accorded to invite to an envoy of foreign sov-
ereign power accredited to the President of India and he or
she is not a citizen of India or any of his parents is an enemy
alien and the birth occurs in a place
then under occupation by the enemy.
Therefore, if we carefully look at this
section, it appears that the Parliament
tried to control conferment of citizen-
ship by birth time and again as and
when the Indian government faced
new problems. By the first amend-
ment in this section in 1987, the gov-
ernment prescribed that a person who
took birth in India after January 26,
1950 but before July 1, 1987 is a citizen of India irrespective
of any condition, whereas by the amendment of 1987, a
condition was imposed on conferring citizenship by birth—
if a person took birth in India after July 1, 1987, he can be
conferred citizenship by birth only in case any of his par-
ents is a citizen of India and this exemption was provided
only up to 2003 and was confined by the Amendment Act,
2004. This Amendment provided that if a person takes
birth in India after commencement of the Amendment Act,
2004, i.e. 3.12.2004, he can be conferred citizenship by
birth only if both his parents are citizens of India or one of
his parents is a citizen of India and the other is not an ille-
gal migrant at the time of his birth.
Citizenship by Descent
Section 4 of the Citizenship Act prescribes citizenship by
descent. According to it, a person who is born outside India
is a citizen of India by descent (i) if he is born after January
26, 1950 but before December 10, 1992 and his father is a
citizen of India at the time of his birth and if he is born after
December 10, 1992, either of his parents is a citizen of India
at the time of his birth. The proviso of the Section puts cer-
tain conditions on citizenship by descent. The proviso says
that if the father (or either of his parents if born after
10.12.1992) of such person is a citizen by descent, that per-
son shall not be a citizen of India unless his birth is regis-
tered at an Indian consulate or his father is in the service of
the Government of India. Subsection (1) of Section 4 fur-
ther prescribes that no such birth shall be registered unless
his parents declare that the minor does not hold the pass-
port of any other country. Subsection (3) of Section 4 also
prescribes that if a person is born outside undivided India
and was a citizen of India at the commencement of the
Constitution, he shall be deemed to be a citizen of India by
descent only.
Citizenship by Registration
Section 5 of the Citizenship Act prescribes conferment of
citizenship by registration. Under this Section, the central
government on an application made in this behalf by any
person who is not an illegal migrant, may grant citizenship
if he belongs to any of the following categories:
A person of Indian origin who is ordinarily resident in
India for seven years before making
such an application.
A person of Indian origin who is or -
dinarily a resident in any country out-
side undivided India.
A person who is married to a citizen
of India and is ordinarily a resident of
India for seven years before making
such an application.
Minor children of citizens of India.
A person of full age and capacity
whose parents registered as citizens of India under Section
6 (1) (a).
A person of full age and capacity who, or either of his par-
ents, was earlier a citizen of independent India and is ordi-
narily a resident of India for 12 months immediately before
application.
A person of full age and capacity, who has been registered
as an Overseas Citizen of India Card Holder (OCI) for five
years and who is ordinarily a resident of India for 12
months before making such an application.
For the purpose of the first and third category, a person
shall be deemed to be ordinarily resident in India if he is
residing here for a period of 12 months immediately before
making an application and who has resided for not less
than six years during the last eight years preceeding the
aforesaid period of 12 months.
For the purpose of this subsection, a person shall be
deemed to be of Indian origin if he or either of his parents
was born in undivided India or in such other territory
which became part of India after August 15, 1947.
Subsection (3) of Section 5 prescribes that no person who
has renounced or has been deprived of his Indian citizen-
ship or whose citizenship has been terminated shall be reg-
THE CITIZENSHIP
(AMEND MENT) ACT,
2019 CHANGED NOTH-
ING IN THE POWERS
OF THE CENTRE TO
GRANT OR TAKE
AWAY CITIZENSHIP.
Special
Supplement

39. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 39
istered as an Indian citizen except by order of the central
government. To the amending Act of 2004, subsection (6)
was added in Section 5 which empowers the central
government to grant exemption from residential require-
ment to any person or class of persons as may be decided
in writing.
Citizenship by Naturalisation
Section 6 of the Citizenship Act prescribes citizenship by naturalisation. Under this section, if a person who is not an
illegal migrant and qualifies under the conditions given in
the Third Schedule, makes an application, he may be con-
ferred a certificate of naturalisation by the central govern-
ment and on taking the oath of allegiance will become a cit-
izen of India by naturalisation from the date of such a cer-
tificate. Under this Section, the central government is also
empowered to waive all or any of the conditions specified in
the Third Schedule while conferring a certificate of natural-
isation to any person who has rendered distinguished serv-
ice to the cause of science, philosophy, art, literature, world
peace or human progress. The qualifications for naturalisa-
tion are given in the Third Schedule and are summarised
as under:
Third Schedule
(a) that he is not a subject or citizen of any country where citizens of India are prevented by law or practice of that
country from becoming subjects or citizens of that country
by naturalisation
(b) that if he is a citizen of any country, he undertakes to
renounce the citizenship of that country in the event of his
application for Indian citizenship being accepted
(c) that he has either resided in India or been in the service
of the Government in India or partly the one and partly the
other, throughout the period of 12 months immediately
preceding the date of the application. If the central govern-
ment is satisfied that special circumstances exist, it may,
after recording the circumstances in writing, relax the peri-
od of 12 months up to a maximum of 30 days which may be
in different breaks.
(d) that during the [14 years] immediately preceding the
said period of 12 months, he has either resided in India or
been in the service of the Government in India, or partly
the one and partly the other, for periods amounting in the
aggregate to not less than [11 years]
(e) that he is of good character
(f) that he has an adequate knowledge of a language speci-
fied in the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution
(g) that in the event of a certificate of naturalisation being
granted to him, he intends to reside in India, or to enter
into, or continue in, service under the Government in India
or under an international organisation of which India is a
member or under a society, company or body of persons
established in India.
Provided that the central government may, if in the special
circumstances of any particular case it thinks fit
(i) allow a continuous period of 12 months ending not
more than six months before the date of the application to
ARE THEY CITIZENS? There has been a major crackdown on suspected illegal Bangladeshis living in Karnataka
UNI

40. 40March 30, 2020
be reckoned, for the purposes of clause (c) above, as if it had
immediately preceded that date
(ii) allow periods of residence or service earlier than 3 [15
years] before the date of the application to be reckoned in
computing the aggregate mentioned in clause (d) above.
Citizenship by the Assam Accord
According to Section 6A, a person shall be deemed to have been detected to be a foreigner on the date on which a
Tribunal constituted under the Foreigners (Tribunals)
Order, 1964 submits its opinion to the effect that he is a for-
eigner to the officer or authority concerned in accordance
with the Foreigners Act, 1946.
Subsection (2)says that all persons of Indian origin who
came before 1.1.1966 to Assam from the specified territory
(means Bangladesh) including those whose names were
included in the electoral rolls used for the purposes of the
general election to the House of the People held in 1967 and
who have been ordinarily residents in Assam since the
dates of their entry into Assam shall be deemed to be citi-
zens of India as from January 1, 1966.
Sub-section (3)says that every person of Indian origin
who (a) came to Assam on or after January 1, 1966 but
before the 25th day of March, 1971 from Bangladesh; and
(b) has, since the date of his entry into Assam, been ordi-
narily resident there and (c) has been detected to be a for-
eigner, shall register himself with the registering authority
and if his name is included in any electoral roll for any
assembly or parliamentary constituency in force on the
date of such detection, his name shall be deleted
therefrom.
Sub-section (4)says that a person registered under sub-
section (3) shall have, as from the date on which he has
been detected to be a foreigner and till the expiry of a peri-
od of ten years from that date, the same rights and obliga-
tions as a citizen of India including the right to obtain a
passport, but shall not be entitled to have his name includ-
ed in any electoral roll for any assembly or parliamentary
constituency at any time before the expiry of the said period
of ten years.
Sub-section (5)says that a person registered under sub-sec-
tion (3) shall be deemed to be a citizen of India for all pur-
poses as from the date of expiry of a period of ten years
from the date on which he has been detected to be a for-
eigner.
Sub-section (6)is about giving up citizenship of India.
Sub-section (8)says that except as otherwise expressly pro-
vided in this section, its provisions shall have effect
notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for
the time being in force.
Citizenship by Incorporation of Territory
According to Section 7, if any territory becomes a part of India, the central government may, by order notified in
the Official Gazette, specify the persons who shall be citi-
zens of India by reason of their connection with that terri-
tory; and those persons shall be citizens of India as from
the date to be specified in the order.
RAGING ISSUE A protest by Asom Yuva Parishad for implementing the Assam Accord which defines citizenship in Assam
Special
Supplement
UNI

41. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 41
Overseas Citizenship
In Section 7A, the procedure for registration of Overseas
Citizen of India Cardholder is given. Subsection (1) says
that the central government may on an application register
the following persons as Overseas Citizen of India
Cardholder
(a) any person of full age and capacity
who is a citizen of another country, but was a citizen of
India at the time of, or at any time after the commence-
ment of the Constitution; or
who is a citizen of another country, but was eligible to
become a citizen of India at the time of the commencement
of the Constitution; or
who is a citizen of another country, but belonged to a ter-
ritory that became part of India after August 15, 1947; or
who is a child or a grandchild or a great-grandchild of
such a citizen; or
(b) a person, who is a minor child of a person mentioned in
clause (a); or
(c) a person, who is a minor child, and
whose both parents are citizens of India or
one of the parents is a citizen of India; or
(d) spouse of foreign origin of a citizen of
India or spouse of foreign origin of an
Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder reg-
istered under Section 7A and whose mar-
riage has been registered and subsisted for
a continuous period of not less than two
years immediately preceding the presenta-
tion of the application under this section:
Provided that for the eligibility for regis-
tration as an Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder, such
spouse shall be subjected to prior security clearance by a
competent authority in India:
Provided further that no person, who or either of whose
parents or grandparents or great-grandparents is or had
been a citizen of Pakistan, Bangladesh or such other coun-
try as the central government may, by notification in the
Official Gazette, specify, shall be eligible for registration
as an Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder under this
sub-section.
Sub-section (3) says that notwithstanding anything con-
tained in sub-section (1), the central government may, if it
is satisfied that special circumstances exist, after recording
the circumstances in writing, register a person as an
Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder.
Section 7B prescribes conferment of rights on Overseas
Citizen of India Cardholder. Sub-section (1) says that
notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for
the time being in force, an Overseas Citizen of India
Cardholder shall be entitled to such rights, other than the
rights specified under sub-section (2), as the central gov-
ernment may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify
in this behalf, but every such notification shall be laid
before each House of Parliament.
Sub-section (2) says that An Overseas Citizen of India
Cardholder shall not be entitled to the rights conferred on
a citizen of India
(a) under Article 16 of the Constitution with regard to
equality of opportunity in matters of public employment;
(b) under Article 58 of the Constitution for election as
President;
(c) under Article 66 of the Constitution for election as Vice-
President;
(d) under Article 124 of the Constitution for appointment
as a judge of the Supreme Court;
(e) under Article 217 of the Constitution for appointment as
a judge of the High Court;
(f) under Section 16 of the Representation of the People
Act, 1950 (43 of 1950) in regard to registration as a voter;
(g) under Sections 3 and 4 of the Representation of the
People Act, 1951 (43 of 1951) with regard to the eligibility
for being a member of the House of the People or of the
Council of States, as the case may be;
(h) under Sections 5, 5A and section 6 of
the Representation of the People Act,
1951 (43 of 1951) with regard to the eligi-
bility for being a member of the
Legislative Assembly or the Legislative
Council, as the case may be, of a State;
(i) for appointment to public services and
posts in connection with affairs of the
Union or of any State except for appoint-
ment in such services and posts as the
central government may, by special order
in that behalf, specify.
According to Section 7C on renunciation of Overseas
Citizen of India Card by any person, every minor child of
that person shall also cease to be an OCI.
Section 7D empowers the central government to cancel
registration of OCI, if it is satisfied that
(a) the registration as an OCI was obtained by means of
fraud, false representation or the concealment of any mate-
rial fact; or
(b) the OCI has shown disaffection towards the Consti -
tution, as by law established; or
(c) the OCI has, during any war in which India may be
engaged, unlawfully traded or communicated with an
enemy or been engaged in, or associated with, any business
or commercial activity that was to his knowledge carried on
in such manner as to assist an enemy in that war; or
(d) the OCI has, within five years after registration under
sub-section (1) of Section 7A, been sentenced to imprison-
ment for a term of not less than two years; or
(e) it is necessary so to do in the interests of the sovereignty
and integrity of India, the security of India, friendly rela-
tions of India with any foreign country, or in the interests of
the general public; or
THE PRESENT CAA
2019 HAS NOTH-
ING TO DO WITH
NRC; IT MERELY
PROVIDES PRO-
TECTION TO A
CERTAIN CLASS
OF PERSONS.

42. 42March 30, 2020
(f) the marriage of an OCI, who has obtained such Card
under clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 7A
(i) has been dissolved by a competent court of law or other-
wise; or
(ii) has not been dissolved but, during the subsistence
of such marriage, he has solemnised marriage with any
other person.
Termination of Citizenship
Section 8 is about renunciation of citizenship. On such
renunciation, every minor child of such person shall also
cease to be a citizen of India. Provided such a child may,
within one year after attaining full age, make a declaration
that he wishes to resume Indian citizenship and shall there-
upon again become a citizen of India.
Section 9 is about termination of citizenship. Subsection (1)
says that any citizen of India who by naturalisation, regis-
tration or otherwise voluntarily acquires citizenship of
another country shall, upon such acquisition, cease to be a
citizen of India:
Section 10 is about deprivation of citizenship. Sub-section
(1) says that a citizen of India who is such
by naturalisation or by virtue only of clause
(c) of Article 5 of the Constitution or by
registration otherwise than under clause
(b)(ii) of Article 6 of the Constitution or
clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 5 of
the Citizenship Act, shall cease to be a cit-
izen of India, if he is deprived of that citi-
zenship by an order of the central govern-
ment under this section.
Sub-section (2) says that subject to the
provisions of this section, the central government may, by
order, deprive any such citizen of Indian citizenship, if it is
satisfied that
(a) the registration or certificate of naturalisation was
obtained by means of fraud, false representation or the con-
cealment of any material fact; or
(b) that citizen has shown himself by act or speech to be
disloyal or disaffected towards the Constitution of India as
by law established; or
(c) that citizen has, during any war in which India may be
engaged, unlawfully traded or communicated with an
enemy or been engaged in, or associated with, any business
that was to his knowledge carried on in such manner as to
assist an enemy in that war; or
(d) that citizen has, within five years after registration or
naturalisation, been sentenced in any country to imprison-
ment for a term of not less than two years; or
(e) that citizen has been ordinarily resident out of India for
a continuous period of seven years, and during that period,
has neither been at any time a student of any educational
institution in a country outside India or in the service of the
Government in India or of an international organisation of
which India is a member, not registered annually in the
prescribed manner at an Indian consulate his intention to
retain his citizenship of India.
Sub-section (3) says that the central government shall not
deprive a person of citizenship under this section unless it
is satisfied that it is not conducive to the public good that
the person should continue to be a citizen of India.
Sub-section (4) says that before making an order under this
section, the central government shall give the person, ag -
ainst whom the order is proposed to be made, notice in
writing informing him of the ground on which it is pro-
posed to be made and, if the order is proposed to be made
on any of the grounds specified in sub-section (2) other
than clause (e) thereof, of his right, upon making applica-
tion therefore in the prescribed manner, to have his case
referred to a committee of inquiry under this Section.
Supplemental
Section 13 prescribes that the central government may, in such cases as it thinks fit, certify that a person with respect
to whose citizenship a doubt exists, is a citizen of India; and
a certificate issued under this section shall,
unless it is proved that it was obtained by
means of fraud, false representation or
concealment of any material fact, be con-
clusive evidence that he was such a citizen
on the date thereof, but without prejudice
to any evidence that he was such a citizen
at an earlier date.
Section 14 is about disposal of application
under Sections 5, 6 and 7A. Sub-section (1)
says that the prescribed authority or the
central government may, in its discretion, grant or refuse
an application under Sections 5, 6 and 7A and shall not be
required to assign any reasons for such grant or refusal.
Sub-section (2) says that subject to the provisions of
Section 15, the decision of the prescribed authority or the
central government on any such application as aforesaid
shall be final and shall not be called in question in
any court.
National Register of Citizens and National
Identity Cards
Section 14A deals with the issue of national identity cards.
Sub-section (1) says that the central government may com-
pulsorily register every citizen of India and issue a national
identity card to him.
Sub-section (2) says that the government may maintain a
National Register of Indian Citizens and for that purpose
establish a National Registration Authority.
Sub-section (3) says that on and from 3.12.2004, the
Registrar General, India, appointed under sub-section (1)
of Section 3 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act,
1969 (18 of 1969) shall act as the National Registration
THE PROBABLE
CHALLENGE TO
CAA 2019 WILL
BE ON THE
GRO UNDS OF
EQUALITY AND
SECULARISM.
Special
Supplement

43. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 43
Authority and he shall function as the Registrar General of
Citizen Registration.
Sub-section (4) says that the government may appoint such
other officers and staff as may be required to assist the
Registrar General of Citizen Registration in discharging his
functions and responsibilities.
Sub-section (5) says that the procedure to be followed in
compulsory registration of the citizens of India shall be
such as may be prescribed.
Revision and Review
Section 15 deals with revision. Any person aggrieved by an order made under this Act by the prescribed authority or
any officer or other authority (other than the central gov-
ernment) may, within a period of 30 days from the date of
the order, make an application to the central government
for a revision of that order and the decision of the central
government shall be final.
Section 15A gives another chance to the aggrieved person
to file a review before the central government.
Penalty
According to Section 17 related to offences, any person who, for the purpose of procuring anything to be done or
not to be done under this Act, knowingly makes any repre-
sentation which is false shall be punishable with imprison-
ment for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine
which may extend to Rs 50,000 or with both.
Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019
By the Amendment Act, 2019 the following amendments
were done:
1. Amendment of Section 2.
In the definition of illegal migrant given in Section 2 (1) (b),
the following proviso is inserted:—
“Provided that any person belonging to Hindu, Sikh,
Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community from Af -
ghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan, who entered into India
on or before the 31st day of December, 2014 and who has
been exempted by the Central Government by or under
clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Passport
(Entry into India) Act, 1920 or from the application of the
provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 or any rule or order
made thereunder, shall not be treated as illegal migrant for
the purposes of this Act.”
2. After Section 6A of the principal Act, the following
Section was inserted:
“6B. (1) The Central Government or an authority specified
by it in this behalf may, subject to such conditions, restric-
tions and manner as may be prescribed, on an application
made in this behalf, grant a certificate of registration or cer-
tificate of naturalisation to a person referred to in the pro-
viso to clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 2.
(2) Subject to fulfilment of the conditions specified in sec-
tion 5 or the qualifications for naturalisation under the pro-
visions of the Third Schedule, a person granted the certifi-
cate of registration or certificate of naturalisation under
sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be a citizen of India from
the date of his entry into India.
(3) On and from the date of commencement of the
Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, any proceeding pend-
ing against a person under this section in respect of illegal
migration or citizenship shall stand abated on conferment
of citizenship to him:
Provided that such person shall not be disqualified for
making application for citizenship under this section on
the ground that the proceeding is pending against him and
the Central Government or authority specified by it in this
behalf shall not reject his application on that ground if he
is otherwise found qualified for grant of citizenship under
this section:
Provided further that the person who makes the applica-
VERIFYING DATABASE The proposed NPR updation by the government involves correcting/modifying Aadhaar and Voter ID details

44. 44March 30, 2020
tion for citizenship under this section shall not be deprived
of his rights and privileges to which he was entitled on the
date of receipt of his application on the ground of making
such application.
(4) Nothing in this section shall apply to tribal area of
Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram or Tripura as included in the
Sixth Schedule to the Constitution and the area covered
under "The Inner Line" notified under the Bengal Eastern
Frontier Regulation, 1873.”
3. In Section 7D of the principal Act (i) after clause (d), the
following clause is inserted:
“(da) the Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder has violated
any of the provisions of this Act or provisions of any other
law for time being in force as may be specified by the
Central Government in the notification published in the
Official Gazette; or”
(ii) after clause (f), the following proviso shall be inserted,
namely:—
"Provided that no order under this section shall be passed
unless the Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder has been
given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.”
4. In Section 18 of the principal Act, in sub-section (2),
after clause (ee), the following clause shall be inserted,
namely:—
“(eei) the conditions, restrictions and manner for granting
certificate of registration or certificate of naturalisation
under sub-section (1) of section 6B,”
5. In the Third Schedule to the principal Act, in clause (d),
the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:—
“Provided that for the person belonging to Hindu, Sikh,
Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community in
Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan, the aggregate period
of residence or service of Government in India as required
under this clause shall be read as ‘not less than five years’ in
place of ‘not less than eleven years’.”
Thus by closely reading the Amendment Act of 2019, it
changed nothing in the powers of the central government
to grant or to take away citizenships of people or the proce-
dure for taking or proving citizenship by the people. It only
makes out a separate class of persons on the basis of reli-
gious persecution which comprises of Hindu, Sikh,
Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community from
Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan, from the definition
of illegal migrants and provides them an opportunity
of getting citizenship of India if residing in India before
31.12.2014.
Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920
Under the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920, the cen-
tral government is empowered to make rules requiring that
persons entering India shall be in possession of passports,
and for all matters ancillary or incidental to that purpose.
Under this Act, the central government may prohibit or
allow entry into India of any person who has no passport
issued to him. The Passport (Entry into India) Rules, 1950
were notified in the year 1950.
The Foreigners Act, 1946, was amended as the Foreigners
(Amendment) Act, 2004. According to the Foreigners Act,
1946, a "foreigner" means a person who is not a citizen of
India. Under this Act, the central government may make
provision with respect to all foreigners or any particular
foreigner or any prescribed class or description of foreigner,
for prohibiting, regulating or restricting the entry of for-
eigners into India or their departure therefrom or their
presence or continued presence therein. The central gov-
ernment may also regulate the entry, period of presence,
place of residence, change of name, movement, arrest,
detention, deportation and eviction of foreigners. It may
also compel foreigners to disclose their identity, associa-
tion, contacts, activities, etc. It may also compel them to
give their handwriting, signatures and other biometrics.
Section 6 prescribes obligations on the master of any vessel
and pilot of any aircraft landing or embarking in India.
DEBATABLE LAW Members of the Jansangharsh Manch
protesting against CAA, NRC and NPR in New Delhi
SpecialSupplement

45. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 45
Section 7 prescribes the obligations of hotel keepers and
others to furnish particulars of foreigners.
Section 14 of this Act prescribes penalty up to five years’
imprisonment for contravention of the provisions of this
Act. Section 14A prescribes penalty of a minimum two
years to a maximum eight years for foreigners to enter in
restricted areas without valid documents. Section 14B pre-
scribes penalty for a minimum two years to a maximum
eight years and a fine up to Rs 50,000 for foreigners using
forged passports. Section 14C provides similar penalty for
abetment of any offence punishable under Section 14 or
Section 14A or Section 14B.
Section 16 prescribes that the provisions of this Act shall be
in addition to, and not in derogation of, the provisions of
the Registration of Foreigners Act 1939 (16 of 1939), the
Indian Passport Act, 1920 (34 of 1920) and of any other
enactment for the time being in force.
Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of
National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003
In exercise of the powers under Sections 18 (1) and (3) of
the Citizenship Act, 1955, the central government on
10.12.2003 enacted the Citizenship (Registration of
Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003.
These rules mention both the population register as well as
the citizen’s register. According to Rule 3, the Registrar
General of Citizen Registration shall establish and main-
tain the National Register of Indian Citizens, which shall be
divided at the state level, district level and the sub-district,
village or ward level. The local register shall contain details
of persons after due verification from the population regis-
ter. According to Rule 4 for the purpose of the National
Register, the Registrar General shall first notify in the offi-
cial gazette, the period and duration of house to house enu-
meration for collection for the particulars of citizens.
During the verification process, if the citizenship of any
person is found doubtful, it shall be entered by the local
registrar with an appropriate remark in the population reg-
ister for further enquiry and such a person or family shall
be informed in a specified proforma immediately after the
verification process is over. Such doubtful persons shall be
given an opportunity of being heard by the sub-district reg-
istrar, who will give his decision in writing with reasons to
include or exclude his name within 90 days after hearing
him. Any objection to any inclusion shall also be decided by
the sub-district registrar in the same manner. Against this
order of the sub-district registrar, the aggrieved person may
file an appeal before the district registrar, whose decision
shall be final. However, after such a decision, the jurisdic-
tion of High Courts can start under Article 226 of the
Constitution and then the Supreme Court.
Rule 11 prescribes that the registrar general shall cause to
maintain a National Register on the basis of extracts from
various registers specified under Registration of Births and
Deaths Act, 1969.
Rule 13 prescribes that the registrar general shall issue a
national identity card to every citizen whose particulars are
entered in the National Register of Indian Citizens. From
these rules it is clear that entries in registers of births and
deaths and in the National Population Register are going to
play a vital role in preparing the National Register of
Citizens. The main provocation against CAA and NRC is
that people of India are very illiterate and they will not be
able to prove their births.
Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969
For the registration of births, Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 was enacted by Parliament in 1969, under
which the central government shall appoint a Registrar
General for India and state governments shall appoint a
chief registrar and other officers for the purpose of registra-
tion of births and deaths up to the local level, i.e. village
level or municipality level.
In this Act, responsibilities were fixed on several officers
and other persons to give information about births and
deaths. According to Section 11, in case of delay of informa-
tion, a birth can be registered after 30 days and within one
year through an affidavit and prescribed fee and after one
year on the order of a First Class Magistrate on verification
and also action will be taken against erring officers. Under
Section 30, rule-making powers are with state govern-
ments subject to prior approval of the central government.
In all states, there are full-fledged rules and set-ups for
registration of births and deaths. Therefore the fear of
any person that he cannot prove his birth in India is base-
less because in case any birth is not registered in any regis-
ter, he can take orders from the Magistrate who is a judicial
officer.
Foreigners Tribunal Order, 1964
The central government enacted the Foreigners Tribunal
Order, 1964 w.e.f. 23.9.1964 according to which any ques-
tion regarding the nationality of any person may be
referred by the central government or registering authority
to the Foreigners Tribunal. This will be a judicial Tribunal
and have the powers of a civil court and will decide the
question on the basis of a judicial scrutiny after giving a
proper opportunity to such a person of being heard.
IN CASE ANY BIRTH IS NOT
REGISTERED IN ANY
REGISTER, THE CON-
CERNED PERSON CAN
TAKE ORDERS FROM THE
MAGISTRATE WHO IS A
JUDICIAL OFFICER.

46. 46March 30, 2020
Foreigners Tribunal (Amendment) Order, 2019
This order was amended by the central government by the
Foreigners Tribunal (Amendment) Order, 2019 w.e.f.
30.5.2019. Under these powers, the question of nationality
of any person has also been given to state governments,
UTs, district collectors or district magistrates. In this order,
a right of appeal is provided to any person referred in para
8 of the schedule to the Citizenship (Registration of
Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003
before the designated Tribunal in this Order. The proce-
dure to be followed by such a Tribunal is provided in para
3A of this order, which is a judicial procedure. In the
absence of any appeal, the designated authority may also
refer the question to the Tribunal.
Instruction Manual For Updation of NPR 2020
The National Population Register (NPR) was created in
2010. The field work for NPR data collection was under-
taken along with Houselisting and Housing Census 2010.
The electronic database of more than 119 crore usual resi-
dents of the country has already
been created under NPR in
English as well as regional lan-
guages by collecting specific infor-
mation of the residents. As per the
decision of the government, the
NPR database was updated dur-
ing 2015-16 in all states/UTs
(except Assam and Meghalaya) to
make a comprehensive resident
database.
The scheme for creation of an NPR is being undertaken
under the provisions of The Citizenship Act, 1955 and The
Citizenship Rules, 2003. The NPR will contain the details
of all the “usual residents” of the country regardless of
whether they are citizens or non-citizens of India.
The government has decided to update the NPR database
alongwith Houselisting and Housing Census phase of
Census of India 2021 during April–September 2020. It will
be done according to the methodology given in the manual
for NPR through a mobile app by updating the existing
NPR database by verifying the details of all residents by
conducting a house to house enumeration by the enumera-
tor (a designated government official) and modifying/cor-
recting the demographic data items, collecting Aadhaar
number from each resident voluntarily, collecting mobile
numbers, Election Photo Identity Cards (EPIC) or Voter ID
Card number, Indian passport number and driving license
number, if available. All new resident(s)/new household(s)
found in the local area (HLB) during the field work will
also be included in NPR.
Supreme Court on Citizenship Act and NRC
The Supreme Court in the matter of Assam Public Works vs
Union of India WP (C) 274 of 2009 in several orders
including one dated 13.8.2019 (2019 (9) SCC 70) specifical-
ly directed the Union of India to update NRC on the pat-
tern of Aadhaar. However, the Supreme Court directed
specifying and publishing the manner of inclusion or exclu-
sion of names in the NRC.
In the matter of Assam Sanmilita Mahasangh vs Union of
India 2015 (3) SCC 1, the question of validity of Section 3
(1) (a) and (b) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 is referred to the
Constitution bench of the Supreme Court and it is still
pending.
The present CAA 2019 has nothing to do with NRC; it
merely provides protection to a certain class of persons
from the definition of illegal migrants and intends to pro-
vide them citizenship on fulfilling certain conditions men-
tioned in the Citizenship Act. The probable challenge to
CAA 2019 will be on the ground of equality and secularism,
which are part of the basic structure of the Constitution
and specifically provided in Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21.
This amendment cannot be challenged on the ground of
Articles 15 and 16 because the pro-
tection granted under both Articles
is available only to citizens of India
and not to other persons residing in
India, whether they are illegal
migrants or not. Article 21 says no
person shall be deprived of his life
or personal liberty without proce-
dure established by law. Therefore,
CAA cannot be challenged on the
ground of Article 21. As far as
Article 14 is concerned, it provides equality before law and
equal protection of law to every person in India whether he
is a citizen or not. CAA can be challenged under this Article
only. But on Article 14, there are numerous judgments of
the Supreme Court which say that the concept of equality
enshrined under this Article applies only on equals and not
on unequals. Article 14 prohibits discrimination but does
not prohibit classification based on intelligible differentia
having reasonable nexus with the object of the Act. The
classification in CAA is reasonable and is based on intelligi-
ble differentia. It makes a separate class of persons of
Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh who are religiously
persecuted and took shelter in India before 31.12.2014 for
the purpose of bringing them out of definition of illegal
migrants and to provide them accelerated citizenship. The
protected persons have their roots in undivided India and
before division, they or their ancestors were citizens of
undivided India and they fought freedom struggle with
other Indians, but unfortunately at the time of division,
they opted for any of these three countries. As a result, they
were facing unending persecution in the name of religion
there. They had been killed and converted in large numbers
in the last few years and their population has decreased
THE CITIZENSHIP
CRITERIA IS ALREADY
PROVIDED IN THE
CONSTITUTION AS WELL
AS IN THE CITIZENSHIP
ACT. THE NRC CANNOT
SUPERSEDE THEM.
Special
Supplement

47. | INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 47
drastically in these countries. In fact, they are facing extinc-
tion and genocide in these countries. Therefore, they took
shelter in India to save their lives and families. They cannot
carry on basic human rights in these countries. This classi-
fication cannot be applied to Muslims of these countries as
they were never persecuted in the name of religion there.
They are natives and a majority in these countries. They
have all the rights there to live a dignified life which is not
available to the protected class of CAA. They enter India in
a planned manner with the intention to earn money or to
spread terrorism but not to take shelter. Therefore, they
cannot be put on an equal footing with the protected class
of persons.
A huge hue and cry is being made against CAA and NRC by
falsely provoking people. There is fear that through CAA or
NRC, the citizenship of Muslim citizens in India will be
snatched away or they will be detained or thrown out of
India, which is baseless. NRC will merely be a procedural
aspect of the mandate granted under Section 14A of the
Citizenship Act which came into force on 3.12.2004 and in
accordance with the rules of 2003. In case of citizenship by
descent, registration or naturalisation, there cannot be any
problem to Indian citizens who are citizens by birth. It is
only in case of citizenship by birth that fear is being spread
among people. From the cumulative speculation of all pre-
vailing laws and procedure, it can safely be said that a per-
son can prove his birth in India by any document such as
birth certificate, school certificate, PAN card, passport,
Voter ID card, Aadhaar, bank account, driving license and
so on including affidavits or certificates by panchayatsor
municipalities or by an order of a magistrate under
Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969. Even if his
nationality is found doubtful for not having any of these
documents, the question will be decided by the sub-district
registrar after giving him the opportunity of being heard.
In case of an adverse order, such a person shall have a right
of appeal before the district registrar and against whose
order he can file a writ petition before the High Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution. Lastly, he can
approach the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the
Constitution. Apart from this, there is a parallel procedure
in case of illegal migrants to refer their cases to the desig-
nated Foreigners Tribunal for judicial scrutiny. Against
the order of this Tribunal, a writ petition can be filed
before a High Court and thereafter, an SLP before the
Supreme Court.
Therefore the provocation only on the basis of fear as to
what would be the criteria for proving citizenship in the
future NRC is very premature. The criteria of citizenship is
already provided in our Constitution as well as in the
Citizenship Act. NRC, being a procedural aspect of the cri-
teria laid down in the Constitution and the Citizenship Act,
cannot supersede them. It will be a register of citizens of
India who fulfil the criteria of citizenship given in the
Constitution or the Citizenship Act. CAA 2019 nowhere
prescribes that it will snatch the citizenship of any person
who is already a citizen of India by any manner prescribed
in the Constitution or the Citizenship Act.
Since the protests against CAA and NRC are spreading
widely across the nation and it is very likely that it may take
the shape of a civil war, it is expected that the central gov-
ernment should issue a notification for NRC as early as
possible prescribing the specific list of documents needed
such as birth certificate, school certificate, PAN card, pass-
port, voter I-card, Aadhaar, bank account, driving license
and so on. This includes affidavits of neighbours or certifi-
cates by panchayatsor municipalities or by an order of a
magistrate under the Registration of Births and Deaths
Act, 1969, which will be admissible proof of citizenship for
different classes of citizens which is missing in the
Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National
Identity Cards) Rules, 2003. Protesters are spreading
rumours among people that they will be discriminated
against or they will not be able to prove their citizenship or
their citizenship will be snatched or they will be thrown out
of the country. At the time of notification, people should be
given sufficient time for procuring the specified documents
and all the concerned authorities will also be directed to
provide the required documents in an easy procedure and
in a time-bound schedule. Only after that should the prepa-
ration of NRC start. The government should ensure that
the NRC, being an important register for welfare schemes
and smooth functioning of the country, should not be a tool
in the hands of mischievous persons to spread rumours or
to disturb peace and harmony or to initiate a civil war in
the country.
—The writer is Advocate On Record,
Supreme Court of India
TRIGGERING MAYHEM NRC and CAA should not become a
tool in the hands of mischievous people leading to violence

48. BUSTING STRESS
A happiness class in a government
school in Delhi
Opinion/ Ambedkar University Initiative Shiv Visvananthan
48March 30, 2020
ANALITY, democracy and
happiness go together. An
abstract concept can be too
elitist and too distant. It
lacks a sense of the familiar.
It cannot be mythical be -
cause myths contain contradictions and
can be double-sided. Banality has to be
ordinary, accessible, bowdlerised. Lan -
guage becomes an indicator of its avail-
ability. It has to be available for use and
be as discardable as tissue. The very life
of the concept, its use becomes a history
of its availability. Each word has to be as
obvious as a hammer and as clear in its
use. In this world of utilitarianism, the
greatest good of the greatest number
becomes possible. Such a fate haunts the
world of happiness.
One has to remember that banality
and post truth are different realms. Post
truth seeks to deceive and distort, be
temperamental in its worlds of meaning
while banality is transparent, obvious
and available. Banality is the counter to
post truth. Post truth deceives to exist,
banality oozes transparency. It is the art
of the obvious.
No word in the last few decades has
been subject to greater banalisation than
happiness. I sensed it first in the way
Indians domesticate English words using
them as nicknames. I remember three
Punjabi kids whose enthusiastic parents
named them Lovely, Pretty and Happy.
You have to have an ethnic verve, a global
confidence to survive such a christening.
But Indians manage it. I remember Delhi
University had three students whose cos-
mopolitan parents, placing their bets
evenly, had named them Hitler Malhotra,
Mussolini Malhotra and Stalin Malhotra.
Our culture has a tremendous sense of
the lowest common denominator.
Philosophers and economists used
words like welfare, decency and well-
being to make sense of concepts which
are polysemic. The fate of the word wel-
fare varied with isms it was associated
with and a welfare state was seen as one
of the great achievements of the 20th
century. Over time, welfare gave way to
finer concepts like well-being. A sense of
measure took over and concepts like
tools had to be more precise. Every con-
cept needed a quantitative index and the
recent millennial index is full of such
attempts. To add nuance to economism
and quantity, the Bhutanese added a
touch of Buddhism to happiness, creat-
ing a different culture around the con-
cept. But this was not enough.
Happiness needed a different pulpit.
It had to be evangelised, managerialised,
turned into a concept which could be
A Brand Called Happiness
The move to start a happiness plan is in line with former CJI Ranjan Gogoi’s statement that such classes
should be introduced in judicial academies. Has the corporatisation of this concept begun?
B
Twitter.com

49. table like scientific temper.
Happiness can be taught, acquired off
the shelf. It has a cosmetic power. One
almost wants to rename fair and lovely
creams as happiness creams. Happiness
is now managerial. It has a brand like
quality. A venerable chief justice has
given his seal of approval, a legal impri-
matur. Where angels and philosophers
fear to tread are the very domains
Justice Gogoi seeks to open. Happiness
is no longer a gated community. It is
open to all. It becomes the essence of a
majoritarian society.
O
ne has to grasp that Justice Gogoi reflects the pragmatic,
populist idea of happiness, as
something good for all and attainable
by all. It has a Pollyanna-like sense of
hope, a belief that happiness is achiev-
able by policy prescriptions. In fact,
happiness in classic psychoanalytic the-
ory was not so easily attainable. But in
modern managerialism, which is more
behaviouristic, happiness is a technique
which anyone can practice. Happiness is
an everyday reality, not a difficult nir-
vanato attain. This spirit of Justice Go -
goi is caught in the enthusiasm of Kar -
tik Dave, Dean of the School of Busi -
ness, Public Policy and Social Entre -
prene urship at Ambedkar University,
Delhi (AUD) who thinks of happiness
literally as a start-up, something that
can be taught with a bit of ingenuity.
The curriculum at Ambedkar promises
that the officers will feel “no inner con-
flict of goal”.
The statement at an
overt level seems innocent.
Happiness sounds more like
a public good available to
all. One senses no backstage
manipulation or social con-
trol. But it is precisely this
absence of backstage that
makes these theories appear
like a new incarnation of
Dale Car negie or Norman
Vincent Peale. Happiness is
redu ced to an attainable
science, not a product of
more complex forces of emergence. It is
a kind of spirituality simplified. One
does not have to move to ethics. All it
needs is a behaviouristic nudge to posi-
tive psychology. There is a sense of
manipulation, where communication,
rather than being a search for meaning,
becomes a technological project. The
proponents may counter the charge by
saying demystification is a part of sci-
ence today. What people do not notice is
that in simplifying the concept, we
mystify the technological apparatus
behind it. Research on welfare and hap-
piness has a corporate bias where spiri-
tuality and happiness, rather than stem-
ming from philosophies of ways of life,
seem to reduce happiness to a set of
assorted techniques or a state of mind
that can be achieved through manipula-
tion. One has to confront the truth of
such happiness.
As the philosopher Slavoj Zizek put it,
truth hurts unlike happiness and the
truth of such inane happiness hurts even
more. An inane happiness becomes the
basis for an inert democracy. It is a pity
that academics in AUD and elsewhere
have sat inertly over these developments.
The University has lost its sense of de -
bate as the courts lose their nuance of
philosophy. An epidemic of mediocrity,
like an unrecognised virus, haunts hap-
piness studies and institutions.
—The writer is a member of the
Compost Heap, a commons of ideas
exploring alternative imaginations
|
INDIA LEGAL |March 30, 2020 49
paraded like a trophy seen as a ritual of
therapy. Happiness and the idea of hap-
piness had to be wrenched from abs -
truse philosophers and made accessible.
Like Alice, every citizen had to use the
word and insist it meant what he meant
it to be. Happiness took a strange mana-
gerial turn. It became subject to tech-
nique. It could be turned into a project.
You could aim for happiness and plan
for it with the precision of a rocket
launch.
Happi ness from wisdom, insight,
philosophy became technique and
method. Happi ness became a project
like plumbing. Even sex was not reduced
to the availability of method and tech-
nique the way happiness was. One needs
a special moment to capture the utter
banality of the term, where its very
description be comes a celebration of
democracy as mediocrity. There is a
shrewdness here when the powers that
be realise happiness might be more
amenable term for manipulation than
justice or equality.
Happiness has a ready availability, an
accessibility, even an intimacy that jus-
tice and welfare fail to provide. Such an
event needs a tongue in cheek storyteller,
a character who epitomises the medioc-
rity of an era and yet is seen as a success.
What better choice than a Supreme
Court judge, what better judge than the
controversial Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi
who in August 2019 proposed happiness
classes in judicial academies. A friend
reminded me that the BJP move to pro-
mote his happiness had made him a
member of the Rajya Sabha. He asked
me: “Is criticizing Gogoi contempt of
Parliament or Courts?”
Justice Gogoi steps on nuance and
subtlety. He brings a gravitas to comic
situations, a vulnerability and a venera-
bility that makes him endearing. Con -
cerned both about justice and the judi-
ciary, the chief justice proposes happi-
ness classes for judicial officers. One
has to remember it is not quality, com-
passion, care or reflexivity that he is
advocating but happiness, which he
sees like a vaccine, available and injec -
Justice Ranjan Gogoi
reflects the prag-
matic, populist idea
of happiness, as
something good for
all and attainable by
all. It has a Pollya -
nna-like sense of
hope that happiness
can be achieved by
policy prescriptions.

50. T
he coronavirus pan-
demic has caused
huge disruptions in
offices and businesses
across the country, and
media houses are not
immune. Despite the
unique processes required
in a media organisation
which entails close coordi-
nation between editorial,
design, copy desk and
printing—or filing and
uploading in the case of
digital operations—many
media outlets are asking
staff to work from home.
According to a survey
by digital media platform
Newslaundry, The Indian
Express, India Todaymag-
azine, and The Times of
Indiagroup are some of
the larger media organisa-
tions that have implement-
ed work from home meas-
ures. TV channels are fol-
lowing suit despite the
unceasing flood of news
about the pandemic, live
coverage and the specia -
lised equipment required
for broadcasts. Regular
programmes that require
elaborate staff have been
shuttered for now as some
senior staffers work from
home, and even digital
platforms like Scroll and
The Quinthave joined in
the work-from-home cam-
paign. Newslaundrysays
reporters and editors will
work from “wherever is
convenient” and India
Legaltoo has also intro-
duced work-from-home
protocols for its senior edi-
torial staff.
50 March 30, 2020
T
here are a lot of red faces in the higher echelons of the Dainik Bhaskargroup, the
largest circulated daily newspaper in
India. The Hindi language newspa-
per has been issued a showcause
notice by the Press Council of India
for publishing an interview of Sanna
Marin, the prime minister of Finland,
on its digital arm, DB Post, which
embarrassingly turned out to be
fake. The interview was published on
International Women’s Day and the
dateline was Helsinki. However, the
interview came to the notice of the
Finnish prime minister’s office which
clarified that no such interview had
taken place.
The communications director of
the Finland government said: “We
would have known if anyone in
Helsinki had interviewed the prime
minister.” The Finnish government
even took up the matter with the
Indian embassy in Helsinki.
DG Posthas since taken down
the interview from its site and an
unofficial statement says it was sent
by a freelancer. The Finnish govern-
ment said that the text was lifted
from an earlier interview of the
Finnish prime minister given to
German TV channel ZDF. For the DB
group, the blow to its hard-earned
credibility is serious.
Red Faces
Media Watch
O
ne of the major casualties of the
pandemic are
con ferences, summits
and conclaves, most
notably the annual India
Today Conclave which
has been postponed.
Regulars at the Conclave,
including invitees, were
looking forward to hear
from a range of speakers,
including Dr Ian Lipkin,
the virologist who is help-
ing China fight the coron-
avirus. Other lost voices
include the Union finance
minister, Nirmala Sithara -
man; Evan Spiegel, co-
founder and CEO of
Snap.Inc; S Jaishankar,
Union foreign minister
who was scheduled to
speak on rebalancing
India’s foreign policy;
economists Arvind
Subramanian and SK
Subramaniam, on their
analysis of the Indian
economy; author Ruchir
Sharma on de-globalisa-
tion; policy expert Navroz
K Dubash; and corporate-
activist Shloka Nath on
why India is so vulnerable
to climate change; and
erudite Congressman
Shashi Tharoor. Also
missed will be the usual
line-up of celebrities and
Bollywood stars. The
Conclave was due to start
last weekend.
Lost Voices
Home Page

52. RNI No. UPENG/2007/25763
Postal Regd. No. UP/GBD-197/2017-19
3ULQWHGRQHYHU\PRQGD\ SRVWHGDW6XE3RVW2IÀFH6HFWRU1RLGD