It is a historical fact that trans-border migration of population has been happening continuously between the territories of India and the areas presently comprising Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. Millions of citizens of undivided India belonging to various faiths were staying in the said areas of Pakistan and Bangladesh when India was partitioned in 1947. India needed to deny citizenship, so Citizenship Act 1955 was laid down. It was known as the nationality law .Amendments were made in the forthcoming years 1986, 1992, 2003, 2005, 2015 and now 2019. Article 5 to 11 deals with citizenship in the Indian Constitution.

CAA 2019
Art 11 Gives The Power To The Union Government / Parliament
Regarding The Decision Of Citizenship After 26th Jan 1950.
It Says Persons From Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Pakistan Of Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Buddhist, Parsi, Christian Minority Who Entered India On Or Before 31st December Will Not Be Treated As An Illegal Migrant Which Is Defined Under 1) Sec 3 Of Passport Act 1920 & 2) Foreigners Act 1946.

It is a chance to become an Indian citizen by changing the time period to get citizenship that is in the third schedule clause (D) the time period by registration was 11+1 years now which is changed to not less than five years.

Nowhere in the act it is been mentioned anything about exclusion of Muslim. This act is to save the religious minorities who are being discriminated against and persecuted in those three countries. Different countries have different minorities. In this current Amendment Act we are dealing with these three countries. Between 1964 and 2008 the then Governments (UPA) have done this with Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and Uganda There are catena of researches which shows that the minorities being persecuted, this act will not benefit financially or by any other means it is just way to get Indian Citizenship.

How Did The Nehru Liaquat Pact Came And Its?
Significance Regarding To The Bill?
To understand this, we need to go back to 1950 post-Independence, when INDIA and Pakistan got divided the Muslim majority of west Punjab, east Bengal along with some areas of Sindh,north west frontier, British Balochistan, Kherpur, Sylhet etc. Muslim was a majority area, Pakistan was not merely for Muslims, nor India was only for Hindus .So both the countries signed the pact.

Believing that you have read the first 6 lines of the pact it is pretty clear that it mentions both the countries have a specific majority of people following a religion, both countries have minorities in their countries as such Pakistan has Hindus, and India has Muslim as minority. The pact says both the country promises to treat its minorities equally without discrimination, protect them and give them protection.

This is famously known as critical hostage theory by far and a solemn promise. Religious minorities in Pakistan often face significant discrimination, subject to issues such as violence and misuse of the blasphemy law. It is claimed that since 1947, religious minorities went from 23% to 3.0% of the population[1], due to violence and discrimination they have faced, however the reason of decline has more to do with mass migration of nearly 5 million Hindus and Sikhs to India in 1947 and separation of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) in 1971 which contained nearly 22% of minorities of Pakistan leaving behind approximately 1.6% of minorities in West Pakistan.

India Kept Her Promise As A Democratic Nation As Given Under Article 29 And Article 30 Of The Indian Constitution as it has a duty as a nation towards those minorities it is a one-way route that means No Indian Citizen will be excluded .

Exclusion?

As an individual no one is being stopped to enter including Muslims through the 5 ways provided in the citizenship act which are as follows:

• By birth
• By descent
• By registration
• By naturalisation
• By incorporation of territory
• � Here special treatment is given to these communities to save them from persecution, there is no point of exclusion, no clause in the current amendment act says such. The irony is in the last 6 years Muslims have been given citizenship in huge numbers in subject matter of law by naturalization or registration, so now why do we exclude them, at last India Is A Secular Country

Article 14 Violated?

The Constitution Of India is one of the most duly crafted works of all time and is regarded for its coverage of varied aspects and one equality before law. Article 14 Is Equality Before Law. In India The Term Equality Is Reasonable Classification Is Allowed But Based On Intelligible Differentia� Which Means Classify By Using Our Brain.

Here the same is being applied by the government to help the minorities so they can be equal, due to constant persecution, conversion, discrimination of the mentioned minorities in those Islamic States are in need of help and it is the duty of the government and it is allowed to protect its minorities it does not violate the Equality Before Law� because we are allowed to do Reasonable Classification�. If this is wrong then we have various laws for minorities not to forget the Muslims{reservation}, women, juvenile, senior citizens etc.

There is also an outrage about not adding Shia (In that case, the learned Judge, with reference to authoritative texts, went into the detailed history of the two sects of the Sunnis and Shias) and Ahmediyas (According to an article written for the Huffington Post by Qasim Rashid, a Visiting Fellow at Harvard University's Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Islamic Studies Program, Ahmadis are a sect of Islam whose members believe that the:
Messiah and Mahdi has come in the person of Mizra Ghulam Ahmad [Ahmed] of Qadian [the founder of the sect]" (The Huffington Post 24 Sept. 2014). in persecuted minorities however these two are sects in Muslim community. The argument follows that this failure on the part of Pakistan and Bangladesh places a special responsibility on India towards these minority groups.

But, because Ahmadiyas were recognized as Muslims until 1974, they weren't understood to fall into the definition of minorities regardless of religion� when India became a party to the current responsibility when it signed the Pact in 1950.

(Art14 Provides Reasonable Classification And Here We Are Concerned About Religious Minorities).

Rohingya Muslims?

In the case of Rohingyas, Indian Ministry of Home Affairs has labelled them illegal immigrants,� accused them of posing a national security threat,� and pushed for their deportation in an affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court.

The affidavit also stated that India does not have to adhere to non-refoulement as India is not a signatory to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention.[2]

The affidavit was in response to a case Mohammad Salimullah v. Union of India, filed by two Rohingya refugees against the involuntary deportation of refugees. The order states that they 'cannot comment upon something happening in another country.' It then recognises that 'serious objections' were raised as to whether Article 51(c) can be applied in this matter when India is not a signatory to the Refugee Convention. This article is a directive principle that requires the State to endeavour to 'foster respect for international law'.

The bench also notes that while Article 14 and 21 are guaranteed to all irrespective of citizenship, Article 19(1) (e) is not. According to the bench, the latter article is the one that contains the right not to be deported, since it provides for the right to reside or settle in any part of India. This is available only to citizens.

Further, the order takes note of the Union's national security concerns and their concern with touts who provide safe passage to India for illegal immigrants. On this basis, the bench refused the application for interim relief. However, it stated that deportation cannot be done unless the 'procedure prescribed' is followed.

Recently on June 18th 2021, Uttar Pradesh police ATS squad got hold of 4 Rohingyas and has claimed that these 4 men were involved in various crimes and illegally living in India.

Conclusion:
Throughout the years India has maintained firm on its stand that Terror and Talks cannot go in hand in hand,there has been no persistent development for peace between the parties adding it is an evident fact that FATF (Financial Action Task Force) has downgraded Pakistan to grey list for various reasons such as money laundering and Terror funding activities.
Lately we have been seeing that countries including Turkey and China are going hard on India over the Kashmir issue where on One side Turkey and Pakistan have choose to remain silent on Human Rights violation happening in Xinjiang province while China and Turkey have chosen to ignore the condition of minorities in Pakistan.

Coming to Turkey,whose Mr. Volkan Bozkir is serving as UNGA President, he recently in a speech tried to compare Kashmir Issue with the Palestine Issue which is violation of code of ethics Sec 3(c) (d) and 5 which talks about unwarranted preferential treatment to a state, biased or prejudiced approach and presenting one's personal interest.

Indian Government has utmost sensitivity and is dedicated towards Kashmir issue as immediately this time India has also hit back hard on Mr. Volkan Bozkir, MEA spokesperson said this is� Unacceptable and a disservice to the office .
This was an unfinished business, it is an inclusive law not exclusive, nor does it affect any citizen of INDIA at all.

End-Notes:

1. Asia times

Written By: Pranit D Kotian is the writer of the article and a second year law student from Government Law College Mumbai