The Role of Judiciary in Interpreting Citizenship Laws Affecting the Muslim Community in India

Abstract

In recent years, the Muslim minority in India has pushed citizenship to the forefront of the country\'s most heated political and legal debates. In this article, we take a look at the Indian judiciary\'s significant role in interpreting citizenship rules, particularly in light of recent laws like the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) and the court\'s reactions to the NRC and NPR. In light of the many claims of Muslim discrimination, this paper examines the judicial response to questions of secularism, equal protection under the law, and constitutional morality. The study examines seminal decisions and ongoing lawsuits to bring attention to the judiciary\'s dual responsibilities as a protector of basic rights and an institution subject to majority political pressure. Concerns about judicial independence and impartiality have been raised by anomalies and delays in adjudicating crucial citizenship-related matters, despite the courts\' sometimes admirable prudence and dedication to constitutional principles. The article argues that the court should keep the democratic balance and make sure that citizenship rules don\'t become tools of religious exclusion or marginalization by analyzing the legislation, studying doctrine, and critically examining current case law.

Introduction

Citizenship in India is not only a legal relationship between the individual and the state but also reflects constitutional values like equality, secularism, and fraternity. Since independence, Indian citizenship laws have evolved amidst debates on identity, migration, and political ideology. These developments have especially impacted Muslims, whose citizenship status has frequently been contested due to historical, religious, and political factors.

2. Judiciary’s Role in Citizenship Disputes
The Indian judiciary is central to interpreting citizenship laws and resolving disputes, especially in light of controversial policies like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019, and the National Register of Citizens (NRC). Critics argue the CAA, which excludes Muslims from its protections, violates the secular and equalitarian principles of the Constitution. Although multiple petitions have challenged the CAA, the Supreme Court’s delay in ruling has led to criticism of judicial passivity. The judiciary also oversaw the NRC in Assam, which excluded 1.9 million people, disproportionately affecting Muslims, raising concerns about procedural fairness and humanitarian impact.

3. Constitutional Morality and Judicial Interpretation
Inspired by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the concept of constitutional morality urges that the judiciary uphold justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity even when laws supported by majorities threaten minority rights. In this view, courts must serve as protectors of secular and pluralistic values, especially when laws like the CAA risk communal bias and undermine constitutional guarantees.

4. Judicial Review and the Doctrine of Reasonableness
Under Articles 13, 32, and 226, courts have the authority to review and invalidate laws that violate fundamental rights. Landmark judgments like Maneka Gandhi, Shah Bano, and Kesavananda Bharati illustrate the judiciary’s evolving role in protecting due process, equality, and secularism. Principles of natural justice and protection against arbitrariness are essential safeguards in citizenship disputes.

5. Legal Pluralism and Postcolonial Citizenship
India’s legal system accommodates both secular constitutional law and religious personal laws, complicating uniform notions of citizenship. Muslims often navigate dual identities: legal citizens and culturally marginalized communities. The legacy of Partition and postcolonial anxieties has led to the securitization of Muslim identity, resulting in exclusionary practices such as the CAA and NRC. Courts must adopt a historically informed, inclusive approach to prevent systemic marginalization.

6. Judiciary Amidst Communal Politics: CAA, NRC, and Legal Responses
The judiciary’s handling of the CAA and NRC raises critical questions about constitutional integrity and minority protections. Critics argue that these laws institutionalize religious discrimination. While some High Courts have offered relief, the Supreme Court's delayed or cautious response has drawn concern over judicial independence and impartiality in politically sensitive cases.

7. Intersectionality and the Rights of Vulnerable Groups
Legal challenges related to citizenship are complex, often affecting individuals across multiple identities — religion, gender, and class. Intersectional justice demands nuanced judicial interpretation. While courts have upheld gender rights in cases like Shayara Bano, their engagement with Muslim refugees and stateless persons has been inconsistent. The judiciary must better integrate international human rights norms, including protections against statelessness and for refugees.

Conclusion

The role of the judiciary in interpreting citizenship laws in India has gained unprecedented importance, especially in light of recent legal and political developments that have disproportionately affected the Muslim community. While the Constitution guarantees equality and non-discrimination, recent legislations such as the CAA and the processes surrounding the NRC and NPR have put these guarantees to the test. The judiciary, vested with the power to interpret the Constitution and protect fundamental rights, holds the potential to act as a bulwark against majoritarian excesses. However, its response has been marked by a mix of assertiveness and hesitancy. Instances of progressive interpretations exist, but delays in adjudicating constitutional challenges and perceived alignment with executive priorities have diluted its protective role. Going forward, the judiciary must reaffirm its independence and commitment to secularism and equal citizenship. By delivering reasoned, timely, and principled judgments, the courts can restore public confidence in the rule of law and ensure that citizenship remains an inclusive and rights-based institution in India. Ultimately, the strength of India’s democracy lies in how fairly and equitably it treats all its citizens—especially the most vulnerable—and the judiciary must remain the final sentinel of that promise.

References

[1] Ali, A. (2006). Governance And Religion - An Islamic Point Of View. Mumbai: Institute of Islamic Study. [2] Al-Muala , A. (Ed.). (2006). The Judicial System in Islam. [3] Chandrachud, A. (2020). Secularism and the Citizenship Amendment Act. Indiana Law Review, 4(2), 1–25. [4] Dewi Fortuna Anwar, “Foreign policy, Islam and democracy in Indonesia,” Journal of Indonesian Social Sciences and Humanities, vol. 3, no. 1 (2010), pp. 37–54 [5] Hardgrave, J, R. L. (1993). The Challenge of Ethnic Conflict: India-The Dilemmas of Diversity. Journal of Democracy, 4(4), 54-68. [6] Islam, R. (2020, August 18). Hindu Nationalism: A Rise of new Religious Radicalism in India. Insamer. India. (2020). Amnesty International. [7] Kaur, A. (2017). Protection of human Rights in India: A Review. Jamia Law. [8] Kumar, S. (2017). Protection and promotion of human rights in India: Role of National human Rights commission. [9] Muhamad Turmudi, “Pajak Dalam Perspektif Hukum Islam (Analisa Perbandingan Pemanfaatan Pajak Dan Zakat),” Al-’Adl, vol. 8, no. 1 (2015), pp. 128–42 [10] Muslihun Muslihun, “Legal Positivism, Positive Law, and the Positivisation of Islamic Law In Indonesia,” Ulumuna, vol. 22, no. 1 (28 Mei 2018), pp. 77–95 [11] Online, E. T. (2019). Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019: What is it and why is it seen as a problem. [12] Poddar, M. (2018). The Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2016: International law on religion-based discrimination and naturalization law. Indiana Law Review, 2(1), 108–118. [13] Tripathi, Ashish (2011, Jul 6). Right to Education Act, against Muslim Interests: All India Muslim Personal Law Board. The Times of India. [14] Schneider. I., Imprisonment in Pre-Classical and Classical Islamic Law., Islamic Law and Society, 1995,V:2/2., p.163-170 [15] Suci Ramadhan, “Islamic Law, Politics And Legislation: Development Of Islamic Law Reform in Political Legislation of Indonesia,” Adhki: Journal of Islamic Family Law, vol. 2, no. 1 (21 Juli 2020), pp. 63–76.

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 Parihar Supriya Ashokbhai, Dr. Tai Chourasiya. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.