THE STATE OF BIHAR versus KUMAR AMAR SINGH AND OTHERS

THE STATE OF BIHAR versus KUMAR AMAR SINGH AND OTHERS

Article 7 of the Constitution of India overrides Article 5 and excludes from citizenship a person who migrated to Pakistan after 1 March 1947, regardless of other personal circumstances; the proviso to Article 7 did not apply in this case because the 'permanent' return permit was invalidly issued and properly cancelled. The definitions of evacuee property in the relevant ordinance and acts extended to interests such as those in wakf property and rights held as trustee or beneficiary—thus the property in dispute was correctly declared as evacuee property.

Parties
Appellant: The State of Bihar; Respondents: Kumar Amar Singh and others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 February 1955
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeals Under Articles 132(1) and 133(1)(c) of the Constitution of India (appeals Nos. 97 and 98 of 1952) / Supreme Court Civil Appellate Jurisdiction, on Appeal From High Court of Patna
Outcome
Appeals allowed.
Legal Topics
Citizenship, Evacuee Property, Wakf, Domicile, Migration, Permit for Resettlement
Constitutional Law Property Law Citizenship Evacuee Property Wakf Domicile Migration Permit for Resettlement

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State of Bihar

Appellant

Kumar Amar Singh and others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeals Under Articles 132(1) and 133(1)(c) of the Constitution of India (appeals Nos. 97 and 98 of 1952) / Supreme Court Civil Appellate Jurisdiction, on Appeal From High Court of Patna

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a wife who migrated from India to Pakistan after 1 March 1947, whose husband continued to reside in India, remains a citizen of India under Article 5 or is excluded by Article 7 of the Constitution of India
  2. 2 Whether the definitions of evacuee property in relevant Ordinances and Acts include the interest of an evacuee in property held as trustee, beneficiary, or as wakf property

Ratio Decidendi

Article 7 of the Constitution of India overrides Article 5 and excludes from citizenship a person who migrated to Pakistan after 1 March 1947, regardless of other personal circumstances; the proviso to Article 7 did not apply in this case because the 'permanent' return permit was invalidly issued and properly cancelled. The definitions of evacuee property in the relevant ordinance and acts extended to interests such as those in wakf property and rights held as trustee or beneficiary—thus the property in dispute was correctly declared as evacuee property.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed.

Orders

  • Kumar Rani could not be deemed a citizen of India at the relevant date and the order requiring her to leave India was valid.
  • The property (wakf estate) had been rightfully declared evacuee property and vested in the Custodian.