Abstract
One of the most debated issues in present day India is the one of citizenship. While the Articles 5 to 11 of the Citizenship Act, 1955 clearly defines who can be called a citizen in India, many controversies have come to the fore with the passing of CAA in December, 2019. Alongside this, there is a very straightforward indication that the GOI seeks to implement a nationwide NRC. This Register is a bona fide list of citizens which was created for the first time in Assam in 1951 to combat the issue of illegal immigration in the state.
The ultimate list of NRC post the updation process, that was released for Assam has alarmingly excluded 19,06,657 people. These people are now ‘stateless’. It has been argued that the NRC is discriminatory because it targets Muslims and its exclusion practices are part of the BJP’s Hindu Nationalist Agenda. Despite these criticisms, the Indian government has defended NRC as necessary measures that fosters national security and controls and preserves the cultural integrity of the country by identifying and deporting illegal migrants. The government has also argued that the NRC (and CAA) are constitutionally valid and that they do not violate any fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitution.
With the citizen’s registry fueling fear and panic in the nation, it is imperative that we critically examine the NRC and its conformity with the Constitution. This paper argues that the maintenance of the NRC ensures the authority of the people of our country and protects the country from Illegal immigration. It also attempts to scrutinize the NRC with the help of the only available precedent – the Assam NRC. In this essay, relevant newspapers, journals, and websites have been analyzed to further explore the implications of a proposed nationwide NRC on India’s diverse population.
The paper concludes by advocating for a carefully structured nationwide NRC and proposes procedural reforms on the ground level to address the administrative and humanitarian challenges observed in Assam.
Keywords
National Register of Citizens, illegal Immigrants, Assam, national security, national integrity, Citizenship Act, 1955
Introduction
There was an influx of refugees in Assam during the independence period and the wars that followed and even during normal times from Bangladesh which included both Muslims and Hindu. This caused an air of fear in the state that the indigenous people might be overnumbered and exploited because of the increase in the population of these refugees. In response to this, many put up the demand for a National Register of the Citizens so that these foreigners could be identified and deported. In 1951, the first NRC was created based on the 1951 census for Assam particularly. This register consisted of demographic information of the people of Assam who qualified as citizens as per Citizenship Amendment Act, 1955. This was made mandatory in view of the growing resistance among the masses to give refuge to Bangladeshi people who were seen as ‘illegal immigrants’.
Post the 1971 Bangladesh War, it has been said that about 10 million Bangladeshi refugees fled to India. From 1979 to 1985, during the Assam Agitation by the All-Assam Students’ Union (AASU), the people pushed for updating the NRC so that these illegal refugees of the war could be deported. The movement ended as the Assam Accord was signed in 1985 which set 25th of March in the year of 1971 as the date, after which anyone who entered after this was to be identified as an illegal immigrant worthy of being deported.
In 2014, it was ordered by the Supreme Court that the updating process of NRC be done in a manner that is time bound. Here it is important to note that Assam is the only state that undertook to update the NRC in the year two thousand and nineteen as per the above mentioned SC order in Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha & Others vs. Union of India & Others.
With the declaration by Home minister Amit Shah in the Rajya Sabha regarding the implementation of NRC throughout the country in November, 2019 and with the approval of funding for the updating of the NPR (short for National Population Register) by the Union Cabinet in December, 2019, one can very rightly assume that the ruling dispensation seeks to implement a nationwide NRC.
As per available information, approximately 330 Pakistani and approximately 1770 Bangladeshi nationals have been repatriated during the last three years. Illegal migrants enter the country in a clandestine and surreptitious manner. Therefore, an accurate estimate of such illegal migrants is not available.
It is a continuous process to identify such illegal immigrants so that they can be deported. The NRC serves this purpose – by requiring people to prove their citizenship by producing documents such as birth certificates and land records. But the proposal of a nationwide NRC has ignited turmoil in the country. Some regard it as a flawed concept that has sought to serve the political agenda of the ruling dispensation. While the Assam NRC was a necessary compilation because of the state’s unique history, many argue that there are no real historical reasons that mandate the compilation of a nationwide NRC. Some have gone to the extent of calling the NRC exercise ‘disruptive and destructive’. That the combined NPR-NRIC exercise is manifestly arbitrary. And thus, it has been argued that this results in a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The fundamental guarantee of the right to life and personal liberty is also threatened.
This is a bold claim to make for a register that simply sets out to prepare a list of bona-fide citizens. While many have slammed the government on the issue of NRC nobody has mentioned any alternative to control illegal migration. It is thus important to analyze whether a register that records the demographic information of the citizens of the nation can be arbitrary and violative of constitutional principles. In this paper, The Citizenship Amendment Act of 1955 and other relevant constitutional provisions have been interpreted to understand the legality of the NRC exercise alongside its socio-political relevance. Its implementation in Assam has also been discussed. The author also analyses the work of Anil RoyChoudhary on NRC, 1951 to understand the ground-level limitations of such an exercise.
Research Methodology
This paper follows descriptive methods of research and uses primary and secondary sources for the closer examination of the constitutional validity of NRC and its implementation in Assam.
Literature review
According to R B Vaghaiwalla, the Census Superintendent, Assam, in 1951, (Census Report, 1951, Part IA, pp xxxiii Ef), “An important innovation of this census was the preparation of a National Register of Citizens in which all important census data was transcribed from the census slips with the exception of census question No 6 (displaced persons), No 8 (bilingualism) and No 13 (indigenous persons). The Register uses the same symbols and abbreviations and is copY of the census slips. It is compiled in separate parts, one relating to each village and each ward of a town. It will be maintained as a permanent record and kept up-to date by collecting information through village officials. As it was not possible to hand-sort for house slips which relate to individuals, the National Register of Citizens giving details of the individuals arranged by households was utilised for sorting and tabulating certain characteristics of the households like their size, ordinary structure and compoEition.”
Moving the SC, Tushar Mehta who is solicitor general of India told a bench of then CJI Ranjan Gagoi and Justice RF Nairman that “illegal migrants have no place in the country. India cannot be the refugee capital of the world.”
BJP MLA Rajeshwar Singh, in his letter to the Union Law Minister in June 2025 called the Union home ministry figures on illegal immigrants in India “alarming”. He highlighted that there were one crore illegal Bangladeshis in India in 1997, 1.2 crore in 2004, over 2 crores in 2016 and in 2025 the numbers are “likely far greater”. Despite this, deportations remain “negligible” due to legal ambiguities and procedural entanglements, he said. The MLA said illegal Bangladeshis and Rohingyas routinely invoke Article 21 (right to life), aided by NGOs, activist lawyers and long-winded court proceedings, effectively “stalling” deportation in most cases.
The Central government filed a counter affidavit in the Supreme Court, rebutting the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. It mentioned in the affidavit that NRC is a necessary exercise for any sovereign country “for identification of citizens from non-citizens” while claiming that it has been part of the Citizenship Act, 1955 since December 2004.
Illegal immigration and the adoption of NRC in Assam
Around 1826 when Assam was ceded to the British by the Burmese as per the treaty of Yandabo, that ended the Ahom rule in Assam, the initial trend of migration from these neighbouring areas began. With river Brahmaputra and her tributaries, which initially rendered the land of Assam uninhabitable for many centuries, now having made the Assam territory fertile alongside the vast stretches of forest lands, this trend gained momentum. These migrants came looking for land and resources and jobs which had most likely been frustrated in their own countries.
Later in the initial years of the twentieth century, during the 1920s, Bengali migrants that migrated to the Nagaon district had now scattered throughout the land of Assam. The British not only did not take any steps to control it but also encouraged the process apparently because these foreigners formed a labour class that were low maintenance and cheap for the British which was a boon for their plantation industry.
Midway the 20th century, during the independence period with the formation of East Pakistan, many refugees migrated to Assam. This time, for the first time the NRC was compiled for the Assamese issue of illegal foreigners. Similarly, during the Indo Pakistan War of 1971, migrants were exiled from the erstwhile East Pakistan due to the atrocities inflicted against the civilians by the Pakistani Army and Security Forces. An estimated 10 million persons immigrated to India at the time.
The migration of Bangladeshi residents and sometimes even registered citizens through illegal means continued even during normal times, very much like the concept of lebensraum. This idea supports the necessity for expanding physical territory and acquiring new land to provide essential resources like food and raw materials for a state’s excessively large population. Thus, in our context it justifies Bangladeshi people taking refuge in India because of low living conditions and over popuplation in their state.
Additionally, many Nepalis and Bhutias also illegally entered Assam from Nepal and Bhutan. Firstly, because our borders with these countries have been for a long time, very easy to penetrate and secondly, because the immigration rules in all these countries including ours have been very liberal which gave an easy way to those who wanted to take refuge in India.
As these migrants settled in Assam, owing to the widespread discontentment among the native population and the fear of becoming minority in their own state, the indigenous people began expressing concerns regarding subversion of their land and culture by these foreigners. This resulted in socio-political friction and the ‘Assam Agitation’. By 1979, protests were seen throughout the state. These protests were organized by the All-Assam Students Union (“AASU”) and the All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad (“AAGSP”). It has been estimated that more than 800 people lost their lives because of this agitation which lasted 6 years ending in the month of August in 1985 after the GOI and the groups involved signed an MoU called the ‘Assam Accord’. This agreement set 25th March 1971 as the cut off date which meant that foreigners who migrated to India post this date were required to be identified and deported while their names must also be removed from the electoral rolls.
Moving towards the end of the twentieth century in 1997, many in Assam were marked as doubtful voters by the ECI. Their names remained in the electoral rolls but they were not allowed to participate in elections. Their cases were to be decided by the Foreigners Tribunals.
Cut forward to 2009, a PIL was filed in the apex court that demanded the implementation based on the CAA, 1955 and removal of Assam NRC. The SC in Assam Public works v. UOI guided that the updating exercise of the NRC needs to begin. Although the SC ordered to update the NRC in 2013 itself, it was not until February 2015 that the actual exercise began. The first draft was published by the GOI on December 31, 2017. In the year, two thousand and eighteen, the Government of Assam released the 2nd draft. This draft excluded over 40 lakh people. It was later ruled by SC that Assam NRC was only a draft, and hence it cannot be the basis of any action by any authority against anyone. Again in 2019 when the latest version was released by the GOI, over 9 lakh people in Assam were not a part of the list.
Is the NRC consistent with constitutional principles?
The significance of this Register is fundamental to the cultural and political fabric of the country. To some this exercise of weeding out illegal immigrants, may make India look like a hostile neighbouring nation that doesn’t want to cooperate with its neighbouring countries but it is imperative that we understand that India can render help and aid in all other terms other than giving refuge to their people as this poses a significant threat to the security and affairs of our own land.
Today, India’s economy is one of the fastest growing in the world. If we do not have a clear demarcation and picture of how many citizens and foreigners are residing in the country, functions of the government like policy making and resource allocation become difficult to fulfil effectively.
This is also vital when we talk of legal rights of the Indian citizens. If these rights are exploited this poses a significant burden on all 3 branches of the government. Thus, all such chances of exploitation must be eliminated which is precisely where the NRC comes into play. It is of critical importance to safeguard growth and development.
From a strictly legal perspective, the NRC has a firm footing in law. The Union government, filed an affidavit to counter allegations of illegality of the NRC in the INDIAN UNION OF MUSLIM LEAGUE v. UNION OF INDIA stating that the NRC is considered a necessary exercise for any sovereign nation “to identify citizens from non-citizens,” with the claim that it has been a part of the Citizenship Act, 1955, since the month of December in the year two thousand and four. As per Section 14A of the Act related to citizenship passed in the year 1955, the Union Govt. can create a register for the citizens of India and issue identity cards. The Constitution itself, under eleventh Article, gives the authority to look after all matters relating to citizenship to the Parliament. This means that, technically, Parliament does have the power to enact laws like the NRC—even if the Constitution’s Articles 5 to 10 already lay down who was a citizen at the time of its commencement.
However, is it in line with the fundamental principles of right to equality and right to life as enshrined in the Article 14 and 21 of the Indian constitution respectively is the bigger question.
The fear that the NRC may be used by the government in a discriminatory manner is valid, but it still does not have the power to invalidate the grave need for NRC in a country as populated as ours. In scenarios, where there may be concerns of valid citizens being deprived of their status due to lack of documents, bureaucratic lapses, or discriminatory assumptions, there can be alternative mechanisms to address this, or certain reforms can be made to the existing structure of the NRC.
Ground level errors in the Assam NRC and what it means for the future
The statement made by the Census Superintendent of Assam (op cit, p 365) R B Vaghaiwalla, about the persons who prepared this Register are very interesting: “In filling up the sample verification forms, the tabulation officers sometimes experienced considerable difficulty in reading the names of persons and tracing their relationship to the head of the households as the National Register of Citizens was written by unqualified or ill-qualified persons.” In other words, the enumerators of the census carried out the process of preparing the register, who also handled the operations of the census. It was primarily grounded in the data collected during the census process. These enumerators were mandated to complete enumeration in just 20 days. Consequently, if any area was under-enumerated or if someone’s name was mistakenly left out during this brief period, their name would also be excluded from the NRC. Individuals who were omitted had no subsequent chance to be included, nor were they allowed to raise objections. Since the NRC was neither made public nor treated as an official public document, people had no way of verifying whether their names were listed. The entire process was ultimately driven by the discretion of the enumerators and their supervisors, making it a heavily one-sided procedure.
A nationwide NRC is bound to replicate these problems not only at a bigger scale but also with far worse consequences. But the solution to this lies in improving the enumeration process and not in the outright rejection of the register as it is an essential tool to combat illegal immigration to uphold national security. Some steps may include giving the enumerators adequate (not too long or too less) time to conduct the work of enumeration, etc. This ensures that the information neither suffers from under-enumeration nor from the consequences that may arise due to delays in documentation.
In a country with a population as dynamic and large as ours, there are possibilities that despite all measures taken with due diligence, the process is still bound to contain errors. And thus, it is necessary that notifications or proof of registration be sent to the citizens so that in case they have been excluded by mistake, and are in reality bona fide citizens of the country, they can be aware of it in the event of non-receival of such a notification. Also such persons must have the right to file objections, etc. Such reforms can overcome ground level errors if they are adequately applied and followed, that’s the beauty of it and that is why they must not demotivate the masses from implementing a nationwide register whose aims align with the greater interests of a civilizational state like India.
The Assam NRC serves as a precedent that the proponents of the NRC must be grateful for, as it guides significantly the proposed nationwide NRC and by outlining the limitations of this exercise, it further suggests improvements as may be required.
And so should be the ones who are against it as it clearly demarcates the constraints of the register.
DO WE NEED A NATIONWIDE NRC?
In Assam, the historical, geographical and political factors have time and again mandated creation of the NRC. However, as we talk about the proposed nationwide NRC, it has been claimed not many historical facts exist that underscore the need for the National Register of Citizens to be compiled on an all India level.
The newly approved National Population Register (NPR) also presents significant challenges, particularly due to the absence of clear guidelines regarding individuals identified as “doubtful citizens.” This ambiguity is especially concerning because being excluded from the NPR could potentially lead to the loss of citizenship. Such uncertainty reflects the arbitrary character of the NRC process and can make it appear irrational and unreasonable.
Even so, It is both logically and factually incorrect to say that there is 1) no historical context for the nationwide NRC 2) there is lack of justification for the same.
India has the third highest number of illegal immigrants in the world after Russia and the United States. While Assam may have been the prime focus of the problem, it was not the only one.
Conclusions and suggestions
The National Register of Citizens (NRC) is a deeply political and constitutional issue that touches the foundational questions of citizenship, identity, and national security in India.
This paper has sought to establish that the NRC, when carried out with clarity, fairness, and accountability, can serve as an effective tool to regulate illegal immigration and safeguard the demographic and cultural integrity of India.
While the Assam NRC revealed numerous flaws—ranging from exclusion errors to bureaucratic inefficiencies—it also offers critical insights for the future. It highlights the urgent need for administrative preparedness, transparent procedures, and strong legal safeguards. A nationwide NRC must avoid the shortcomings of the Assam experience by ensuring the availability of documents, addressing issues of statelessness, and providing robust mechanisms for appeals and redressal.
The paper also finds that the argument of constitutional invalidity on grounds of arbitrariness does not hold up against the legal justifications presented by the Government of India. Rather than rejecting the NRC as a disruptive or exclusionary tool, the need is to reform and refine its structure to ensure that it remains constitutionally sound and socially just. In an era where the question of illegal immigration affects not just Assam but several Indian states, the idea of a procedurally fair NRC gains relevance. India must balance compassion with sovereignty.
Many political leaders from the BJP like Amit Shah, Yogi Adityanath, Aparna Yadav, Rajeshwar Singh have shown immense support for the legislation. Meanwhile many stand in its opposition like Akhilesh Yadav, Mamta Banerjee. Clearly, the NRC has also created its own political polarisation. As of now, the Central Government has not prepared or released any draft for a nationwide NRC. Hence, it is prudent to reserve final judgment until the official contours of the nationwide NRC are made public. If executed with precision and empathy, the NRC can indeed emerge not only as a legal instrument but as a historic milestone in India’s journey as a civilizational state—one rooted in justice, order, and cultural continuity.
Submitted by
Vanshika Rathi
Jindal Global Law School