Case Note & Summary
The case involved foreign nationals engaged in Christian missionary work in India who had been residing in the country since before independence. They were ordered to leave India in 1987 after their requests for naturalization and extension of stay were rejected. The petitioners contended that their long-term residence established their domicile and thus citizenship under Article 5 of the Constitution. They argued that they were denied a hearing before the expulsion order was issued and that the Superintendent of Police lacked authority to sign the deportation order. The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions, stating that domicile requires an intention to remain permanently in India, which the petitioners failed to demonstrate. The court emphasized that mere residence does not equate to domicile, and the burden of proof lay with the petitioners. The court also affirmed the government's absolute right to expel foreigners and clarified that foreigners do not have the right to reside in India under Article 19(1)(e). The court found that the deportation order was valid as it was executed based on a decision from the Central Government. Ultimately, the petitions were dismissed without costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Domicile and Citizenship - Acquisition of Domicile - Article 5 of the Constitution of India - The court held that mere residence in India does not establish domicile without the intention to remain permanently. The petitioners failed to prove such intention, thus not acquiring Indian citizenship (Paras 1-2). B) Administrative Law - Expulsion of Foreigners - Right to be Heard - The court ruled that the government has absolute power to expel foreigners and there is no hard and fast rule regarding the opportunity to be heard before expulsion. The absence of notice did not vitiate the expulsion order (Paras 4-5). C) Constitutional Law - Fundamental Rights of Foreigners - Article 21 - The court clarified that foreigners have rights under Article 21 but not under Article 19(1)(e) for residence. The government’s power to expel foreigners is unrestricted (Paras 4-5). D) Administrative Law - Authority to Deport - The court found that the deportation order was executed by the Superintendent of Police but was based on a decision made by the Central Government, thus valid (Paras 6-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners acquired Indian citizenship and if the expulsion order was valid.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the writ petitions, affirming that the petitioners did not establish domicile or citizenship, and upheld the government's right to expel foreigners.
Law Points
- Domicile
- Citizenship
- Expulsion of Foreigners
- Fundamental Rights
- Natural Justice
