Article 9 of the Indian Constitution
The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the country, and it lays down the framework of governance, rights, and duties of citizens. Among its many provisions, Article 9 is a short but very significant one. It is located in Part II of the Constitution, which deals with the subject of citizenship. Citizenship is one of the most important aspects of any legal system, because it defines who belongs to the State and who enjoys the full set of rights and duties guaranteed by it. Article 9 deals with a specific situation where a person who is already a citizen of India acquires the citizenship of another country voluntarily. The rule is very clear: such a person is not an Indian citizen.
Even though Article 9 consists of only one sentence, it has far-reaching implications. It clarifies the principle that India does not allow dual citizenship in the conventional sense. This means that an Indian citizen cannot at the same time be a citizen of another country. The article has been the basis of many laws and judicial decisions, and it continues to be an important topic in constitutional law, immigration law, and public discussions about nationality.
Background to Article 9
To understand Article 9 properly, it is necessary to go back to the time when India became independent in 1947. At the time of independence and partition, the question of citizenship was extremely complex. Millions of people moved across the new borders between India and Pakistan. Some Indians were living abroad in countries like Burma, Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), or East Africa. Many people were not sure whether they would be considered citizens of India, Pakistan, or some other country.
The Constituent Assembly, which drafted the Constitution, had to carefully consider these issues. Part II of the Constitution, consisting of Articles 5 to 11, was devoted to defining Indian citizenship at the commencement of the Constitution in 1950. Article 5 laid down who would be citizens of India at the start. Article 6 dealt with persons who migrated from Pakistan, and Article 7 dealt with those who migrated to Pakistan but later returned. Article 8 concerned persons of Indian origin residing outside India. Article 9 then placed an important limitation by saying that if a person voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State, such a person would not be considered a citizen of India.
Thus, Article 9 emerged from the need to avoid confusion about dual citizenship and to ensure loyalty and allegiance to one country only. The framers of the Constitution felt that a person should not be a citizen of two countries at the same time, because this could create conflicts of loyalty and legal complications.
The Exact Wording of Article 9
Article 9 of the Indian Constitution reads:
“No person shall be a citizen of India by virtue of Article 5, or be deemed to be a citizen of India by virtue of Article 6 or Article 8, if he has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of any foreign State.”
This simple sentence is packed with meaning. It connects Article 9 with Articles 5, 6, and 8. Articles 5, 6, and 8 define different categories of persons who would be considered citizens at the commencement of the Constitution. Article 9 says that none of these persons can claim Indian citizenship if they have voluntarily taken the citizenship of another country. This makes Article 9 an overriding provision that limits the scope of Articles 5, 6, and 8.
The Principle Behind Article 9
The principle behind Article 9 is that India follows the model of single citizenship. This principle has two aspects. First, within the country, India recognises only one citizenship for the entire Union of India, not separate citizenships for each State. Second, externally, India does not allow a person to hold Indian citizenship at the same time as the citizenship of another foreign State.
The reason is straightforward: citizenship creates rights and obligations. A citizen owes allegiance to the country and in return receives rights like voting, equality, and protection. If a person is a citizen of two countries, situations may arise where the two countries have conflicting expectations or laws. For example, both countries may demand military service or loyalty in times of conflict. To avoid such clashes, India decided to keep citizenship exclusive.
Voluntary Acquisition of Foreign Citizenship
A central concept in Article 9 is the voluntary acquisition of the citizenship of a foreign State. This means that if an Indian citizen chooses to apply for and obtain citizenship of another country, he or she automatically loses Indian citizenship. The act must be voluntary, that is, done by free choice and intention.
The phrase “foreign State” means any country outside India. So, if a person becomes a citizen of the United States, Canada, Australia, or even neighbouring countries like Nepal or Bangladesh, he or she is no longer an Indian citizen under Article 9.
If the acquisition is not voluntary—for example, if a child automatically acquires citizenship of another country because of birth abroad—then it is not necessarily covered by Article 9. However, the Citizenship Act, 1955 and subsequent amendments provide detailed rules on how such cases are handled.
Loss of Citizenship under Article 9
Article 9 itself does not provide the detailed procedure of how Indian citizenship is lost. It only states the principle. The actual procedures are contained in the Citizenship Act, 1955. According to the Act, a person automatically ceases to be an Indian citizen if he or she acquires foreign citizenship voluntarily. There is no need for any formal cancellation by the Government of India. The law operates automatically.
This means that the moment an Indian citizen takes the oath of allegiance to another country and receives a foreign passport, he or she ceases to be an Indian citizen. If that person still uses an Indian passport or tries to claim rights reserved for Indian citizens, it is illegal. In fact, using an Indian passport after acquiring foreign citizenship is a punishable offence under the Passport Act.
Relation with Articles 5, 6 and 8
Articles 5, 6 and 8 of the Constitution identify different groups of people who would be citizens at the commencement of the Constitution in 1950. Article 5 recognised persons domiciled in India. Article 6 dealt with migrants from Pakistan, and Article 8 dealt with persons of Indian origin residing outside India. Article 9 says that none of these provisions can be used to claim Indian citizenship if the person has voluntarily taken foreign citizenship.
This makes Article 9 a limiting clause. For example, a person of Indian origin living in the UK in 1950 could have been recognised as a citizen under Article 8. But if that person had already taken British citizenship voluntarily, Article 9 would deny Indian citizenship to him or her. In this way, Article 9 acts as a safeguard to prevent dual nationality.
Judicial Interpretation of Article 9
Indian courts have had many opportunities to interpret Article 9. The Supreme Court and High Courts have clarified that the question of whether a person has voluntarily acquired foreign citizenship is a matter of fact and must be determined carefully.
One important case was Izhar Ahmad Khan v. Union of India (1962), where the Supreme Court explained that Article 9 applied only to voluntary acquisition of foreign citizenship. The Court said that if a person has been granted foreign citizenship automatically by operation of law, it may not always mean voluntary acquisition.
In another case, State of U.P. v. Rehmatullah (1971), the Court said that once it is proved that a person has voluntarily taken citizenship of another country, he ceases to be an Indian citizen and cannot enjoy rights like contesting elections or holding public office.
These judicial interpretations have strengthened the rule that Article 9 does not permit dual citizenship and that the loss of Indian citizenship occurs automatically once foreign citizenship is acquired.
The Citizenship Act, 1955 and Article 9
While Article 9 states the constitutional principle, the Citizenship Act, 1955 provides the operational details. Under Section 9 of the Act, any citizen of India who voluntarily acquires the citizenship of another country shall cease to be a citizen of India. Rules have been framed under this Act to determine whether acquisition was voluntary.
The Act also empowers the Government of India to make enquiries and decide such questions. For example, if there is a dispute about whether a person has acquired foreign citizenship, the Central Government can investigate and issue a decision. Courts have generally held that such decisions of the Government are binding.
Thus, the Citizenship Act acts as the practical extension of Article 9, making the rule effective in day-to-day situations.
No Dual Citizenship in India
A key outcome of Article 9 is that India does not allow dual citizenship in the traditional sense. A person cannot be a citizen of India and another country at the same time. Many Indians who migrate abroad and settle in countries like the USA, UK, Canada, or Australia face this situation. Once they take citizenship of that country, they automatically lose Indian citizenship under Article 9.
However, to maintain a connection with the Indian diaspora, the Government introduced the concept of Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI). This status gives certain rights like long-term visa, right to own property, and to do business in India. But it is not full citizenship. OCI cardholders cannot vote in Indian elections, hold constitutional office, or buy agricultural land. This distinction shows how Article 9’s principle of no dual citizenship continues to be respected even today.
Importance of Article 9
Although Article 9 is a single-line provision, it is very important. It establishes the clear boundary of Indian citizenship. It ensures that allegiance is not divided between India and any foreign country. It maintains the integrity of the Indian State by ensuring that those who enjoy full citizenship rights are committed to India alone.
It also helps in avoiding practical difficulties. Imagine if a person could hold two passports, vote in two countries, or claim government benefits from both countries. This could create endless confusion and conflicts. Article 9 prevents such situations by insisting on exclusivity.
Criticism and Debates
Despite its importance, Article 9 has also been criticised by some. Critics argue that in today’s globalised world, many countries allow dual citizenship, and India should reconsider its rigid stance. They say that millions of Indians living abroad, who still have emotional and financial ties to India, should be able to hold Indian citizenship along with foreign citizenship. This would strengthen India’s connection with its diaspora.
On the other hand, supporters of Article 9 argue that dual citizenship can create serious security and political problems. For example, a person with dual citizenship could have divided loyalty in times of war or political conflict. They also argue that the OCI status already provides most practical facilities for overseas Indians, without the complications of full dual citizenship.
Thus, the debate on Article 9 reflects the balance between exclusivity of citizenship and the desire to embrace global mobility.
Article 9 and Fundamental Rights
An important implication of Article 9 is its effect on fundamental rights. Only citizens enjoy certain fundamental rights, such as the right to equality of opportunity in public employment, the right to vote, the right to contest elections, and protection against discrimination. If a person ceases to be a citizen under Article 9, he or she loses these rights.
However, other rights like the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 are available to all persons, including foreigners. So, a former Indian who becomes a foreign citizen will still be protected by Article 21 when in India but will not enjoy rights reserved exclusively for citizens.
Article 9 and National Security
Another angle is national security. By making sure that Indian citizens cannot also be citizens of other countries, Article 9 ensures clear and undivided loyalty to India. This is especially important in sensitive areas like armed forces, intelligence, and government service. If dual citizenship were allowed, questions of divided loyalty could arise. Thus, Article 9 strengthens national security and sovereignty.
Comparative Perspective
Many countries have different approaches to dual citizenship. The United States, Canada, and Australia allow dual citizenship, meaning a person can be both a citizen of those countries and of another. In contrast, countries like China and Japan prohibit dual citizenship, similar to India. Each approach has its advantages and disadvantages. India chose the path of exclusivity in 1950, and Article 9 reflects that choice.
Contemporary Relevance
Even today, Article 9 remains highly relevant. With globalization, migration, and increasing overseas employment, many Indians acquire foreign citizenship. The principle of Article 9 continues to apply in each case. The popularity of OCI shows that people still want a link with India even after giving up citizenship. The continuing debates on whether India should allow dual citizenship show that Article 9 remains at the heart of the discussion on nationality and identity.
Conclusion
Article 9 of the Indian Constitution may be short, but it carries a deep message. It declares that no person can be an Indian citizen if he or she voluntarily acquires the citizenship of a foreign State. This establishes the rule that India does not allow dual citizenship. It ties in closely with Articles 5, 6, and 8, and is implemented through the Citizenship Act, 1955.
The provision ensures exclusive allegiance to India, avoids confusion in rights and duties, and strengthens national unity. At the same time, it has sparked debates about whether India should relax this rule in today’s globalised world. While critics call for dual citizenship, supporters argue that the Overseas Citizenship of India scheme already balances the needs of the diaspora.
In the end, Article 9 reflects the vision of the framers of the Constitution: a clear, undivided, and strong idea of Indian citizenship. Its relevance continues, as it shapes the identity of who is truly an Indian citizen in law and in spirit.
COMMENTS