The Madras High Court has directed the Union Government to review the citizenship application of a woman born in India to Sri Lankan refugee parents. The court emphasized that her case presents unique circumstances that require careful consideration under the Citizenship Act.
Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy observed that while the applicant might be technically classified as a foreigner, she had not entered India illegally. Instead, she was born on Indian soil in 1987 to Sri Lankan parents who had sought refuge in India. Given these factors, the court ruled that authorities should evaluate her citizenship request without insisting that she return to Sri Lanka and re-enter India with a visa.
"Given the unique facts and circumstances of the case, while authorities must consider all parameters required under the Citizenship Act for granting citizenship, the sole requirement for her to return to Sri Lanka and re-enter India as a legal migrant need not be considered," the court stated.
Read Also:- Madras High Court Questions Tamil Nadu Government Over ED Searches at TASMAC Headquarters
Court Emphasizes Unique Case and Legal Considerations
The petitioner, S. Ramya, had approached the court after facing difficulties in securing Indian citizenship. Her parents had arrived in India in 1984 due to the civil unrest in Sri Lanka and were granted refugee status. Her birth was officially registered with the Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation, and she was issued an Indian birth certificate.
Ramya possessed key identity documents such as a voter ID and an Indian passport. She completed her education, worked in India, and married an Indian citizen in 2014. She also has a son who is recognized as an Indian citizen. However, when her parents sought renewal of their refugee registration, the authorities noted that she was ineligible for citizenship under the Citizenship Act since neither of her parents were Indian citizens at the time of her birth.
Ramya attempted to submit her citizenship application online, but her case was not accommodated by the portal due to its peculiar circumstances. She argued that under Section 5(i)(c) of the Citizenship Act, she was still eligible for citizenship. Furthermore, the Act permits citizenship applications from individuals married to Indian citizens who have resided in India for at least seven years.
Read Also:- Madras High Court Upholds Minority Institutions’ Rights Against UGC Regulations
Despite these factors, authorities insisted that she return to Sri Lanka and re-enter India as a legal migrant to qualify for citizenship. The court, however, disagreed with this approach. It noted that the restriction applies only to illegal migrants—defined as foreigners who enter India without valid passports or travel documents. Since Ramya was born in India and had always considered herself an Indian citizen, the court determined that she could not be classified as an illegal migrant.
Recognizing the complexities of Ramya’s case, the court instructed the authorities to assess her application based on its unique merits rather than adhering to a rigid interpretation of the law. It underscored that her circumstances differ significantly from typical cases of foreign applicants seeking Indian citizenship.
Read Also:- Madras High Court Clarifies: Which Provision Prevails Between Sections 43B & 40A of the Income Tax Act?
The case was heard by Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy, with Mr. S. Ilamuhil representing the petitioner and Mr. Rabu Manohar along with Mr. V. Manoharan appearing for the respondents.
Case Title: S. Ramya v. The Union of India and Others
Case No: W.P. No. 5611 of 2025
