People whose names were missing in the final draft of NRC, filling new enrollment forms at an NRC Seva Kendra,... Read More

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court deferred on Tuesday commencement of filing of claims and objections on inclusions-exclusions in the final NRC draft from August 30, saying it wanted to be doubly sure about authenticity of data and eliminate any confusion in standard operating procedures.

The court told attorney general K K Venugopal that on the one hand, the SOP, drafted by the Centre in consultation with the Assam government, provided that no one applying for inclusion in the National Register of Citizens (NRC) would be permitted to alter the family tree (proof of lineage) submitted earlier, but on the other, it permitted applicants to file fresh documents that could alter the legacy (lineage).

After going through NRC Assam coordinator Prateek Hajela’s report on district-wise percentage of over 40 lakh persons not in the final draft a bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and R F Nariman said a sample check was needed.

“We would like a re-verification of 10% of the final draft NRC data, like in a sample survey, by a different team to satisfy ourselves. You (Hajela) have to gear up your machinery as it will go on parallel to the process of receiving claims and objections as well as digitising and adjudicating them,” the bench said.

‘Family tree in a civil suit different from that for NRC purpose’

Hajela has placed before the court district-wise data of population excluded from the final draft NRC. We are of the view that the apex court should consider reverification of names included in the final draft NRC on a sample survey basis. Hajela will submit a report on this issue and time required to complete this exercise on September 4,” the bench ordered, posting the matter for September 5.

On admissible documents, the bench said, “AG, there is one issue regarding SOP. You (Centre) indicated that a person can change his legacy and submit fresh documents. Will it not amount to second chance? There is no problem in giving a second chance, but is it not redoing the entire exercise? At the same time, you also say that there can be no tinkering with the family tree. Is this not a contradiction? Family tree in a civil suit is very different from that for the NRC purpose.”

With Hajela saying that altering of legacy could amount to changing the family tree, the AG said, “There are poor, illiterate persons and labourers in remote areas of Assam who may not have submitted correct documents about lineage. The consequences of being rendered stateless is very severe as they cannot buy land or hold government jobs. These are human problems of huge magnitude.”

Appearing for a petitioner, senior advocate Kamal N Choudhury said the flip side also presented a human tragedy as the state had been infiltrated by a large number of foreigners, impacting demography and its culture. The bench asked Hajela to study this apparent contradiction in the SOP and give a report to the court by September 4 on its ramifications for preparation of final NRC.

