Migration Jurisprudence from the South › India
Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India
Supreme Court of India · India · 2005-07-12 · National court
Citation: (2005) 5 SCC 665
Type of case: Constitutional and human rights
Outcome: Decided against the migrant side
Question
Was the special law for identifying “illegal migrants” in Assam, which put the burden of proof on the state, constitutional?
What the court decided
No. The Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act 1983 was struck down; the Foreigners Act, which puts the burden on the person to prove citizenship, applies in Assam.
In plain language
Assam had its own law under which the state had to prove that someone was an illegal migrant. The Supreme Court struck it down, so people now have to prove they are citizens themselves.
Dalam bahasa sederhana
Assam punya UU sendiri yang mewajibkan negara membuktikan seseorang migran ilegal. MA membatalkannya, sehingga kini orang harus membuktikan sendiri bahwa mereka warga negara.
Pertanyaan: Apakah UU khusus untuk menetapkan “migran ilegal” di Assam, yang membebankan pembuktian kepada negara, konstitusional?
What happened afterwards
- 2005-07-12: IMDT Act struck down.
- 2019: National Register of Citizens in Assam published, leaving out about 1.9 million people.
Sources
Open this decision in the interactive collection (compare, filter, Indonesian view, downloads).
Cite as: Institute for Migrant Rights (2026), Migration Jurisprudence from the South, version 0.1, https://theimr.org/court-decisions/d/in-sonowal-2005/. This page summarizes a court decision for research and advocacy; it is not legal advice.