Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, has filed a plea before the supreme court regarding the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) and the legal challenges it faces, particularly from the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML). Upadhyay's plea asserts that the opposition to the 'caa' is politically motivated and does not have a solid legal basis.

The crux of Upadhyay's argument lies in the contention that the CAA does not violate any fundamental rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. He emphasizes that the protests and objections raised by certain groups, such as those seen at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) and Jamia Millia Islamia University, are not based on genuine constitutional concerns but rather on political agendas. The plea condemns the use of violence and unrest to oppose a law passed by the Parliament, stating that such actions prioritize street power over democratic processes.

Highlighting incidents of violence, including attacks on public property and law enforcement personnel, Upadhyay's plea aims to debunk what it terms as a misleading narrative of widespread dissatisfaction with the CAA.

The central purpose of the CAA, as argued in the plea, is to offer refuge to persecuted minorities from neighboring countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. Upadhyay refers to the Nehru-Liaquat Pact and Pakistan's failure to protect its minorities as reasons necessitating India's intervention through the CAA.

It is crucial to note that Upadhyay clarifies that the CAA does not affect the citizenship status of Indian Muslims and is specifically designed to grant citizenship rather than revoke it. The focus is on providing protection to minority communities such as Hindus and Sikhs who face persecution in the mentioned countries.

The plea also addresses concerns regarding the constitutional validity of the CAA. Upadhyay provides legal clarifications to support the Act's legality, grounding it in the authority granted to the Parliament by the Indian Constitution.

In conclusion, Upadhyay's plea advocates for the dismissal of petitions challenging the CAA's constitutionality, citing broader public interest and emphasizing the Act's humanitarian objectives within the framework of the Indian legal system.

Case:  Indian Union Of Muslim League v Union of India,

WP(c) 1470/2019.