1. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 28/06/2013 of the Foreigners Tribunal-III, Barpeta, passed in case No. FT Case No. 04(III)/2013 (Ref. IMDT Case No. 1595/01) (State vs. Rahim Ali @ Rahimuddin), by which the petitioner has been declared to be a foreigner.

2. Heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Noor Mohammad, learned State Counsel and so also Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned ASGI. I have also perused the entire materials on record including the LCR received from the Tribunal.

3. In the written statement filed before the Tribunal, the petitioner contended that he was born and brought up at Village Fingwa in the district of Barpeta. He also contended that his grandfather’s name (Abed Ali) appeared in the voter list of 1965 along with his Uncles and mother. He also contended that his Uncle’s name (Sukur Ali) appeared in the voters’ list of 1971 and that his own name along with his wife Rezia Khatun appeared in the voters’ list of 1997.

4. Above were the grounds projected by the petitioner to claim that he is an Indian citizen. The learned Tribunal discussing the evidence on record has returned the following findings in para 9 of the impugned judgment:-

“(a) In the instant case, the OP has projected late Abed Ali S/o. Riazuddin as his grandfather and Late Kudus Ali as his father. But except the statement of the OP made in his Affidavit, there is no corroborative or any trustworthy evidence on record to show that Late Abed Ali s/o Riazuddin, whose name appears as a voter in the voters’ list of 1965 (Ex-A), is the grandfather of the OP or Late Kuddus Ali (the projected father of the OP) is the son of said Abed Ali. The linkage certificate (Ex-F) shows that one Rahimuddin (OP in this case) s/o. Kuddus Ali (even if it is accepted that Rahim Ali and Rahimuddin is one and the same person) is a resident of village Finguwa but there is nothing in Ex-F to show that Late Kudus Ali was the son of Late Abed Ali and or the aforesaid Rahimuddin was born in that village. It is sated in Ex-F that the name of the father of Rahimuddin appears written in Ex-A but on careful perusal of Ex-A it appears clear that there is nothing to show that Rahimuddin is the son of Kuddus or that the name of any Kuddus Ali is shown in Ex-A as a voter.

(b) The OP has further stated in his evidence in chief that his father died before 1965 and that his grandfather died after 1965. By saying so he wants to convey that because his father died before 1965, his (his father’s) name did not appear in Ex-A. Further if the statement of the OP to the effect that his father died before 1965 is accepted as true, the statement that his (OP’s) name appeared in Ex-C and Ex-D along with the name of his step mother Sibarun Nessa cannot be accepted as true because if Sibarun Nessa is his step mother than she should have married OP’s father before his (father of OP) death i.e. before 1965 and in that case her name should also have been recorded in Ex-A along with the name of the actual projected mother of the OP, namely Yarian. In Ex-C the age of Sibaran Nessa (the projected step mother of the OP) is recorded as 60 years in 1989 and if it is so, she should have born in or about 1929 and as such she was eligible to be a voter in 1950 (after 21 years from the date of her birth i.e. 1929). If her (Projected step mother of the OP) name appears in Ex-C and Ex-D it can well be presumed that she was alive at least till 1997 but there is no explanation or clarification on record as to why her name was not recorded in any of the voters’ lists of 1965, 1970, 1971 and 1985 and as to why no such voters’ list showing her name has been submitted and proved in this case.

(c) The OP has stated that the names of his uncles Hayat Ali, Pulmat Ali and Sukur Ali are recorded in Ex-A but there is nothing on record to show as to why the voters’ list of 1970 showing their names therein could not be filed. The amended voters’ list of 1971 (Ex-B) also did not show