JUDGMENT AND ORDER :

U. Bhuyan, J.

1. Heard Mr. D. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Ms. P. Baruah, learned counsel for the Central Government and Mr. H.K. Hazarika, learned Government Advocate, Assam.

2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 07.10.2016, passed by the Foreigners Tribunal No.5, Kamrup, Rangia in F.T. Case No.1237/2008 declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner who had illegally entered into India (Assam) from Bangladesh after 25.03.1971.

3. It appears that a reference was made by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Kamrup under the Foreigners Act, 1946 read with the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 with the allegation that the petitioner was a foreigner who had illegally entered into India (Assam) from the specified territory i.e., Bangladesh after 25.03.1971.

4. On receipt of the reference, F.T. Case No. 1237/2008 was registered and after creation of additional Tribunals, was assigned to the Foreigners Tribunal No.5, Kamrup, Rangia (Tribunal) for opinion. Notice issued by the Tribunal was served upon the petitioner whereafter he entered appearance and filed written statement along with certain documents denying the allegation made by claiming to be citizen of India by birth. Petitioner also gave evidence as his witness and exhibited a number of documents. After hearing the matter, Tribunal passed the order dated 07.10.2016 answering the reference in favour of the State in the above manner.

5. Aggrieved, present writ petition has been filed.

6. When the writ petition was moved on 08.12.2016 it was submitted that following the order passed by the Tribunal, petitioner was taken into custody. This Court while issuing notice and requisitioning the case record, passed an interim order to the effect that petitioner should not be deported from India until further order.

7. While learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the finding recorded by the Tribunal on the ground that evidence tendered by the petitioner was not properly appreciated, learned counsel for the respondents have extended support to the order impugned.

8. Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have received the due consideration of the Court. Also perused the materials on record.

9. At the outset, it would be apposite to refer to the order dated 07.10.2016 passed by the Tribunal, relevant portion of which is extracted here in below:-

“8.The O.P. has stated in his W.S. that he is a permanent resident of Village- Bhangnamari and S/o Jalil Ali but not Abdul Jalil in support of which he has produced a certificate (Exhibit A) issued by Gaon Burha of Village- Bhangnamari, P.O. & P.S. Bhangnamari which is not admissible in this Tribunal as a documentary evidence since it is not a Govt. document as because it (Exhibit-‘A’) lacks the Govt. emblem on the body of this document. He has further submitted a certificate (Exhibit ‘B’) from Govt. Gaon Burha of village- Naburka Satra, P.O. Khudra Dimu, P.S. Rangia, Dist- Kamrup (Assam) which mentions that the name of the father of the O.P. is Md. Abdul Jalil but the certificate of Gaon Burha (Exhibit ‘A’) mentions the name of the father of the O.P. as Jalil Ali which is contradictory and is a major discrepancy.

9. That the O.P. has stated in his W.S. as well as in his deposition that the name of his grandfather is Tafiz Mistry in support of which the O.P. has produced certified copy of Voter List of 1966 (Exhibit ‘C’) where his grandfather’s name appeared under Sl. No. 174 of 54 No. Chenga L.A.C.

10. The O.P. has produced certified copy of voter list of 1997 (Exhibit-‘G’) of 60 Nos. Barkhetri L.A.C. in support of his claim and the O.P. in his deposition as well as in W.S. stated placing reliance on aforementioned voter list (Exhibit-‘G’) that his name appeared under voter serial Nos. 420, House No. 1588 of village Bhangnamari, P.S. Mukalmua, Dist & Sub Division- Nalbari(Assam) of 60 No. Barkhetri L.A.C. but has

Click Here to Read the rest of this document