Point of Law : When person specially a woman appears before Tribunal stating that she is daughter of a person who was a resident of Tripura and when there are sufficient evidences to show that her father was staying in Tripura, merely because she could not produce any electoral roll or marriage certificate, may not be a ground to reject her claim.

JUDGMENT :

N.Kotiswar Singh, J.

Heard Mr. U. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned Central Government Counsel appearing for respondent No.1; Mr. G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Foreigners Tribunal appearing for respondent Nos.2 & 3 and Mr. A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel, ECI for respondent No.4.

2. In this petition, the petitioner has challenged the opinion dated 03.07.2019 passed by the learned Foreigners Tribunal, Tezpur (1st), Sonitpur, Assam in F.T.(D) Case No.2258/2012 [Police Enquiry No.1695/1998] by which the petitioner who was alleged to be a ‘D’ Voter was declared a foreigner who entered India on or after 25th March, 1971 without any valid document.

3. The petitioner, on receipt of the notice from the Tribunal, filed her written statement stating that she is an Indian by birth. She also adduced evidences in support of her claim that she is an Indian citizen.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that she is the daughter of Late Phani Bhusan Roy and was born on 25.12.1974 at Amarpur Hospital, South Tripura and a permanent resident of Bhati Abhoy Nagar, Mouja Agartala, Sub Division Sadar, Dist. West Tripura.

5. In the written statement, the petitioner stated that she had pursued her studies at Banividyapith Girls’ H.S. School, Tripura and appeared in the Madhyamik Pariksha (Secondary Examination) in the year 1990. She also stated that she was registered as an Indian citizen by the office of the Sub-Divisional Officer Sadar, West Tripura on 19.05.1990. She claimed that her father Late Phani Bhushan Roy had served in the Food and Civil Supplies Directorate under the Government of Tripura since 12.12.1967 and was issued Electoral Identity Card bearing No.TP/01/004/057033 and her father had pursued his studies at Calcutta University and had passed the Pre-University Examination in the year 1956. The petitioner also stated that her father was enrolled as a citizen of India in the year 1964. The petitioner also stated that she got married to Sri Sajal Kanti Deb on 22.04.1996 who is an inhabitant of Garowanpatty, Tezpur and since after her marriage she had been living with her husband and accordingly, she adopted the surname “Deb” in her documents after marriage, thus, writing as Barnali Deb instead of Barnali Roy.

6. In support of her claim, the petitioner produced a number of documents, which were examined and considered by the learned Tribunal to arrive at its conclusion.

7. Ext.1 was the certificate of birth shown to be issued by the Registrar, Amarpur Hospital, in the name of Barnali Roy, wherein her father’s name is shown as Phani Bhusan Roy. Place of birth is shown as Amarpur Hospital and the date of birth is shown as 25.12.1974.

As regards the aforesaid certificate, the learned Tribunal held that though in the said Exhibit 1, the date of birth of Barnali Roy is shown as 25.12.1974, the date of registration is not shown. Neither the date of issue of the certificate is also mentioned.

It has been also observed that in the said certificate, the name of mother is also not mentioned. The learned Tribunal also observed that there is a space for signature of the Chief Registrar, however, the same is absent.

8. Under the circumstances, it was observed that in absence of the evidence of the author of the said certificate and without comparing with the original birth register, the said certificate, Ext.-1 cannot be acted upon.

9. Coming to the Admit Card issued by the Secretary of the Tripura Board of Secondary Education, which was exhibited as Ext.2 in the name of Barnali Roy, daughter of Phani Bhusan Roy, bearing Registration No.61818 of 1998 with Roll-AGR F, No.-18159 of Madhyamik Pariksha (Secondary Examination 1990) wherein the date of birth of the petitioner is shown to be 25.12.1974, the learned Tribunal observed that, in para No.2 of the written statement it is stated that since the said Admit Card was issued by a statutory authority, and a “State” as defined under Article 12 of the Cons