JUDGMENT :

N. KOTISWAR SINGH, J.

1. Heard Ms. D. Ghosh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned CGC appearing for respondent no. 1; Mr. J. Payeng, learned Special Standing Counsel, F.T. appearing for respondent nos. 2, 5, 7 and 8; Ms. U. Das, learned Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for respondent nos. 6, Mr. A. Bhuyan, learned Standing Counsel, ECI, appearing for respondent no. 3 and Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned counsel, NRC, appearing for respondent no. 4.

2. In this petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned opinion dated 7/7/2021 passed by the learned Foreigners Tribunal, Kamrup (M) 3rd, Guwahati-3 passed in FT Case No. 02/2019 by which the petitioner was declared a foreigner.

3. Ms. D. Ghosh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had produced sufficient materials before the Tribunal to substantiate his claim that he is an Indian and not a foreigner. The petitioner has also collected some more important documents subsequently like certified copies of the voters lists of 1966, 1997, 2005 and 2021 etc. and if necessary, these may be allowed to be filed so that he can conclusively establish his claim of Indian citizenship. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that because of the lock down due to Covid-19 pandemic, the petitioner could not produce the aforesaid documents. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if the Court is not satisfied with the existing evidences on record to prove that he is an Indian, the matter can be remanded to the concerned Tribunal for reconsideration by allowing these documents to be filed.

The petitioner submits that otherwise also, there are sufficient documents to prove that the petitioner is an Indian and not a foreigner.

4. Before we go further to examine the rival contentions of the parties, we would like to examine the impugned opinion/order dated 7/7/2021 passed by the learned Foreigners Tribunal, Kamrup (M) 3rd, Guwahati-3 passed in FT Case No. 02/2019.

5. As also mentioned in the opinion dated 7/7/2021, the petitioner had filed a written statement contending, inter-alia, that the petitioner is a bonafide citizen of India by birth and was born on 15/11/1979 at Guwahati Railway Colony, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, Assam. He stated that his grandfather, father and other relatives had left the then East Pakistan and entered India as refugees. Thereafter, a Certificate of Registration was issued in the name of his father, Promod Chandra Ghosh, son of Late Jagannath Ch. Ghosh by the Sub Deputy Collector, Patharkandi, Cachar Assam on 24/10/1956 registering Promod Chandra Ghosh as a citizen of India. Thus, his father is an Indian citizen by registration.

6. It has also been stated that the petitioner’s father’s name, Promod Ch. Ghosh, appeared in the voters list of 1966 of LA-05, Pathar-kandi Assembly Constituency and the name of the petitioner along with his family members appeared in the final draft of NRC list of 2019. He also stated that his name along with the parents’ names i.e. Promod Ch.Ghosh (father) and Bina Rani Ghosh (mother) appeared in the voters lists of 2010, 2013 and 2019 under 54 West Guwahati Constituency. He also stated that his father, Promod Ch. Ghosh was a permanent resident of Village: Lowipua, Satish Basti, P.S. Patharkandi. The petitioner also stated that when his father was 31 years, his father shifted his residence from Karimganj to Panbazar, Guwahat along with his family and started his business and after a few years his fath