The main legal point established is the requirement for link documents and the verification of contents in certificates to prove Indian citizenship under the Foreigners' Act, 1946.

JUDGMENT :

M. Thakuria, J.

Heard Mr. A. S. Tapader, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. J. Payeng, learned Standing Counsel, Home Department, Assam for the respondent Nos. 2, 4 & 5. Also heard Mr. H. K. Hazarika, learned Government Advocate for the respondent No. 3.

2. None appears on behalf of the respondent No. 1, Union of India.

3. The brief facts of the case is that pursuant to a reference made by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Karimganj, vide Police Enquiry No.- D/3723/1999, the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal-I, Karimganj registered a case under Section 2 of the Foreigners’ Act, 1946, being F.T. Case No. 367/2012 against the petitioner namely, Humara Begum. Subsequently, on transfer of the said F.T. Case No. 367/2012 from the Foreigners’ Tribunal-I, Karimganj it was renumbered as F.T. Case No. 61/2016 before the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal-II, Karimganj, Assam, wherein, notice was initially issued to the petitioner on 04.05.2016 for her appearance in the said case. On receipt of notice of said F.T. Case No. 61/2016 the petitioner accordingly appeared before the learned Foreigners’ Tribunal-II Karimganj on 02.11.2016 and contested the case by submitting her Written Statement and also adduced evidence along with the supported documents. In support of her Indian nationality, the petitioner placed and exhibited several documents and she was duly cross-examined by the State. After hearing the arguments put forwarded by the learned counsels for both the sides, the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal-II, Karimganj, Assam, vide its impugned final order/opinion, dated 24.03.2017 in said F.T. Case No. 61/2016, declared the petitioner as a foreigner under the Foreigners’ Act, 1946, who had illegally entered into the territory of India from the specified territory of Bangladesh on or after 25.03.1971.

4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said impugned final order/opinion dated 24.03.2017 of the Foreigners’ Tribunal-II, Karimganj, noted above, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

5. It is the contention of the petitioner that she is a citizen of India by birth and was born and brought up at Village Duhalia under Patherkandi Police Station in the District of Karimganj, Assam. She contended that the name of her father and mother are Mojir Uddin and Runu Bibi, respectively, and their names appeared in the Voters Lists of 1989 and 1993 of the No. 2 Patharkandi Assembly Constituency. She stated that she was married with one Sihab Uddin of Village Gandarvakhani, P.O. Mullaganj, and P.S. Patherkandi under South Karimganj Assembly Constituency. In support of her case, the petitioner exhibited the Voters Lists of 1966, 1970 & 1977 as Exhibits - 1, 2 & 3, wherein the name of her grandfather - Wakib Ali has been recorded. She also exhibited the Voter List of 1989 as Exhibit - 4, wherein the name of her father has been recorded and further exhibited Exhibit-5, the Voters List of 1993, wherein her name along with her father has been recorded. The petitioner also exhibited the copy of Kabin Nama (Exhibit-6) to show that she was married in the year 1993 with one Sihab Uddin. Exhibits - 7 & 8 are the Voter Lists of 1997 & 2014, respectively, wherein the name of the petitioner is recorded. Exhibit-9 is the Voter ID Card of Mojir Uddin, the projected father of the petitioner and Exhibit-10 is the certificate issued by the Gaonburha (Village Headman) showing that her projected father - Mojir Uddin is the son of one Wakib Ali.

6. Mr. A. S. Tapader learned counsel for the petitioner, accordingly submitted that the petitioner produced all the relevant documents to prove herself to be the citizen of India including the Voters Lists of 1966, 1970 & 1977, wherein the names of her grandfather is shown and also produced the Voters List of 1993, wherein her own name has been recorded along with her parents. Mr. A. S. Tapader submitted that in spite of production of all the relevant documents, the learned Member, For