IMPORTANT POINT
The burden of proof to establish citizenship rests on the proceedee, and the evidence presented must be cogent and relevant. Full disclosure of evidence and the requirement to establish a linkage with the projected father under the Citizenship Act, 1955 are essential.

The extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court has been sought to be invoked by filing this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by putting to challenge the opinion rendered vide impugned order dated 02.06.2023 passed by the learned Foreigners Tribunal No.1, Bongaigaon, Assam in F.T. Case No. BNGN/FT/1636/08. By the impugned judgment, the petitioner, who was the proceedee before the learned Tribunal, has been declared to be a foreigner post 25.03.1971.

2. The facts of the case may be put in a nutshell as follows:

(i) The reference was made by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Bongaigaon District, against the petitioner giving rise to the aforesaid F.T. Case No. BNGN/FT/1636/08.

(ii) As per requirement u/S 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 to prove that the proceedee is not a foreigner, the petitioner had filed the written statement on 08.11.2021 along with certain documents before the Foreigners Tribunal No. 1, Bongaigaon on receipt of notice under the above noted 1946 Act from the said Tribunal.

(iii) The learned Tribunal, after considering the facts and circumstances and taking into account of the provisions of Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 had come to a finding that the petitioner as opposite party had failed to discharge the burden cast upon him and accordingly, the opinion was rendered declaring the petitioner to be a foreign national post 25.03.1971.

3. We have heard Shri A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. We have also heard Shri A. Kalita, learned Standing Counsel, Home Department, Assam; Shri A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India and Shri R. Talukdar, learned Government Advocate, Assam.

4. Shri Sikdar, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner could prove his case with cogent evidence and in view of the fact that there was no rebuttal evidence, the learned Tribunal should have accepted the said proof and accordingly hold the petitioner to be a citizen of India. In this regard, he has referred to the evidence on affidavit of the two numbers of witnesses including the petitioner and also the following documentary evidence.

i. Certificate of Registration issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Exbt -A)

ii. Voter Identity Card (Exbt – B)

iii. Permanent Account Number (Exbt – C)

iv. Aadhar Card (Exbt – D)

v. Special Family Identity Card (BPL) (Exbt – E)

vi. Certified copy of Voter list of 2014 (Exbt – F)

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the registration card of the projected father of the petitioner Ramesh Chandra Debnath dated 01.08.1963. He has also referred to the voter list of 1966 containing the name of the projected father. A voter list of 2014 has also been referred to containing the name of the petitioner.

6. The learned counsel has also referred to a Special Family Identity Card (BPL) (Ext.E) containing the name of the petitioner. In this connection, reference has also been made to the deposition of the DW2, Shri Naba Kumar Borah, the Inspector, Food and Civil Supplies, Bongaigaon.

7. The learned counsel has also referred to a Gazette Notification dated 07.09.2015 which is titled “Foreigners’ (Amendment) Order, 2015” wherein there is insertion of paragraph 3A in the Foreigners’ Order of 1948 regarding exemption of certain class of Foreigners. In this connection, reference has also been made to an order dated 04.09.2021 of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Review. Pet. No. 73/2021 (Mangla Das Vs. UOI).

8. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the provision of the Citizenship Act, 1955 more specifically, Section 5(1)(e) read with Section 6, as amended. It is submitted that a person of full age and capacity whose parents were registered as citizens of India under Clause (a) or Section 6(1) may apply for registration. Reference has also been made to the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 in this regard.

9. The learned counsel for the petitioner accordingly submits that the impugned opin