ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, NELSON SAILO
ABDUR RAHIM @ ABDUL RAHIM S/O ABDUL ALI @ A. ALI – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.
1. Heard Mr. A.S. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J. Payeng learned counsel for the respondents in the Home Department of Government of Assam as well as the Superintendent of Police (B), Nagaon, Ms. L. Devi, learned CGC appearing for the respondents in the Union of India, Mr. N.K. Das learned counsel appearing for the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon and heard Mr. G. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondents in the Home Department of Government of Assam as well as the Superintendent of Police (B) Barpeta, P.O & District Barpeta, Assam, Ms. L Devi, learned CGC appearing for the respondents in the Union of India, Mr. AI Ali, learned counsel for the respondents in the Election Commission of India.
2. The petitioner Abdul Rahim had been referred to the Foreigners’ Tribunal No. 4th, Nagaon for rendering an opinion as to whether he is a foreigner within a meaning of Foreigners’ Act, 1946, resulting in the registration of FT Case No. 246/2016, wherein the Tribunal rendered an opinion dated 24.04.2019 declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner. Being aggrieved this writ petition is instituted.
3. In the writ proceeding, the pe
The court established that credible evidence of familial relationships is essential for determining citizenship status under the Foreigners Act, and such evidence must meet the standards set forth in....
The burden of proving citizenship lies exclusively with the proceedee. Failure to disclose material facts in pleadings or providing contradictory documentary and oral evidence results in an adverse p....
The burden of proof lies on the petitioner to establish citizenship, and mere document production is insufficient without proper evidence.
The court affirmed the Tribunal's authority in assessing the evidence required to establish citizenship under the Foreigners' Act, emphasizing the necessity of substantial proof.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of complying with the requirements of the Evidence Act in establishing relationships and the need for special means of knowledge.
The burden of proof lies on the petitioner to establish citizenship, which was not met due to insufficient evidence linking her to her claimed lineage.
The burden of proof concerning citizenship rests with the individual asserting citizenship; insufficient evidence leads to the designation as a foreigner, reaffirming that mere document submission is....
Citizenship requires establishing a direct, consistent bloodline linkage to an ancestor present before the specified cut-off date. Documentary evidence, such as voters' lists and residential certific....
In citizenship determination proceedings, the burden of proof lies on the individual to establish ancestral linkage through consistent, corroborated documentary evidence. Mere production of documents....
The burden of proving citizenship rests entirely on the individual, requiring direct and admissible documentary evidence to establish lineage to an Indian ancestor. Supervisory jurisdiction does not ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.