Back
MANASH RANJAN PATHAK, SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Nur Islam, S/o Late Amir Uddin @ Amir Ali – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Susmita Phukan Khaund, J.)
1. Heard Mr A Chaliha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr J Payeng, learned Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of the Foreigners’ Tribunal, Mr H K Hazarika, learned Government Advocate, Assam appearing on behalf of State respondents and Mr A I Ali, learned Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of the Election Commission of India.
2. The petitioner in this case is Nur Islam, who has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, certiorari or any other appropriate order of like nature for quashing and setting aside the Judgment and Order dated 04.09.2019, passed by the Foreigners’ Tribunal 1st at Barpeta in FT Case No. 116 of 2017, arising out of IM(D)T Reference Case No. 7244/B/98, declaring him as a foreigner, who entered into Assam, post 25.03.1971.
3. The genesis of the case was that the IM(D)T Reference Case No. 7244/B/98 was forwarded by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Barpeta (SP, for short), alleging inter alia, that the petitioner is a foreign national. Later, this case was re-numbered as FT Case No. 116/2017 and registered under the Foreig
The burden of proof lies with the petitioner to establish citizenship through credible evidence, and discrepancies in documentation can lead to a declaration of foreign nationality.
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 lies on the petitioner to provide reliable evidence establishing citizenship, which was not met, leading to the declaration of foreign status.
Merely because documents were collected by petitioner during pendency of reference, it cannot be a ground to ignore same as documents have to be examined as regards the genuineness, authenticity, rel....
The judgment emphasizes the necessity of reliable evidence to establish citizenship claims and the burden of proof on the petitioner under the Foreigners Act, 1946.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the petitioner, who failed to establish lineage and continuous residency prior to the cutoff date, resulting in the declaration as a foreigner.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
