KALYAN RAI SURANA, NELSON SAILO
Md. Siraj Ali @ Chiraj Ali S/O- Late Abdulaziz @ Ajitali Kha – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Rep. By The Ministry Of Home Affairs, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Nelson Sailo, J.
Heard Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A.M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. J. Payeng, learned Standing Counsel for the F.T. matters, Mr. R.K. Talukdar, learned Govt. Advocate and Mr. A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission of India.
2. By filing this Review Petition, the petitioners have sought review of the Judgment & Order dated 31.01.2018 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 6771/2014, by which the Order dated 19.06.2014 passed by the Foreigners Tribunal (2nd), Morigaon, Assam in F.T (C) Case No. 350/2011 (State of Assam –Vs-Md. Chiraj Ali & Ors.) declaring the petitioners to be foreigners and who had illegal entered into India (Assam) from Bangladesh after 25.03.1971 was upheld.
3. The petitioners have preferred the instant Review Petition on the following grounds:-
The court reaffirmed that the burden of proof lies with the petitioners to establish their citizenship, emphasizing the limited scope of review jurisdiction.
The High Court by invoking its inherent powers, can always pass adequate orders to correct such errors that appear to be apparent on the face of the record.
Review petitions in citizenship cases require new evidence or errors apparent on record, not mere re-hearing of previous arguments.
Review petitions must demonstrate clear errors or new evidence; mere dissatisfaction with prior rulings is insufficient for review.
A review petition must show an error apparent on the record or new evidence; the burden of proof for citizenship lies with the petitioner under the Foreigners Act.
The burden of proving citizenship under the Foreigners Act lies on the petitioner, and a review petition cannot be used to reargue the case based on previously dismissed evidence.
The burden of proof under section 9 of the Foreigners' Act 1946 is on the petitioner to establish citizenship, and minor discrepancies in documents must be explained to substantiate the claim.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual asserting it, and failure to produce evidence can lead to a declaration of foreigner status.
Point of Law : 12, 16. Under Section 9 of Foreigners' Act, 1946, burden is on proceedee to prove that she is not a foreigner, but a citizen of India and this burden never shifts.
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.
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.