IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
M.R. PATHAK, MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, JJ.
Minu Das – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 3194 of 2017
Decided On : 19-08-2024
JUDGMENT :
MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, J.
1. Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. U.K. Goswami, learned Central Government Counsel for the respondent No. 1. Also heard Mr. J. Payeng, learned Standing Counsel, Home Department, Assam for the respondent No. 2, as well as Mr. P. Sarma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent No. 3.
2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Smt. Minu Das impugning the opinion/order, dated 15.03.2017, passed by the learned Foreigners Tribunal No. 6, Tezpur at Sootea in the Case No. F.T.C. (6) 17/2015, whereby, she was declared as a Foreigner, who entered into India (Assam) after 25.03.1971.
3. By order dated 31.05.2017, passed in this case, this Court issued notice to the respondents and the case record of Case No. F.TC.(6)17/2015 was called for from the Foreigners Tribunal No. 6 Tezpur at Sootea and the petitioner was given interim protection from being deported from India until further orders.
4. On perusal of the case records of F.TC.(6)17/2015, it reveals that initially the reference was made against the petitioner under the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983, (hereinafter referred to as IMDT Act) by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Sonitpur, Tezpur to the Chairman, Illegal Migrants Determination Tribunal, Tezpur suspecting the petitioner to be an illegal migrant, i.e. a foreigner, who had unauthorizedly entered into India (Assam) from the specified territory, i.e. present Bangladesh, after 25.03.1971. Later on, after striking down of the IMDT Act, 1983 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Case of Sarbananda Sonowal vs. Union of India and Another, 2005 INSC 287 : (2005) 5 SCC 665 and as per the direction of the Hon'ble Apex Court passed therein, the said case was transferred to the Foreigners Tribunal No. 6 Tezpur, at Sootea.
5. After registration of the case, the Foreigners Tribunal No. 6 Tezpur, Sootea issued notice to the proceedee (petitioner) on 18.08.2015 and she personally appeared before the said Tribunal on 27.08.2015. On 04.09.2015, the petitioner had filed written statement in support of her case, along with the relevant documents.
6. In her written statement, the petitioner had stated that she was born and brought up at village Bhurbandha, Nanke, Mouza-Laukhowa in the district of Nagaon, Assam. She stated that her father, namely Gopal, son of Girish, was also the resident of said locality and that her grandfather and father cast votes in the year 1971 and their names were enlisted in the voter list of 1971 at Serial Nos. 725 and 729 respectively of 90 No. Kaliabor Legislative Assembly Constituency. The petitioner has also stated that she got married with one Shri Nikhil Das of Village-Pasigaon, under Jamugurihat Police Station and had cast vote in the year 1997 from 75 No. Sootea Legislative Assembly Constituency at Centre No. 63, Part No. 62 and her name has been shown at Serial No. 34 against house number 62 of the voter list of 1997. She has also stated that to show her linkage with her father, namely Gopal Das she has submitted a certificate issued by the Circle Officer, wherein it is mentioned that she is the daughter of late Gopal Das.
7. To substantiate her contention that she is an Indian citizen by birth, the petitioner had adduced the evidence of two witnesses namely herself as DW-1 and one Shibash Das as DW-2. The petitioner exhibited the following documents during her deposition before the learned Foreigners Tribunal No. 6 Tezpur, Sootea:
(ii) Exhibit-B, Voter List of 1997.
(iii) Exhibit-C, Certificate issued by the Circle Officer, Tezpur Revenue Circle.
(iv) Exhibit-D, Electoral Photo Identity Card of Sri Shibash Das.
(v) Exhibit-E, Voter List of 1965.
8. While deposing as DW-1, the petitioner/proceedee Smt. Minu Das deposed before the Foreigners Tribunal, that her father late Gopal Das, son of late Girish Das was a resident of Bhurbandha N
The burden of proving citizenship lies on the individual claiming it, necessitating admissible and reliable evidence to establish linkage with parents.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual, requiring reliable evidence and clear documentation to establish claims.
The burden of proving citizenship lies with the individual claiming it, and mere oral testimony is inadequate without corroborating documentary evidence.
The judgment establishes that the burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual, requiring admissible and reliable evidence to counter claims of foreign status.
The burden of proving citizenship lies with the individual, requiring credible documentary evidence to substantiate claims of nationality.
The burden of proof lies on the individual asserting citizenship to establish their linkage with legacy persons and provide evidence based on personal knowledge. Documentary evidence alone may not su....
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual asserting it, requiring credible evidence to substantiate claims.
A foreigner's status must be proven by credible and verifiable evidence linking them to claimed Indian ancestors; mere appearances in voter rolls are insufficient.
In citizenship proceedings, the burden of proof lies solely on the individual. Oral testimony of relatives, without corroborating admissible documentary evidence, is insufficient to establish linkage....
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.