IMPORTANT POINT
The rejection of documentary evidence by the Tribunal was deemed perverse due to improper evaluation of authenticity and lack of legal grounds.

ORDER :

K.R. Surana, J.

Mr. S. Parashar, learned counsel for the petitioner is present. Heard Mr. J. Payeng, learned Standing Counsel for F.T. matters; Mr. M. Islam, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. A. Ali, learned Standing Counsel for ECI and Mr. H.K. Hazarika, learned Government Advocate for the State.

2) Pursuant to order dated 08.09.2023 the records of the Tribunal have been received. Perused the same.

3) On a query to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether he had perused the Tribunal’s record, he replied in the negative. Therefore, as he would not be able to render assistance to the Court without perusing the records, the Court has declined to hear the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4) Records reveal that pursuant to the notice issued by the learned Tribunal, the petitioner had appeared before the Foreigners’ Tribunal 2nd, Dibrugarh. However, he had not filed his written statement despite several opportunities being granted and he had also remained absent on call on several dates. Therefore, by an order dated 14.09.2021 bailable warrant of arrest was issued. Accordingly, on the next date fixed i.e. 04.10.2021, the petitioner appeared before the learned Tribunal and expressed his incapacity to engage a learned lawyer of his choice due to financial constraints. Accordingly, the learned Tribunal has provided him a Legal Aid Counsel through the District Legal Services Authority, Dibrugarh. Thereafter, the petitioner filed his written statement along with documents and on 22.03.2022, the petitioner was orally examined, thereby recording his evidence.

5) The record reveals that on 24.03.2022, the petitioner was orally examined on oath as DW-1. There appears to be no cross-examination by the State. However, the petitioner had given answers to the queries put by the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, as per order dated 24.03.2022, the evidence of the petitioner was closed. By the said order the evidence of the prosecution was also closed as the post of Assistant Government pleader was lying vacant.

6) As per the oral deposition of the petitioner as DW-1, the petitioner claimed that his father Late Manindralal Dey was a railway employee and he joined service in N.F. Railway in the year 1948 and he retired from service in the year 1982 as Khalashi in the Engineering Department at Naharkatiya. In this regard the petitioner has exhibited a certificate issued by the Divisional Engineer, D.E.N. Office, Dibrugarh, bearing Serial No. 72 dated 8.8.84 as Ext.-1.

7) In order to demonstrate that the petitioner’s father had cast his ballot in the year 1965 and 1971, the petitioner has exhibited the Electoral Roll of the year 1970 of No. 121 Joypur Assembly/ Parliamentary Constituency as Ext.-2. The petitioner claimed that he was born on 02.09.1963 at Naharkatiya Railway Quarter in the district of Dibrugarh and he appeared in his HSLC Examination conducted by the Board of Secondary Education, Assam in the year 1979 and he has exhibited the original Admit Card of HSLC, issued by the Controller of Examination, Board of Secondary Education, Assam for the examination held in the year 1979 as Ext.-3. The petitioner has exhibited his HSLC Pass Certificate of the year 1979 as Ext.-4, and he has exhibited his Naharkatiya College certificate of appearing in the Pre-Degree (Com) Final Examination, 1983, issued by the Principal, Naharkatiya College on 22.09.1983 as Ext.-5.

8) Records further reveal that the hearing of the argument was concluded as per order dated 11.07.2022 and the next date of the case was fixed on 04.08.2022 for rendition of opinion. However, as per order dated 04.08.2022, the learned Tribunal deemed it appropriate to call for the authenticity verification report in respect of Ext. Nos. 1 to 5 and accordingly, notices were issued to the issuing authorities to verify the authenticity of the contents of those documents. As per order dated 16.09.2022, the Election Officer, Dibrugarh was directed that the document exhibited as Ext.