Back
THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
KALYAN RAI SURANA, MALASRI NANDI
Firoja Khatun W/o. Azibar Rahman – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M. Nandi, J.
Heard Md. A. Kuddus, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. K. Phukan, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, FT Matters; Mr. M. Islam appearing on behalf of Mr. A.I. Ali, learned counsel for ECI and Mr. H.K. Hazarika, learned Government Advocate.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the opinion of the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.2, Dhubri, Assam in F.T. Case No.1903/F/2017, arising out of Police Reference Case No.1154/98, wherein the petitioner was declared as a foreigner.
3. On receipt of the notice, the petitioner appeared before the Tribunal and filed her written statement wherein she stated that she was born at Village - Airanjongla Part III under Dhubri Revenue Circle where her father Sultan Ali @ Sultan Sk. @ Sultan Ahmed is a permanent resident. She got married to Md. Ajibar Rahman of Village – Bhagnir Kanda under Dhubri district.
4. The petitioner also stated in her written statement that she studied in the Char Airanjongla Abad Ali Mollah M.E Madrassa up to class VII in the year 1966 and as per admission register, her date of birth is 06.10.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual asserting it, particularly under the Foreigners' Act, and the petitioner failed to establish her claims adequately.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual asserting it, requiring credible evidence to substantiate claims.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual asserting it, and mere production of documents is insufficient without proper proof.
The burden of proof lies on the individual to establish their citizenship under the Foreigners Act, 1946, and presenting reliable and verified evidence is crucial to prove citizenship status.
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 on individuals asserting citizenship under Section 9 of the Foreigners' Act, 1946, and the need for documentary evidence and verification of contents to establish citizenship.
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.
The burden of proof to establish citizenship lies on the individual, and reliable and cogent documentary evidence is required to prove citizenship.
The burden of proof concerning citizenship rests with the individual, and significant discrepancies in documentation can undermine one's claim of citizenship.
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
