THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MANASH RANJAN PATHAK, SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Jamina Begum D/O. Tabib Ali @ Tabibar Rahman @ Tabir Ali, W/O. Nurul Hoque – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Susmita Phukan Khaund, J.
Jamina Begum is the petitioner who has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order/opinion dated 10.08.2018 passed by the learned Foreigners Tribunal, Bongaigaon No.2, Abhayapuri in connection with BNGN/FT/Case No. 958/2009 whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner who entered into India from Bangladesh illegally subsequent to 25.03.1971.
2. Petitioner has claimed that she is an Indian citizen born in the year 1987 at village – Madulijhar in the district of Barpeta, Assam. Her marriage was solemnized with Md. Nurul Hoque of Jaraguri No.2 village in the neighbouring district of Bongaigaon in the year 2007. She is the mother of two daughters, who are 8(Eight) years and 4 (Four) years old respectively. It is further submitted that the petitioner’s father’s name has been recorded in the NRC of 1951 as
Tubibar Rahman,
S/O - Rejan Ali,
Legacy Data Code – 120-0021-7461,
Under Village – Madulijhar,
PS – Sorbhog,
Mouza – Rupshi,
House No – 252 (ka),
District – Barpeta,
(Annexure - III).
3. The petitioner has further submitted that her grandfather’s name has been recorded as
Rejan Ali Sheikh
S/O – Jahila
The burden of proof lies on the petitioner to establish citizenship, which must be supported by reliable evidence and proper documentation.
The burden lies on the petitioner to provide reliable evidence establishing citizenship, which was not met, leading to the declaration of foreign status.
The burden of proof to establish citizenship lies on the person asserting it, requiring credible evidence of lineage and personal knowledge.
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 lies with the petitioner to establish citizenship through credible evidence, and discrepancies in documentation can lead to a declaration of foreign nationality.
The burden of proof concerning citizenship rests with the individual asserting citizenship; insufficient evidence leads to the designation as a foreigner, reaffirming that mere document submission is....
The burden of proof for citizenship lies on the claimant, and mere inclusion in voter lists does not suffice as admissible evidence to establish citizenship.
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 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....
Claimants asserting citizenship must substantiate their claims with credible evidence, failing which their claims may be dismissed as seen in foreigner cases.
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.