Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK, MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG, JJ
Bahatan Nessa W/o Jahar Ali @ Jaher Uddin – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
Judgment and Order :
M. R. Pathak, J.
1) Heard Mr. Monowar Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Anita Verma, learned Standing Counsel, Home Department, Assam for the respondent Nos. 2 and 4. Also heard Mr. Prem Sharma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent No.3 as well as Mr. H. Kuli, learned counsel on behalf of Md. Akram Imtiaz Ali, learned Standing counsel, Election Commission of India for the respondent No.5.
2) Aggrieved with the Final Order dated 10.11.2023 passed by learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal, 5th, Barpeta, Assam in Case No. F.T.(5th) 319/2017 by which she has been declared to be a foreigner of post 1971 stream, the petitioner has filed this writ petition praying, amongst others, for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to set aside the said Final Order dated 10.11.2023 and also to issue Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to deport her from India.
3) By order dated 19.01.2024 the Court called for the records of said Case No. F.T.(5th 319/2017 from the Foreigners Tribunal, 5th, Barpeta, Assam and in the interim, directed the respondents not to take the petitioner in custody and deport her from India and
The Tribunal's failure to consider critical evidence invalidated its decision, necessitating a fresh review of the case.
The burden of proving citizenship lies with the individual, requiring credible documentary evidence to substantiate claims of nationality.
The burden of proving citizenship lies with the individual claiming it, and mere oral testimony is inadequate without corroborating documentary evidence.
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 proving citizenship lies on the individual claiming it, necessitating admissible and reliable evidence to establish linkage with parents.
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.
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 for citizenship lies with the individual, requiring reliable evidence and clear documentation to establish claims.
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
