Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Kalyan Rai Surana, Malasri Nandi
Aklima Khatun W/o. Lt. Alim Uddin – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
M. Nandi, J.
Heard Mr. Md. S. Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J. Payeng, learned Standing Counsel, FT matters, Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Government Advocate and Mr. M. Islam, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel, ECI.
2. By filling this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the impugned opinion dated 20.01.2018, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal, Bongaigaon No.2, Abhayapuri in F.T. Case No.224/2016, declaring the petitioner as foreigner/illegal migrant of post 25.03.1971.
3. On the basis of the reference made by the Superintendent of Police (B), Bongaigaon vide reference no. BNGN/P.E No.180/2008, an investigation was conducted and subsequently, it was reported that petitioner is a foreigner who had entered into India from Bangladesh after 25.03.1971. Accordingly, SP (B), Bongaigaon sent the reference for opinion of the Tribunal.
4. On receipt of the notice from the Tribunal, the petitioner contested the reference and by filing written statement contended that she is the citizen of India by birth. It is stated in the written statement th
The burden of proof for establishing citizenship lies with the individual, requiring substantial evidence beyond mere documentation.
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 concerning citizenship rests with the individual, and significant discrepancies in documentation can undermine one's claim of citizenship.
The burden of proof lies on individuals claiming citizenship, requiring credible evidence of lineage and prior existence in the country, as emphasized in the Foreigners Act.
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 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 establishing citizenship lies with the individual, necessitating sufficient documentary evidence to counter claims of foreigner status.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual asserting it, requiring substantial evidence of birth and residence, and mere document production is insufficient.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual asserting it, requiring credible evidence to substantiate 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
