SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Gau) 1076

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH 
KALYAN RAI SURANA, MALASRI NANDI, JJ.
Rafika Bibi @ Rafika Khatun D/o. Lt. Safiar Ali @ Sopior Rahman @ Safior Rahman @ Safiyar Ali, W/o. Karim Baksha SK. – Petitioner 
Versus
The Union Of India, rep. By The Secy. To The Govt. Of India, Ministry Of Home Affairs And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) No.3330 Of 2020
Decided On : 26-05-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. H. R. A. Choudhury, Mr F. U. Barbhuiya, Ms. S. Das
For the Respondents: Asstt. S.G.I., SC, Election Commission.,SC, NRC,SC, F.T

The right to a fair trial encompasses fair investigation practices to ensure individuals suspected of foreign status are given adequate opportunity to prove their citizenship.

Headnote:(A) Foreigners Act, 1946 - Foreigners (Tribunal) Order, 1964 - Challenge to the order of Foreigners Tribunal declaring petitioner a foreigner - The court finds no specific inquiry results indicating foreigner status and rules the referral authority's notice was mechanical and lacked proper justification. (Paras 29-35)

(B) Fair trial and fair investigation - The right to a fair trial encompasses a fair investigation, ensuring that individuals suspected of being foreigners are provided adequate opportunity to prove their citizenship. (Paras 93-97)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the Tribunal's order declaring her a foreigner post-1971, claiming citizenship by birth and offering multiple supporting documents such as electoral rolls and school certificates. (Paras 2-16)

Findings of Court:
The court noted a lack of substantial evidence from the Referral Authority to substantiate the foreigner claim and emphasized the need for sufficient investigation before declaring someone a foreigner. (Paras 29-35)

Issues: The main issues included the adequacy of evidence presented by the petitioner regarding her citizenship and the procedural propriety of the Tribunal's actions. (Paras 12 & 35)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that a fair trial principle requires a thorough investigation and no mechanical references should be made by the Referral Authority; the Tribunal's decision was flawed due to insufficient verification. (Paras 93-96)

Result: The writ petition is allowed, and the Tribunal's order is set aside.

Table of Content
1. petitioner claims indian citizenship based on voter list history. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. petitioner argues the tribunal's process was flawed and unlawful. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
3. due process and fair investigation are essential for citizenship determination. (Para 18)
4. court observes the tribunal’s reference was mechanically made and improperly justified. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35)
5. court sets aside tribunal's order, allowing further enquiry on citizenship. (Para 36 , 37)
6. writ petition disposed with directions to transmit records. (Para 38 , 39)

JUDGMENT :

(M. Nandi, J.)

Heard Mr. F.U. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. J. Sarma, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the FT matters and NRC; Mr. A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel for the ECI; and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State respondent.

2. The petitioner has preferred an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned opinion/order dated 06.03.2020, th passed by the Foreigners Tribunal 10 , Dhubri in F.T. Case No.10/TMH/1211/2018 arising out of “D” Voter Case No.43/D/07 declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971.

3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner is a citizen of India by birth and is a permanent resident of village - Uttar Kachakhana under Tamarhat P.S in the district of Dhubri, Assam. The petitioner was born and brought up at village – Belguri Part I under Agomoni Police station in the district of Dhubri. The name of the petitioner’s grandfather is late Ainulla @ Aynullah Munsi. The father’s name of late Ainulla Munsi is late Gamiruddin. Late Gamiruddin got two sons Ainulla Munsi and Farid Uddin Sarkar. The petitioner’s grandfather had two wives - Shabijan Bibi and late Moina Bibi @ Moina Bewa. The name of the petitioner’s father is late Safiar Ali @ Sopior Rahman @ Safior Rahman @ Safiyar Ali who expired on 31.05.2019 and mother’s name is Jarina Bibi who is alive and they are the citizens of India by birth.

4. The petitioner got married to one Karim Baksh Sk, S/o late Sona Uddin Sk of Village – Uttar Kachakhana about 20 years back and both the petitioner and her husband used to work in the brick industry in different places of Assam to maintain their livelihood.

5. Further case of the petitioner is that the name of the petitioner’s grandfather appeared in the voter list of 1966 along with her step grandmother of Village- Belguri Part I. The name of the petitioner’s father along with her step grandmother appeared in the voter list of 1977 from the same village. The name of the petitioner’s parents appeared in the voter list of 1997 and the name of petitioner’s parents along with petitioner’s brother also appeared in the voter list of 2005 under same LAC i.e. 25 Golakganj LAC and their names also appeared in the subsequent voter lists. The name of the petitioner appeared in the voters’ lists of 2007, 2010 and 2015 along with her husband and mother-in- law under Kumarganj LAC of village - Uttar Kachakhana. However, in the voter list of 2015 against the name of the petitioner mark “D” has been inserted.

6. On receipt of the notice, the petitioner appeared before the Tribunal and submitted written statement with documents. The petitioner examined herself as DW-1 and her uncle Mohi Uddin Ahmed @ Mohiruddin Sk as DW-2. School Headmistress of Belguri L.P School examined as DW-3. The learned Tribunal after hearing the parties vide order dated 06.03.2020 declared the petitioner as foreigner of post 25.03.1971, who entered into India without any valid documents.

7. It was urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that apart from voter lists of her parents and grandparents, the petitioner also submitted some other documents to prove her citizenship before the Tribunal i.e. school certificate issued by the He

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top