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
| 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
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.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual asserting it, and failure to produce evidence can lead to a declaration of foreigner status.
The burden of proving citizenship lies with the individual claiming it, and mere oral testimony is inadequate without corroborating documentary evidence.
The burden of proof for establishing citizenship lies with the individual, requiring substantial evidence beyond mere documentation.
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.
A quasi-judicial authority must consider all relevant evidence and materials in its decision-making to ensure validity and prevent arbitrary conclusions.
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.