Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KALYAN RAI SURANA, MALASRI NANDI
Md. Abu Bakkar Siddique, S/o Md. Mechar Ali – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M. Nandi, J.
Heard Mr. M.R. Khandakar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the FT matters and NRC; Mr. M. Islam, learned counsel appears on behalf of Mr. A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel for the ECI; Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel for the CGC; and Mr. P. Sarma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam.
2. Though the case is fixed for admission, however, with the consent of both sides, the matter is taken for final disposal.
3. Vide this application under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order/opinion dated 06.03.2025, passed in F.T. Case No.700/2015 by the learned Foreigners Tribunal No.2, Kamrup(M), Guwahati.
4. The case of the petitioner as projected before the Tribunal is that he is the son of Md. Macher Ali @ Mechar Ali and Fuljan Bibi @ Fuljan Necha. His grandparents were Sonaullah Seikh @ Sonaulla and Moussamat Nessa. The petitioner was born on 01.01.1988 at village – Katdanga under South Salmara Police Station in the district of Dhubri, Assam.
5. A reference has been made by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (B), City, Guwahati against the
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 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, requiring credible evidence to substantiate claims.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual claiming it, and failure to provide credible evidence results in a declaration of foreigner status.
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.
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 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 proceedee to establish their citizenship status, and reliable and cogent documentary evidence is required to prove citizenship under the Citizenship Act, 1955.
Point of Law : 12, 16. Under Section 9 of Foreigners' Act, 1946, burden is on proceedee to prove that she is not a foreigner, but a citizen of India and this burden never shifts.
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
