The burden of proof concerning citizenship rests with the individual asserting citizenship; insufficient evidence leads to the designation as a foreigner, reaffirming that mere document submission is inadequate without proper linkage and verification.

JUDGMENT :

S.P. Khaund, J.

Factual Matrix :-

1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 15.09.2018 passed by the Member, Foreigners Tribunal (2^nd), Morigaon, Assam, in connection with FT Case No.251/2012, Police Reference FT Case No. 458/2008.

2. The Union of India represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Department of Home Affairs, the Election Commission of India, the State of Assam represented by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Department of Home, the Deputy Commissioner, Morigaon, the Superintendent of Police (B), Morigaon and the State Coordinator, NRC, are arrayed as respondents No. 1 to 6 respectively.

3. The petitioners are Rahim Uddin, Husnara Begum, Maksidul Islam @ Muksidul Mamin and Roksana Begum Begum. The petitioner No. 1, Rahim Uddin is the husband of petitioner No. 2, Husnara Begum and their children are petitioner No. 3 Maksidul Islam @ Muksidul Mamin and the petitioner No. 4 Roksana Begum.

4. Earlier the petitioner No. 1 on being aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal dated 16.03.2016 in F.T. Case No. 251/2012, preferred a writ petition before this Court, which was registered as WP(C)/5539/2016. This Court vide order dated 18.04.2018 in WP(C) No. 5539/2016, remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for a fresh opinion. After the matter was remanded back, evidence was again adduced by the petitioner and finally, vide order dated 15.09.2018, the petitioner No. 1 Rahimuddin was declared to be a foreigner of post 1971 stream and his children namely Md. Maksidul Islam and Roksana Begum, were also declared to be a foreigners of post 1971 stream, after drawing a lineage from their father Md. Rahimuddin and it was ordered that action may be taken as per law.

Arguments for the petitioner :-

5. It is contended that the allegations of illegally immigrating into India was only against the petitioner No. 1 and not against his wife or others related to him. Initially, vide order dated 08.08.2008 in F.T. Case No. 458/2008, a reference was made against the petitioner No. 1, but in F.T. Case No. 251/2012 vide order dated 15.09.2018, the Foreigners Tribunal, 2^nd Morigaon, passed an order, relying on the decision of this Court in Aktara Khatun-Vs-State of Assam & Ors. reported in 2017 (2) GLT 974, that the Superintendent of Police (Border), Morigaon, may draw reference against other family members of Md. Rahimuddin (petitioner No. 1).

6. It is contended that the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the exhibited documents and has erroneously held that Exhibit-A was issued during the proceeding in the year 2014. The learned Tribunal failed to appreciate the voters’ list of 2014 (Exhibit-C) by discarding the same as a document after 1971. The learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the certified copies of voters’ lists of 1966 and 1970 (Exhibits-E and D) relating to the father and grandfather of petitioner No. 1, by deciding that the exhibits were not proved with the original Electoral Roll by examining the official who had issued the certified copy.

7. It is contended that the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate that the certified copy is a secondary piece of evidence and the same may be taken into consideration. Similarly, the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the certified copy of the jamabandi (Exhibits-F, G & H) relati