IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Ramjan Ali Son Of- Late Abdul Hakim – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Represented By The Ministry Of Home Affairs – Respondent
Judgment :
Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J.
1.The extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court has been sought to be invoked by filing this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by putting to challenge the opinion rendered vide impugned order dated 29.01.2022 passed by the learned Foreigners’ Tribunal No. 6, Nagaon in F.T. Case No. 281/2016 arising out of Police Reference – F.T. “D” Case No. 831/98. By the impugned judgment, the petitioner, who was the proceedee before the learned Tribunal, has been declared to be a foreigner post 25.03.1971.
2. The facts of the case may be put in a nutshell as follows:
(i) A reference was made by the Superintendent of Police (B), Nagaon District, against the petitioner giving rise to the aforesaid Case No. 281/2016.
(ii) As per requirement u/s 9 of the Foreigner’s Act, 1946 to prove that the proceedee is not a foreigner, the petitioner had filed the written statement dated 15.03.2013 along with certain documents and had claimed to be an Indian Citizen. He had adduced evidence as OPW1 and there were three other witnesses, namely, a neighbour as OPW2, the Gaonburah as OPW3 and the Headmistress of Rajabari Sologuri High School as OPW4.
(iii) The le
Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India
Assam Sanmilita Mahasangha & Ors. vs Union of India
The burden of proving citizenship lies with the proceedee under the Foreigners Act, 1946; insufficient evidence can lead to a declaration of foreignness.
The burden of proof for establishing citizenship under the Foreigners Act lies with the proceedee, and mere submission of documents without adequate corroboration does not suffice.
The burden of proof rests on the individual claiming citizenship, and failure to provide credible evidence results in designation as a foreign national under the Foreigners Act, 1946.
The burden of proof to establish citizenship lies solely with the individual under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and must be met with sufficient evidence, without relying on rebuttal evidenc....
The burden of proof for establishing citizenship rests solely on the individual, as mandated by Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
The burden of proving citizenship is on the proceedee under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and the Writ Court does not review factual determinations of the Tribunal unless procedural impropri....
The burden of proof lies with the individual claiming citizenship, under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, requiring cogent evidence to substantiate the claim.
The burden of proving citizenship lies entirely on the proceedee, and failure to provide cogent and reliable evidence results in a declaration of foreign nationality under Section 9 of the Foreigners....
The burden of proof under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 lies upon the person claiming citizenship, and the evidence presented must be supported by documentary evidence and contemporaneous rec....
The burden of proof for establishing Indian citizenship lies with the proceedee under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and a writ court does not interfere with factual findings of a Tribunal.
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.