Back
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
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to foreigners tribunal's order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner's evidence not accepted. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. respondent's burden of proof arguments. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. importance of proper documentation. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. writ jurisdiction limitations. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. standard of proof clarifications. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 7. documentation issues examined. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 8. burden of proof on applicant. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 9. writ petition dismissed. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
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
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....
In citizenship proceedings, the burden of proof rests entirely on the individual. Documentary evidence requires proof of both authenticity and contents through the examination of authors and contempo....
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
