Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Sanjay Kumar Medhi, Susmita Phukan Khaund
Saleha Khatun, W/O- Md. Abdul Hekim – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Rep. By The Secy. To The Govt. Of India, Ministry Of Home Affairs, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.P. Khaund, J.
Heard Shri M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri C.K.S. Baruah, learned CGC, Shri G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the Home Department & NRC; Shri A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission of India and Shri H.K. Hazarika, learned Junior Government Advocate.
Factual Matrix :-
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned opinion dated 25.09.2018 passed by the learned Foreigners’ Tribunal (5th), Darrang, Mangaldoi in Case No. FT(V)2737/2017 whereby the petitioner has been declared as a foreigner of post 1971 stream.
Arguments for the petitioner :-
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this is a fit case to be remanded back as the evidence of DW-2 was not elaborately discussed by the learned Tribunal to the prejudice of the petitioner. The learned Tribunal has erred in law as well as in facts as the Tribunal did not accept Exhibit-6, acknowledgment receipt from NRC Seva Kendra as it was observed that the document was a computer generated document and cannot be accepted as evidence.
4. It is further submitted that in the NRC of 1966, the petitioner’s father’s name is reflected and the
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the claimant, requiring reliable evidence that was not sufficiently provided, leading to the dismissal of the petition declaring the petitioner a foreign....
The burden of proof to establish citizenship lies on the person asserting it, requiring credible evidence of lineage and personal knowledge.
The burden of proof on individuals asserting citizenship under Section 9 of the Foreigners' Act, 1946, and the need for documentary evidence and verification of contents to establish citizenship.
Merely because documents were collected by petitioner during pendency of reference, it cannot be a ground to ignore same as documents have to be examined as regards the genuineness, authenticity, rel....
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the petitioner, who failed to establish lineage and continuous residency prior to the cutoff date, resulting in the declaration as a foreigner.
Claimants asserting citizenship must substantiate their claims with credible evidence, failing which their claims may be dismissed as seen in foreigner cases.
The burden of proof lies on the individual asserting citizenship to establish their linkage with legacy persons and provide evidence based on personal knowledge. Documentary evidence alone may not su....
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
