Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Mustt Mumtaz Begum Alias Mamta Begum W/O Kasem Ali – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Rep By The Secretary To The Govt Of India Ministry Of Home Affairs – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction invoked under article 226. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner's arguments on citizenship prove inadequacy. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. counterarguments against petitioner's evidence presentation. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. court’s analysis of evidence presentation standards. (Para 12 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. requirement of documentary proof in citizenship claims. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. burden of proof lies on the petitioner in citizenship disputes. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 7. writ petition dismissed; no interference with tribunal's order. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
Judgment :
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 13.09.2019 passed by the learned Foreigners’ Tribunal No. 7, Sonitpur in Case No. FTDC.624/16 arising out of Reference No. TZP(B) 471/07. 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.
(i) The reference was made by the Superintendent of Police (B), Sonitpur District, against the petitioner giving rise
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 proving citizenship lies with the proceedee under the Foreigners Act, 1946; insufficient evidence can lead to a declaration of foreignness.
The burden of proof regarding citizenship lies on the proceedee, and failure to provide adequate admissible evidence results in a declaration of foreigner status as per the Foreigners Act.
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 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 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 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.
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
