Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Md Safique Kuraishi S/O- Late Latif Kuraishi – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Represented By The Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction claimed under article 226 against tribunal's order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner argues evidence not accepted by tribunal. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. state's counsel states burden of proof rests with the petitioner. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. court's limited power to scrutinize decision-making. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. burden of proof under foreigners act lies with the proceedee. (Para 11 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. discussion of previous case and remand for merits. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 7. assessment of documents presented by the petitioner. (Para 15 , 18) |
| 8. decision to dismiss the writ petition affirmed. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
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 29.09.2023 st st passed by the learned Foreigners’ Tribunal, 1 , Lakhimpur in F.T. (1 ) Case No.1341/2011 (District No. 307/2009). By the impugned order, the petitioner, who was the proceedee before the learned Tribunal, has been declared to be a foreigner post 24.03.1971.
2. The facts of the case may be put in a nutshell as fo
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.
The burden of proving that a person is not a foreigner lies upon the said person under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act would not be applicable.
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 under the Foreigners Act remains with the individual, regardless of representation, and failure to provide evidence justifies a tribunal's determination of foreign n....
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 proving citizenship lies with the proceedee under the Foreigners Act, 1946; insufficient evidence can lead to a declaration of foreignness.
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 proving citizenship rests entirely on the individual. In exercise of supervisory jurisdiction, the court will not re-evaluate evidence or substitute its findings for those of the tribun....
The burden of proof to establish citizenship lies on the proceedee, and the admissibility of evidence is crucial.
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
