Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, PRANJAL DAS
Saleha Khatun W/o- Hanif Ali – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
(S.K. Medhi, J.)
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 vide impugned order dated 06.09.2018 passed by the learned Foreigners’ Tribunal - II, Dhubri in F.T. Case No. 633/F/2015, arising out of Ref FT Case No. 842/98. 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) The reference was made by the Superintendent of Police (B), Dhubri District, against the petitioner giving rise to the aforesaid F.T. Case No.633/F/2015.
(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 along with certain documents and had also adduced evidence as DW1. There were two more witnesses namely, one Kansu Sheikh (DW2) and the Headmaster of the School (DW3).
(iii) The learned Tribunal, after considering the facts and circumstances and taking into account of the provisions of Section 9 of t
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 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 for establishing citizenship rests solely on the individual, as mandated by Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
The burden of proof to establish citizenship lies on the proceedee, and the admissibility of evidence is crucial.
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 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 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 regarding citizenship under the Foreigners Act lies solely with the proceedee, and failure to meet this burden results in their classification as a foreigner.
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
