THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KALYAN RAI SURANA, SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Fatima Bibi @ Fatema Khatun, D/o. Sakir Hossen @ Saker Uddin Mia, W/o. Nazrul Hoque – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Rep. By The Ministry Of Home Deptt. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.P. Khaund, J.
Heard Ms. S. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Gayan, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the FT matters and NRC; Mr. A. I. Ali, learned standing counsel for the ECI; and Mr. P. Sarma, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate for the State.
2. The petitioner Fatima Bibi is aggrieved by the impugned opinion dated 30.09.2016 in F.T. Case No. FT-9/79/GKJ/2015 and Ref. Case No. IM (D) T case no. 3012/98 passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal No. 9, Dhubri, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner who had entered into India from the specified territory on or after 25.03.1971. The instant case was registered and notices were issued to the petitioner. Earlier this case was registered under the IMDT Act, but was subsequently transferred to the Foreigners Tribunal. The petitioner appeared before the Tribunal and filed her written statement and duly contested the proceeding. She adduced her evidence as DW1 and the evidence of Moinul Hoque as DW2, and exhibited some documents.
2. Through her written statement, Fatima Bibi submitted that she is an Indian citizen and the letter ‘D’ was erroneously insert
Claimants asserting citizenship must substantiate their claims with credible evidence, failing which their claims may be dismissed as seen in foreigner cases.
The burden lies on the petitioner to provide reliable evidence establishing citizenship, which was not met, leading to the declaration of foreign status.
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.
The burden of proof to establish citizenship lies on the person asserting it, requiring credible evidence of lineage and personal knowledge.
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 establishing citizenship lies on the individual, necessitating credible and coherent evidence, which must be reliable and consistent.
The court established that the burden of proof in citizenship cases lies with the petitioner, but the Tribunal must consider all relevant evidence presented.
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 lies on the petitioner to establish citizenship, which was not met due to insufficient evidence linking her to her claimed lineage.
The burden of proof for citizenship rests on the petitioner in Foreigners Act cases; discrepancies in documentation can undermine claims of Indian citizenship.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.