IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
KALYAN RAI SURANA, SHAMIMA JAHAN
Harej Ali @ Haraj Ali @ Harej, S/o. Late Basir Ali @ Md. Baser Ali @ Basir – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, To Be Rep. By The Secretary, Govt. Of India, Department Of Home Affairs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.R. Surana, J.
Heard Mr. A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M.R. Adhikari, learned CGC; Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel for the ECI; Mr. G. Sharma, learned standing counsel for the FT matters and NRC; and Mr. H.K. Hazarika, learned Junior Govt. Advocate for respondent.
2. This review petition has been filed to assail the order dated 15.11.2019, passed by this Court in WP(C) 4759/2019. By the said order, this Court had dismissed the writ petition and thereby refused to interfere with the opinion dated 31.05.2019, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal nd Kamrup (M) 2 , in F.T. Case No. 1552/2015, by which the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the proceedings before the learned Foreigners Tribunal, the petitioner had exhibited 9 (nine) documents, viz., voters list of 1965 (Ext.A), voters list of 1966 (Ext. B), voters list of 1970 (Ext. C), voters list of 1993 (Ext. D), voters list of 1997 (Ext. E), voters list of 2014 (Ext. F), school certificate dated 11.06.2012 (Ext. G), socio-economic and caste census-2011 acknowledgement slip of
Sirajul Hoque v. State of Assam & Ors.
Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India & Ors.
Abdul Kuddus v. Union of India & Ors.
Review petitions in citizenship cases require new evidence or errors apparent on record, not mere re-hearing of previous arguments.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual claiming it, and failure to provide credible evidence results in a declaration of foreigner status.
The court upheld the Tribunal's decision declaring the petitioner a foreigner due to insufficient evidence of citizenship, emphasizing the importance of credible documentation.
A foreigner's status must be proven by credible and verifiable evidence linking them to claimed Indian ancestors; mere appearances in voter rolls are insufficient.
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 High Court by invoking its inherent powers, can always pass adequate orders to correct such errors that appear to be apparent on the face of the record.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the individual asserting it, and failure to produce evidence can lead to a declaration of foreigner status.
The Foreigners Tribunal must adhere to due process and cannot declare family members as foreigners without proper reference and sufficient evidence.
The court reaffirmed that the burden of proof lies with the petitioners to establish their citizenship, emphasizing the limited scope of review jurisdiction.
If a proceedee has disclosed credible relevant facts on the basis of which he is claiming citizenship, it will be incumbent upon the State to, in our opinion, verify these facts and if necessary, lea....
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.