Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KALYAN RAI SURANA, SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Sahara Begum, W/o - Md. Siddique Ali – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Through The Commissioner And Secretary To The Min Of Home Affairs, Govt Of India, New Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. tribunal's decision declaring petitioner a foreigner. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. parties' contentions regarding evidentiary discrepancies and burden of proof. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 16 , 17 , 25 , 34 , 36 , 37) |
| 3. inconsistency in evidence fails to discharge burden under section 9. (Para 8 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 40 , 42 , 43 , 45) |
| 4. review of oral evidence and conflicting documentary discrepancies. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 5. pleadings, evidentiary burden and validity of adoption under law. (Para 35 , 38 , 39 , 41 , 44) |
| 6. conclusion of writ jurisdiction and dismissal of petition. (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49) |
JUDGMENT :
S.P. Khaund, J.
The petitioner, Musstt. Sahara Begum is aggrieved by the Judgment and Order dated 03.08.2018, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal, Tezpur (1st ) Assam in connection with FT (D) Case No.65/2016, Police Inquiry No.109/2016, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner who entered into Assam from the specified territory after 24.03.1971.
2. A reference was made by the Superintendent of Police (B), Sonitpur, Tezpur under the Foreigners’ Act, 1946, Police Inquiry No. 109
The burden of proving citizenship lies solely with the individual asserting it. Oral testimony without corroborating documentation is insufficient, and unexplained inconsistencies in official records....
In citizenship proceedings, the statutory burden of proof rests entirely on the individual to provide consistent and corroborated documentary evidence. Oral testimony, when contradictory or unsupport....
In matters of disputed citizenship, the burden of proof rests solely on the individual. Oral testimony without cogent, linked documentary evidence is insufficient, and failure to disclose material fa....
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 lies on the petitioner to provide reliable evidence establishing citizenship, which was not met, leading to the declaration of foreign status.
The petitioner failed to prove citizenship under the Foreigners Act, 1946, as the presented documentation was insufficient and lacked proper verification.
The main legal point established is the requirement for link documents and the verification of contents in certificates to prove Indian citizenship under the Foreigners' Act, 1946.
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 proving citizenship lies with the individual, requiring credible documentary evidence to substantiate claims of nationality.
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
