Back
2026 Supreme(Gau) 1259
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KALYAN RAI SURANA, SHAMIMA JAHAN, JJ.
Aminul Hoque, S/o Mohiruddin Sheikh - Petitioner
Versus
The Union Of India Rep. BY The Secretary To The Govt. Of India, Ministry Of Home Affairs, New Delhi And Ors. - Respondents
WP(C)/5471 OF 2019
Decided On : 30-06-2026
Important Points
Subject
Constitutional Law - Citizenship and Immigration
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Appellate Jurisdiction - Scope of judicial review in writ jurisdiction - Court does not exercise powers of an appellate tribunal to re-evaluate evidence - Writ jurisdiction is limited to correcting manifest errors of law or perversity - If the decision is based on valid appreciation of evidence, the Court will not interfere merely because another view is possible. (Paras 28, 29, 30)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, having been declared a foreigner by a tribunal, approached the Court. The petitioner asserted citizenship through documentary evidence including land documents, electors' lists, and national register extracts, claiming that inconsistencies in names and ages were minor errors. The tribunal concluded these documents were unreliable and failed to establish the petitioner's lineage.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the documents produced lacked required certification under the law for electronic evidence. It also noted significant discrepancies in the ages and names of family members across different administrative records, rendering the documents incapable of establishing a consistent genealogical link. Oral testimony alone could not replace the requirement for corroborated documentary proof.
Issues: Whether the individual discharged the burden of proof to establish citizenship and whether the tribunal's assessment of evidence was perverse or erroneous.
Ratio Decidendi: The burden of proof solely rests on the individual to prove citizenship under the relevant statute. Documentary evidence must be admissible and relevant, and mere oral affirmation is insufficient. Electronic records lacking the necessary statutory certification carry no evidentiary value, and inconsistencies in names and ages across records undermine the reliability of the documents in establishing ancestral links.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
For the Petitioner: Mr. M U Mahmud, Ms F N Zaman, Mr S Islam, Ms. R Ahmed
For the Respondent:Asstt.S.G.I., Sc, Eci,Sc, Nrc,Sc, F.T, Mr. B. Deka, CGC., Mr. A.I. Ali, Standing Counsel, Mr. J. Payeng, Standing counsel., Ms. R.B. Bora, Govt. Advocate.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's background and evidence supporting citizen status (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. admissibility requirements for electronic evidence and nrc archives (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. requirement to prove consistent ancestry and link through documentation (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. evidentiary value of secondary documents and oral testimony in citizenship cases (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. scope of writ of certiorari regarding jurisdictional and manifest errors (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
JUDGMENT :
K.R. Surana, J.
Heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Deka, learned CGC for the respondent no.1; Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel for the respondent no.2; Mr. J. Payeng, learned standing counsel for the FT and Border matters, for respondent nos. 3, 4 and 6, and Ms.R.B. Bora, learned Junior Govt. Advocate for respondent nos.5, 7 and 8.
2) By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, namely, Aminul Hoque, has assailed the opinion dated 28.02.2019, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal No.4, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, in FT Case No. FT[K(M)-4] 1077/2017, arising out of F.T. Case No. 842/2016, which was a reference forwarded by the Deputy Commissioner of Police Kamrup (M), Guwahati (respondent no.6).
3) On receipt of the notice, the petitioner had filed his written statement. In the written statement, the petitioner had stated as follows:-
a. That due to poverty he was working as day labourer in Guwahati by staying in a rented house at village- Borbori under Azara P.S. The Investigating Officer, who had come for enquiry, gave his report without fair or proper enquiry.
b. The name of his father is Mohiruddin Sheikh @ Mahruddin Sheikh @ Mohiruddin @ Mohir Uddin. The name of his mother is Foziron Nessa and nickname is Nesa Khatun @ Nesaton Bibi. The name of his grandfather is Late Pashan Ali Sheikh @ Pashan Ali @ Pashan Sheikh. The name of his grandmother is Late Korimon Nessa. The name of his step grandmother is Late Kulsum Nessa Bibi and name of his another step grandmother is Sokina Khatun. The name of his father, along with grandparents, step grandmother and other family members had been recorded in the NRC of 1951 at village- Charai Khasara, under Lakhipur P.S., Dist. Goalpara.
c. About 56/57 years ago, due to Brahmaputra river erosion, the petitioner shifted from village Charai Khasara to village- Dhobakura under the same Lakhipur P.S., Dist. Goalpara. The name of Pashan Ali and Korimon Nessa, his grandparents and Sokina Khatun, his step grandmother were recorded in the voter list of 1966 under the then 44 No. Goalpara West LAC in village- 115, Dhobakura, Circle and PS Lakhipur, Dist. Goalpara.
d. The name of Mahruddin Sheikh, his father; Pashan Ali and Korimon Nessa, his grandparents; and other family members were recorded in the voter list of 1970 under the then 44 No. Goalpara West LAC in village- 115, Dhobakura, Circle and PS Lakhipur, Dist. Goalpara.
e. By sale deed dated 12.09.1973, his grandfather had purchased 2 bigha, 1 katha, 6 lessa land, covered by dag no. 4 and 6 was from Md.Jason Ali Mollah at village- Ghugudoba under Lakhipur Revenue Circle.
f. The name of his father, grandparents and other family members were recorded in the voter list of 1979. The name of his father was recorded as Mohiruddin and the name of his mother’s name has been recorded as Fojiran Nessa in the voter list of 1979, under the then 39 No. Jaleswar LAC in village- 78, Dhobakura, Circle and PS Lakhipur, Dist. Goalpara. Due to family separation, the parents of the petitioner shifted from village- Dhobakura to village- Ghugudoba about 37 years ago under the same PS Lakhipur, Dist. Goalpara.
g. The name of Mohir Uddin, father; and Nesa Khatun instead of Fojiran Nesa, mother; grandmother, uncle and aunt of the petitioner has been recorded in the voter list of 1985 in Village- (Ka) Ghugudoba
