Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KALYAN RAI SURANA, SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Saleha Khatun, W/o. Aijul Hoque, D/o. Khandakar Jamal Uddin – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Represented By The Secretary of The Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's claim of citizenship based on documentation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. evidence provided by the petitioner regarding lineage. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. challenge to the credibility of documents submitted. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. burden of proof lies with the petitioner under section 9. (Para 16 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. court's findings on evidentiary discrepancies. (Para 21 , 22 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 6. inadmissibility of photocopies as evidence. (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 7. disparities in petitioner's documentation undermine citizenship claim. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 8. final judgment affirms tribunal's decision. (Para 41 , 42 , 43) |
JUDGMENT :
S.P. Khaund, J.
The petitioner Saleha Khatun is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 30.06.2016 passed by the learned Foreigners Tribunal No. 7 Dhubri, at th Bilasipara in F.T.7 Dhubri Case No. 155/BBR/15 (F.T. Case No. 359/BBR/11) (‘D’ Voter Case No. 1556/D/2007).
2. Vide the impugned order dated 30.06.2016 passed in F.T. 7th Dhubri Case No. 155/BBR/15, the petitioner has been declared to be a foreigner who entered India (Assam) on or after 25.03.1971. Upon receipt of notice, the petitioner appeared before the l
The burden of proof for establishing citizenship lies on the individual, necessitating credible and coherent evidence, which must be reliable and consistent.
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....
Claimants asserting citizenship must substantiate their claims with credible evidence, failing which their claims may be dismissed as seen in foreigner cases.
Point of law: Citizenship - Merely because a witness or a proceedee has not produced the land document, it would be sufficient to draw an adverse inference that he is not an Indian.
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 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.
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
