GAHC010053802026 2026:GAU-AS:3891-

DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/1576/2026 BAHAR ALI SON OF LATE DULU SHEIKH,R/O-VILL- LATABARI FAHURATALI, P.O. P.S.-

SIPAJHAR, DIST- DARRANG,ASSAM, PIN- 784145.

VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHRS REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-110001..

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6

3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B)

DARRANG MANGALDAI ASSAM

4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DARRANG MANGALDAI ASSAM

5:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA REP. BY THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI-110001

6:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS ASSAM BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-05 DIST- KAMRUP (M Advocate for the Petitioner : MS S. MEHJABIN, MR. R ALI,MR M Z SHAH,MR G U AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., GA, ASSAM,SC, NRC,SC, ECI,SC, F.T BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

ORDER

18.03.2026 (K.R. Surana, J)

Heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Deka, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the FT matters and NRC, Ms. S. Katakey, learned standing counsel for the ECI and Ms. R.B.Bora, learned Junior Govt. Advocate.

2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the opinion dated 31.05.2018 passed by the learned th th Member, Foreigners Tribunal (4 ), Darrang, Mangaldai, in F.T. 4 Case st No.76/SPR/2017, [F.T. 1 Case No.1220/12, Ref. F.T. Case No. 232/07 dated 30.06.2007], by which the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream. The contents of the said opinion reveals that though the petitioner had filed his written statement, but he did not tender any evidence and therefore, the learned Tribunal, taking note of Order 3(4) of the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 passed the opinion on account of failure of the petitioner to discharge his burden of proof as envisaged under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.

3. As there is an inordinate delay of 8 years in assailing the said opinion, the learned counsel for the petitioner was asked to address the Court on the delay and laches. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is an inordinate delay in assailing the said opinion, but he places reliance on an earlier opinion dated 09.12.1999 passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal, Darrang, Mangaldoi, in F.T. Case No.1613 of 1998 (S.P. Enquiry No.6,988/98), by which the petitioner was held to be not a foreigner who entered Assam between 01.01.1966 and 25.03.1971. Accordingly, he was declared to be not a foreigner who entered Assam between the said dates. It is further submitted that, as there already existed an opinion declaring the petitioner to be not a foreigner, the petitioner was under a bona fide impression that his learned counsel would take care of the procedures and only in the month of November, 2025, when the State started taking action against the declared foreigners, he contacted his learned counsel and came to know about the opinion already rendered on 31.05.2018.

4. The learned Standing counsel for the FT and border matters has submitted that the previous opinion dated 09.12.1999 is absolutely a non-speaking order and without discussing the evidence, it has only been mentioned in the said opinion that, on a perusal of the Gaonburah certificate dated 28.04.1999, certifying that the petitioner Bahar Ali is the son of Dulu Seikh, whose name appears in the Electoral Roll of 1966, the petitioner was declared not to be a foreigner entering into Assam between 01.01.1966 and 25.03.1971. Accordingly, it is submitted that the said opinion is not sustainable either on facts or in law.

5. Accordingly, by referring to the decision of this Court in the case of Rafikul Is