JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)

(S.P. Khaund, J)

The petitioner in this case is Masuda Begum @Mashuda Begum and she is aggrieved by the opinion dated 13.07.2022 passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal, South Salmara Mankachar, (Assam) in F.T. Case No. 2284/SSM/11 arising out of reference IM(D)T case No. 1249/1998. Vide the impugned order dated 13.07.2022, the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner of Post 1971 stream.

2. Heard Mr. J. Abbas, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. J. Das, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the FT, Border and NRC matters; Mr. N. Kalita, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. A. I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission of India and Mr. P Sarmah, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondent State.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner laid stress in his argument that the petitioner has categorically mentioned in her written statement that her father's name is Mojo Sheikh and her grandfather's name is Isopuddin Sk, whereas her mother's name is Samsun Nehar and her grandmother's name is Panaullah Sk. It is also submitted that the petitioner has also mentioned in her written statement that her grandmother's name is Khotizan Bibi. A pertinent point to be noted is that the petitioner was married twice. Earlier the petitioner got married to one, Sahidur Rohman of village-Berabhanga in the district of Dhubri (now South Salmara, Mankachar), who passed away on 05.12.2001 owing to an incident of assassination. Thereafter, the petitioner’s marriage was solemnized with Bosirul Hoque of village-Tatipara (Boraitari) in the district of Dhubri, South Salmara. The Kabin Nama was executed and registered on 01.07.2004 and the registration was duly authenticated on 31.07.2004.

4. It is also submitted that the petitioner has submitted sufficient documents linking her lineage with her parents and grandparents. There are some discrepancies in the names and these discrepancies have been cleared by an affidavit which was exhibited by petitioner while adducing her evidence. It is also submitted that the Qazi has deposed as DW-4 and has proved the Kabin Nama. The evidence adduced by the petitioner has substantiated her stance. Without any valid reasons, the petitioner's documents were not accepted as evidence and the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner.

5. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for FT Matters, Mr. G. Sharma, laid stress in his argument that the petitioner's name does not appear along with her father's name in the voters list. Indeed, the petitioner was declared as a D-voter and thus her name does not appear along with her father as a voter. It is also submitted that although the petitioner's father's name appears with her grandparents' names, yet the petitioner has failed to establish any lineage with her parents and grandparents through any reliable documents. Petitioner could not even recall her date of marriage. The date of marriage is overwritten and this has been admitted by the witness DW-4. Documents of this nature cannot establish petitioner's lineage with her parents and grandparents. Overwriting is visible in the school certificate also. The petitioner relied heavily on the oral evidence, but oral evidence is not sufficient to prove citizenship. The learned counsel appearing for the other respondents have adopted the submissions of the learned Counsel for FT Matters.

6. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions at the Bar.

7. To substantiate her stance, the petitioner through her written statement/written reply and her evidence-in-chief has stated that she is a genuine Indian citizen and her father's name is Mojo Sheikh, son of Isopuddin Sk and her mother's name is Samsun Nehar. The petitioner has also stated that her grandfather Isopuddin Sk and her grandmother Khotizan Bibi are genuine Indian citizens and their names figure in the NRC of 1951 and in different voter's list prepared from time