Julhas Sheikh vs The Union Of India And 8 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1701 Gua

                                                                 Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010279462019




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

                         Case No. : WP(C)/8501/2019


         JULHAS SHEIKH
         S/O- LATE MUSLIM SHEIKH, R/O- WARD NO.2, MARGHERITA TOWN, P.O
         AND P.S- MARGHERITA, DIST- TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN- 786181


         VERSUS


         THE UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS
         REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MIN OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI- 01

         2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
          REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM
          DEPTT OF HOME AND POLITICAL
         ASSAM CIVIL SECRETARIAT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI
          PIN- 781006
         ASSAM

         3:THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER
          ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA
          NIRVACHAN SADAN
         ASHOKA ROAD
          NEW DELHI- 110001

         4:THE STATE COORDINATOR
          NRC
          1ST FLOOR
         ACHYUT PLAZA
          GS ROAD
          GUWAHATI
         ASSAM
                                                                          Page No.# 2/5

             PIN- 781005

            5:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE(B)
            ASSAM
             ULUBARI
             GUWAHATI- 781007

            6:THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE(B)
            ASSAM
             BHANGAGARH
             GUWAHATI
            ASSAM
             PIN- 781005

            7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE(B)
            TINSUKIA
            ASSAM
             PIN- 786125

            8:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
            TINSUKIA
            ASSAM
             PIN- 786125

            9:THE FOREIGNERS TRIBUNAL
            TINSUKIA
            ASSAM
             PIN- 78612

Advocate for the Petitioner    : MS. P BORA

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.


                                    BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA


                                              ORDER

Date : 26.07.2021 [N. Kotiswar Singh]

Heard Ms. P. Bora, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

2. Mr. B. Sarma, learned CGC accepts notice on behalf of respondent Page No.# 3/5

No.1 whereas Ms. A. Verma, learned Special Counsel, FT appears for respondent Nos.2, 5, 6 and 7. Ms. A. Bhuyan, learned Standing Counsel, ECI appears for respondent No.3 and Ms. L. Devi, learned Standing Counsel, NRC appears for respondent No.4.

3. Considering the nature of the case and as also agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for disposal at this stage by remanding it to the Foreigners' Tribunal, Tinsukia for fresh consideration.

4. It is the specific plea of the petitioner that the petitioner is the son of one Sofiya Begum @ Sopia Khatun and her mother had been already declared to be an Indian citizen by the Foreigners' Tribunal (Tinsukia) in F.T. Case No. 417/D/2008 vide order dated 22.06.2015. Petitioner states that inspite of the fact that his mother had been declared as an Indian, the petitioner was proceeded by the authorities and was declared a foreigner subsequently by the Tribunal in F.T. Case No. 415/D/2008 vide order dated 02.03.2017.

5. According to the petitioner the said opinion of the Foreigners' Tribunal (Tinsukia) dated 22.06.2015 declaring his mother to be an Indian has not been challenged and as such attained finality.

6. Under the circumstances, the question does not arise that the son of a woman who has been declared to be an Indian citizen can be a foreigner and accordingly, it has been submitted that the said aspect having not discussed by the Foreigners' Tribunal in the proceeding against him, the impugned opinion is illegal.

7. We are also of the view that if the aforesaid Sofiya Begum @ Sopia Page No.# 4/5

Khatun about whom the Tribunal had given an opinion that she is an Indian indeed happens to be the mother of the petitioner as claimed by him, naturally, the petitioner cannot be a foreigner but an Indian citizen as the mother. However, this is an aspect which can be better examined by the Tribunal for which we remand the matter to the Foreigners' Tribunal (Tinsukia) for fresh consideration as to the citizenship of the petitioner in the light of the finding of the Foreigners' Tribunal in F.T. Case No. 417/D/2008 dated 22.06.2015.

8. As a result, the petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment and order dated 02.03.2017 passed by the Foreigners' Tribunal (Tinsukia) in F.T. Case No. 415/D/2008 for fresh consideration. The petitioner will appear before the Foreigner Tribunal within a period of 1 (one) month i.e. on or before 26.08.2021 and furnish all the relevant documents including the opinion dated 22.06.20015 passed by the Foreigners' Tribunal (Tinsukia) in F.T. Case No. 417/D/2008.

9. However, we direct the petitioner to appear before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Tinsukia within 15 (fifteen) days from today, who may obtain necessary information and documentation as required under the rules from the petitioner for securing her presence. On such appearance, the petitioner may be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the said authority. The concerned Superintendent of Police (Border) shall also take steps for capturing the fingerprints and biometrics of the iris of the petitioner.

10. The petitioner also shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Tinsukia district without furnishing the details of the place of destination and necessary Page No.# 5/5

information including contact number to the Superintendent of Police (Border), Tinsukia.

                         JUDGE                             JUDGE




Comparing Assistant