Page No.# 1/8 vs The Union Of India And 5 Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 7635 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/8 vs The Union Of India And 5 Ors on 25 September, 2025

Author: Sanjay Kumar Medhi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Medhi

                                                                 Page No.# 1/8

GAHC010162242025




                                                     2025:GAU-AS:13399-DB

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

                        Case No. : WP(C)/4407/2025

         SAYRA BEGUM @ SAYRA KHATUN
         D/O LT. ROSHAN ALI @ ROSHAN QURESI @ ROSHAN KACHAR, W/O MD.
         AKRAM QURESI, P/R/O VILL- WARD NO. 1 RANGAPARA TOWN, P.O.-
         RANGAPARA, P.S.- RANGAPARA, DIST- SONITPUR (ASSAM), PIN-784505


         VERSUS

         THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
         MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI, PIN-110001

         2:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
          REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER
          NEW DELHI-110001

         3:THE STATE OF ASSAM
          REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
         GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
          HOME DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-781006

         4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
          SONITPUR
         TEZPUR
         ASSAM
          PIN-784001

         5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B)
          SONITPUR
         TEZPUR
         ASSAM
          PIN-784001
                                                                       Page No.# 2/8


           6:THE COORDINATOR
            NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS
            BHANGAGARH
            GUWAHATI-05


                                            BEFORE
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR



      Advocate for the petitioner(s):       Mr J Abbas

      Advocate for the respondent(s): Ms A Verma, SC, FT,
                                      Mr G Sarma, SC, NRC,
                                      Mr H K Hazarika, GA, Assam
                                      Ms K Phukan, CGC
                                      Mr A I Ali, SC, ECI

      Date of Hearing                   :     08.09.2025.

      Date of Judgment                  :     25.09.2025


                         JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)

(Rajesh Mazumdar, J.)

     Heard Shri J Abbas, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. A Verma, learned
Standing Counsel, FT, Shri G Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, NRC, Shri H K
Hazarika, learned Government Advocate, Assam, Ms. K Phukan, learned Central
Government Counsle and Shri A I Ali, learned Standing Counsel, Election
Commission of India.

2.       The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
has been filed by the writ petitioner to assail the opinion dated 15.11.2023,
                                                                          Page No.# 3/8

passed by the learned Member, Foreigners' Tribunal, 7 th, Tezpur, at Balipara, in
Case No. FTDC 1179/16, arising out of Reference No. TZP.(B)/07/972, dated
28.03.07, by which the petitioner was declared an illegal immigrant, who came
to Assam on or after 25.03.1971.

3.        Notice was issued in this case on 06.08.2025 and the records of the
trial Court were also requisitioned. The records having been received, with the
consent of both the parties the matter is taken up for final disposal.

Facts revealed from Trial Court Record

4. During the intensive revision of electoral rolls for the 74 Rangapara Assembly Constituency in Assam, with reference to 01.01.2005 as the qualifying date, the Electoral Registration Officer requested the Local Verification Officer to conduct a verification in respect of the petitioner herein. On receipt of the report, the Electoral Registration Officer forwarded the report to the Superintendent of Police, Sonitpur. On receipt of the said request, the Superintendent of Police, Sonitpur, Tezpur, forwarded the same to the Foreigners' Tribunal, Tezpur, for rendering an opinion on the citizenship of the

petitioner. The case records were received at the Foreigners' Tribunal-7 th, Tezpur and accordingly, Case No. FTDC 1179/16 was initiated against the petitioner.

5. Notices were issued by the Learned Tribunal to the petitioner on 31.08.2021, requiring the petitioner to appear and submit her written statement along with other documents on 05.10.2021. The petitioner filed her written statement on the 11.01.2022. She had annexed documents to the written statement to support her claim of a citizenship in India and to prove the linkage Page No.# 4/8

with her projected parents. The petitioner thereafter filed her evidence on affidavit on 26.05.2022. The Petitioner did not appear before the Tribunal on several occasions after that and on the dates when she did appear, her cross

examination could not take place for different reasons. By the order dated 24 th of May 2023, the Learned Tribunal rejected the application filed on behalf of the petitioner for fixing another date for cross examination as also for filing further evidence and closed the stage of further evidence and cross examination. The

Learned Tribunal fixed 17th of June 2023 for arguments in the matter. On that day, the petitioner was present before the Learned Tribunal along with her engaged advocate and filed a petition bearing number 6/2023 praying for setting aside of the last order which had fixed the date of argument and to allow her to file further evidence and also to allow her to face cross examination since she was not able to be present on the last occasion due to her ill health. The learned Tribunal rejected the application of the petitioner on the same day, although there was no representation or objection filed on behalf of the State

and fixed 17th of July 2023 for opinion.

6. Through an opinion dated 15.11.2023, the Learned Tribunal held that the petitioner could not discharge her burden under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the petitioner was declared as a foreigner who came to Assam illegally on or after 25.3.1971. In the said opinion, although the learned Tribunal had referred to the different documents exhibited by the petitioner, almost all the exhibits, like the marriage certificate issued by the Gaon Pradhan and the school certificate issued by the School where the petitioner claimed to have studied, had been rejected on the ground that they were private documents and that they were not proved in the manner known in law. The Page No.# 5/8

Electoral Rolls exhibited by the petitioner were also held to be doubtful in the absence of being proved in a manner acceptable in law. It is this opinion which is being assailed in the present writ petition.

7. Mr J Abbas, Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has initiated his arguments by submitting that the petitioner had submitted her written statement and her evidence on affidavit before the Learned Tribunal in a conscious effort to defend her claim of citizenship. He submitted that the petitioner is a lady of frail health and she had remained present before the Learned Tribunal whenever her health permitted her and there were also occasions when although she had reached the Tribunal but had to leave the premises due to her ill health. There were also instances where, though she was present and available for cross examination etc., the proceedings could not take place due to absence of representation on behalf of the State. He has submitted that the records of the Learned Tribunal would reveal that the petitioner had diligently followed the proceedings before the Learned Tribunal. He has submitted that the Learned Tribunal had rejected the prayer of the

petitioner made on 17th of July 2023 to be allowed an opportunity to face cross examination and to lead further evidence, even though on that there was no representation for the State. He has impressed upon this Court that citizenship is a very valuable right and it would be only reasonable that a person called upon to prove his citizenship should be allowed sufficient opportunities to defend his/her claim. He has submitted that the Learned Tribunal ought to have positively considered the prayer of the petitioner to recall the order dated 24.05.2023 by which her opportunity to face cross examination and to lead further evidence had been closed, more so in view of the fact that the petitioner had attended the proceedings on that day and the State Counsel was absent.

Page No.# 6/8

He has submitted that granting one opportunity to the petitioner to participate in the proceedings would further the interests of justice and the petitioner could have availed full opportunity to defend her claim of citizenship.

The Learned Counsel for the petitioner thereafter referred to the different documents exhibited during the proceedings before the Learned Tribunal in his attempt to convince this Court that there is a high possibility of the petitioner succeeding in her attempt to prove her citizenship if she is given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings from the stage where her opportunities were closed by the Learned Tribunal.

8. Mr G Sharma, learned standing Counsel for NRC, appearing for the respondents has on the other hand submitted that the petitioner was aware of the proceedings before the Tribunal and she had on her volition, refrained from pursuing her cause after having filed her evidence. The Learned Counsel has submitted that though it cannot be denied that citizenship is a valuable right, it would be the responsibility of the person who is required to prove his citizenship to diligently take all steps to ensure his success in proving his status. He submits that the Learned Tribunal did not commit any error in rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to be afforded another opportunity to face cross examination and to adduce further evidence.

9. We have considered the submissions made on behalf of the contesting parties and the records have been perused. From the records of the learned Tribunal, it is seen that though the petitioner was absent on several occasions, she had, in fact, filed her written statement and also adduced written evidence by way of affidavit which indicate that she had made efforts to participate in the proceedings before the Tribunal. During her appearances, on one occasion, her Page No.# 7/8

cross examination did not take place due to the absence of the Counsel for the State and on another occasion, she had to leave the Tribunal premises as she fell ill while waiting for the proceedings. On the last occasion when she had appeared and prayed for recall of the order by which her evidence had been closed, the prayer was rejected. The Counsel for the State was not available on that day also.

10. In view of the above and taking into consideration the plea of the medical condition of the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner may be afforded one opportunity to face cross-examination so that the evidence led by her can be given due weightage by the learned Tribunal while deciding the reference before it. The petitioner also may be allowed, subject to just exceptions, to lead further evidence to support her claim before the learned Tribunal.

11. In view of the above and only due to the peculiar circumstances of the case, we interfere with the order dated 17.07.2023 and consequently also interfere with the opinion dated 15.11.2023, passed by the learned Member,

Foreigners' Tribunal, 7th, Tezpur, at Balipara, in Case No. FTDC 1179/16, arising out of Reference No. TZP. (B)/07/972, dated 28.03.07. Accordingly, the following directions are passed:

a. the matter is now remanded back to the learned Tribunal with a simultaneous direction to the petitioner to appear before the learned

Member, Foreigners' Tribunal-7th, Tezpur, at Balipara on or before 28.10.2025 without requiring any further notice for appearance.

b. Upon her appearance, the Learned Tribunal shall allow her to face Page No.# 8/8

cross examine and also allow her to lead further evidence as permitted in law. It is expected that the petitioner shall also file all evidence in her defense on or before 28.10.2025 when she appears to participate in the proceedings and any prayer for extension of time for the same shall be decided at the sole discretion of the Tribunal.

c. Thereafter, the Learned Tribunal shall conduct the proceedings in accordance with law to bring the same to its logical conclusion at the earliest.

d. On failure of the petitioner to appear before the learned Tribunal within the date fixed by this order, the learned Tribunal will be at liberty to treat the petitioner as absent on call and pass such order as may be deemed fit.

12. This writ petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above.

13. The original records received on requisition from the learned Tribunal shall be expeditiously returned back along with a copy of this order to be made a part of the record.

14. No costs.

                                                  JUDGE              JUDGE

Comparing Assistant