Disposed

Marfat Ali v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC4 Jun 2018WP(C)/1558/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking quashing of Foreigners' Tribunal order declaring petitioner a foreigner. Court set aside order and granted petitioner an opportunity to adduce evidence via affidavit before the Tribunal within specified time.

What did the court decide?

Set aside impugned order; directed petitioner to appear before FT with evidence-in-chief by affidavit on 02.07.2018; Tribunal to conclude case within 60 days.

Marfat Ali Vs the Union of India and 4… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010015922017

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 1558/2017

¶5

1:MARFAT ALI

¶6

S/O LT. SIRAJ ALI @ SIRAJ VILL- HATIMURIA, P.S. and MOUZAMOIRABARI, DIST. MORIGAON, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE UNION OF INDIA and 4 ORS.

¶9

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, HOME DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI-1, INDIA

¶10

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶11

REP.BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI -6.

¶12

3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MORIGAON DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM

¶13

4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE B MORIGAON DIST. MORIGAON ASSAM

¶14

5:THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE MOIRABARI POLICE STATION P.S. MOIRABARI DIST. MORIGAON ASSA

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.Z HAMMAD

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶18

BEFORE

¶19

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Date : 04-06-2018

¶22

(Ujjal Bhuyan, J)

¶23

Heard Mr Z Hammad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr J Payeng, learned Special Counsel, Foreigners’ Tribunal, Foreigners’ Tribunal (FT).

¶24

By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 24.12.2013, passed by the Foreigners’ Tribunal (2^nd ), Morigaon, in FT(D) Case No. 164 of 2011 ( State –Vs- Marfat Ali), declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner, who had illegally entered into India (Assam) from Bangladesh after 25.03.1971.

¶25

When the writ petition was moved on 20.03.2017, on a query by the Court as to why the writ petition was filed after more than 3 (three) years of passing of the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that his minor son had met with an accident, which required surgery, which was the reason for the delay. Subsequently, petitioner has filed affidavit in support of the above contention.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had filed written statement along with copies of certain documents before the Tribunal, but could not adduce evidence for the aforesaid reason. He, therefore, prays for grant of one more opportunity to the petitioner to adduce evidence.

¶27

Learned Special Counsel, however, supports the order passed by the Tribunal.

¶28

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on due consideration, we feel that it would be in the interest of justice if one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner to adduce evidence, he having filed his written statement.

¶29

Consequently, we set aside the order dated 24.12.2013 and direct the petitioner to appear before the Foreigners’ Tribunal (2^nd ), Morigaon, in connection with FT(D) Case No. 164 of 2011, along with his evidence-in-chief by way of affidavit on 02.07.2018, at 10:30 am, whereafter, Tribunal shall proceed with the reference in accordance with law from the stage of evidence and conclude the same

¶30

Page No.# 3/3

¶31

within a period of 60 (sixty) days from the date of such appearance.

¶32

Needless to say, if there is any default on the part of the petitioner henceforth, Tribunal would be at liberty to pass such order(s) as may be deemed fit and proper.

¶33

Before parting with the record, we make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case.

¶34

This disposes of the writ petition.

¶35

Registry to inform the concerned Foreigners’ Tribunal, Superintendent of Police (Border) and Deputy Commissioner for taking necessary follow-up steps.

¶36

A copy of this order may also be furnished to learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India and, State Coordinator, National Register of Citizens (NRC), for doing the needful.

¶37

JUDGE JUDGE

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Marfat Ali v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Marfat Ali v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Debojit Khound Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Musst. Nuraton Nessa @ Nuriton Nessa Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Md. Abdul Nasser and Anr. Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.