Partly allowed

Badal Bhowmik v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Gauhati HC18 May 2018WP(C)/2128/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed a writ petition seeking quashing of an order declaring the petitioner a foreigner. The court set aside the impugned order and granted the petitioner an opportunity to adduce evidence in the Foreigners Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 09.01.2018 set aside and petitioner directed to appear before the Foreigners Tribunal and adduce evidence by 07.06.2018.

Badal Bhowmik Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010068222018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 2128/2018

¶5

BADAL BHOWMIK

¶6

S/O- LATE MOTILAL BHOWMIK, PERMANENT R/O- VILL- JURIPAR KATHIATOLI, P.S- KAMPUR, UNDER KAMPUR REVENUE CIRCLE, DISTNAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782426

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.

¶9

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPTT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, PIN- 781006

¶10

2:THE UNION OF INDIA

¶11

REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA MIN OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI, PIN- 110001

¶12

3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NEW DELHI, PIN- 110001

¶13

4:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS (NRC) BHANGAGARH, GUWAHATI ASSAM, PIN- 781005

¶14

5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782001

¶15

6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE(B) NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782001

¶16

7:THE ENQUIRY OFFICER(B) KAMPUR POLICE STATION KAMPUR, NAGAON, ASSAM PIN- 78242

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. H G BARUAH

¶19

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

¶20

BEFORE

¶21

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN HON BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Date : 18-05-2018

¶24

(UJJAL BHUYAN, J)

¶25

Heard Mr. S. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J. Payeng, learned Special Counsel, Foreigners Tribunal (FT).

¶26

By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 09.01.2018 passed by the Foreigners Tribunal (9^th ), Nagaon in FT Case No. 634/2015(State vs Sri Badal Bhowmik) declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner from the specified territory of post 25.03.1971 stream.

¶27

On a perusal of order dated 09.01.2018, it would go to show that notice issued by the Tribunal was served upon the petitioner whereafter petitioner had entered appearance before the Tribunal and after seeking adjournments on several occasions filed written statement on 18.08.2017. But when the turn for evidence came, petitioner stopped appearing and failed to adduce evidence. In such circumstances, Tribunal decided to proceed with the reference whereafter impugned order dated 09.01.2018 was passed answering the reference in favour of the State in the above manner.

¶28

When the writ petition was moved on 25.04.2018, it was submitted that petitioner had failed to appear before the Tribunal on three occasions after filing written statement due to illness. We had granted time to the petitioner to file additional affidavit to explain the nature of illness.

¶29

In the meanwhile, one of the counsel for the petitioner, H. G. Baruah has expired. In such circumstances, affidavit could not be filed. However, learned counsel for the petitioner

¶30

Page No.# 3/3

¶31

has made oral submissions explaining the default of the petitioner.

¶32

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on due consideration, we are of the view 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.

¶33

In such circumstances, we set aside the order dated 09.01.2018 and direct the petitioner to appear before the Foreigners Tribunal 9^th , Nagaon in connection with FT Case No. 634/2014 alongwith his evidence-in-chief by way of affidavit on 07.06.2018 at 10:30 a.m. whereafter Tribunal shall proceed with the reference in accordance with law and conclude the same within a period of 60 (sixty) days from the date of appearance.

¶34

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.

¶35

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

¶36

This disposes of the writ petition.

¶37

Registry to inform the concerned Foreigners’ Tribunal, Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of Police (B) for doing the needful.

¶38

Copies of this order may also be furnished to learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India and State Coordinator, NRC.

¶39

JUDGE JUDGE

¶40

Comparing Assistant

Badal Bhowmik v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badal Bhowmik v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Musstt. Amina Khatun Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Panu Barman @ Panesh Barman Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

X-X-X Vs in Re MD Mustafa and Anr.

Jamila Bibi @ Jomila Khatun Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Sisir Biswas @ Sisir Nomosudra Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Mahamad Ali Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.