Allowed

Ms. Safia Begum v. the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 May 2018WP(C)/6972/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court accepted a writ petition seeking to quash a Foreigners Tribunal order declaring the petitioner a foreigner. The Court set aside the tribunal's order and granted the petitioner a second chance to adduce evidence within 60 days without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 09.12.2015 set aside; petitioner directed to appear before Foreigners Tribunal on 24.05.2018 to adduce evidence; case to conclude within 60 days.

Ms. Safia Begum Vs the Union of India… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010030242016

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 6972/2016

¶5

1:MS. SAFIA BEGUM

¶6

W/O MD. SAMSUL HOQUE, VILL. SUTAR GAON, AZAD NAGAR, P.S. DOBOKA, DIST- HOJAI, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE UNION OF INDIA and 6 ORS

¶9

REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, HOME DEPTT., NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI

¶10

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM

¶11

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT.

¶12

DISPUR GHY-6

¶13

3:ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM B BHANGAGARH GHY-5

¶14

4:DY. COMMISSIONER

¶15

NAGAON ASSAM

¶16

5:DY. COMMISSIONER HOJAI SHANKARDEVNAGAR ASSAM

¶17

6:SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE B NAGAON ASSAM

¶18

Page No.# 2/3

¶19

7:SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE B HOJAI ASSA

¶20

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.L WAJEEDA

¶21

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

¶22

BEFORE

¶23

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

¶24

Date : 03-05-2018

¶25

Ujjal Bhuyan, J.

¶26

Heard Mr. NH Mazarbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A Kalita, learned Special Counsel, Foreigners Tribunal (FT).

¶27

By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 09.12.2015, passed by the Foreigners Tribunal, Nagaon Court No.10^th at Doboka in FT(D) Case No.154/2015 (State Vs. Musstt. Safia Begum), declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner who had illegally entered into India (Assam) from Bangladesh after 25.03.1971.

¶28

This Court by order dated 22.11.2016 had issued notice while requisitioning the case record and passed an interim order to the effect that petitioner should be allowed to remain on bail subject to her appearance before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Hojai and furnishing of adequate surety.

¶29

On going through the order dated 09.12.2015, we find that notice issued by the Tribunal was served upon the petitioner whereafter, she had entered appearance before the Tribunal and filed written statement. However, when the turn for evidence came, petitioner stopped appearing before the Tribunal and did not adduce any evidence. Holding that petitioner had failed to prove her case, Tribunal vide order dated 09.12.2015 answered the reference in favour of the State in the above manner.

¶30

It is trite that mere filing of written statement is not enough. Material facts pleaded in the written statement would have to be proved by the proceedee by adducing cogent, reliable and admissible evidence. Further, as has been held by this Court, a proceedee is to prove by

¶31

Page No.# 3/3

¶32

way of documentary evidence that he/she is not a foreigner but a citizen of India having regard to the mandate of Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.

¶33

That being the position and taking an overall view of the matter, we feel that notwithstanding the default of the petitioner, since she had filed written statement, it would be in the interest of justice if one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner to adduce evidence.

¶34

Consequently, we set aside the order dated 09.12.2015 and direct the petitioner to appear before the Foreigners Tribunal, Nagaon Court No.10^th at Doboka in FT(D) Case No.154/2015 (State Vs. Musstt. Safia Begum) on 24.05.2018 at 10.30 am whereafter, Tribunal shall proceed with the reference from the stage of adducing evidence by the petitioner and conclude the same within a period of 60 days from the date of appearance.

¶35

However, if there is any default on the part of the petitioner, Tribunal would be at liberty to pass such order as may be deemed fit and proper.

¶36

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

¶37

Writ petition is disposed of.

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

JUDGE JUDGE

¶41

Biplab

¶42

Comparing Assistant

Ms. Safia Begum v. the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms. Safia Begum v. the Union of India 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 Rahima Khatun Vs the Union of India

Sharifa Khatun @ Sarifa Bibi Vs the State of Assam

Raju Uddin Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Ms. Kadbanu Begum @ Kadbanu Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Khuki Bibi @ Khuky Bibi Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Md. Abubakkar Siddique Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.