Remanded

Gautam Aich v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC7 May 2018WP(C)/7278/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a Foreigners Tribunal order declaring him a foreigner. The High Court set aside the Tribunal order and granted the petitioner one last chance to present evidence before the Tribunal concludes the case within 60 days.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 19.11.2015 set aside; petitioner directed to appear with evidence-in-chief by affidavit; Tribunal to conclude proceedings within 60 days.

Gautam Aich Vs Union of India and 3 Ors. — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010031632016

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 7278/2016

¶5

1:GAUTAM AICH

¶6

S/O SUDHIR AICH R/O VILL- MILAN NAGAR P.S. BONGAIGAON, DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:UNION OF INDIA and 3 ORS.

¶9

REP. BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, DEPTT. OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI.

¶10

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPTT. OF HOME AFFAIRS DISPUR GUWAHATI -6.

¶11

3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BORDER BONGAIGAON P.O. and DIST. BONGAIGAON ASSAM.

¶12

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BONGAIGAON ASSAM

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.B J MUKHERJEE

¶14

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

¶15

BEFORE

¶16

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

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Date : 07-05-2018

¶20

By Ujjal Bhuyan, J.

¶21

Heard Mr. B.J. Mukherjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. Kalita, learned Special Counsel, Foreigners Tribunal (FT).

¶22

By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 19.11.2015 passed by the Foreigners Tribunal No.1, Bongaigaon in BNGN/FT/ Case No. 1065/2007 (State Vs. Gautam Aich) declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner who had illegally entered into India (Assam) from the specified territory i.e., present day Bangladesh.

¶23

This Court by order dated 06.12.2016 had issued notice and passed an interim order to the effect that petitioner should be allowed to remain on bail subject to his appearance before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Bongaigaon and furnishing of adequate surety.

¶24

On a perusal of the order dated 19.11.2015, it would go to show that notice issued by the Tribunal was duly served upon the petitioner whereafter he had entered appearance before the Tribunal along with his engaged counsel and filed written statement. But when the turn for evidence came petitioner stopped appearing and did not adduce evidence. In such circumstances Tribunal decided to proceed with the reference whereafter order dated 19.11.2015 was passed answering the reference in favour of the State.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was a communication gap between the petitioner and his lawyer for which evidence could not be tendered. He submits that petitioner’s parents had sought shelter in India because of communal disturbances in East Pakistan. Therefore, petitioner would be protected under the laws of the country, more particularly, Section 6(A)(2) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, as amended, if an opportunity is granted to the petitioner to prove his case.

¶26

Learned Special Counsel, F.T. however submits that no reasons have been given by the petitioner for his default before the Tribunal. Conduct of the petitioner does not inspire confidence.

¶27

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

¶28

We accordingly set aside the order dated 19.11.2015 and direct the petitioner to appear before the Foreigners Tribunal No. 1, Bongaigaon in connection with BNGN/FT/ Case No. 1065/2007 along with his evidence- in- chief by way of affidavit on 29.05.2018 at 10-30 a.m. whereafter Tribunal shall proceed with the reference in accordance with law from the stage of adducing evidence and conclude the same within a period of 60 days from the date of appearance.

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

Writ petition is disposed of.

¶32

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

¶33

Page No.# 3/3

¶34

A copy of this order may also be furnished to the learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India and State Co-ordinator, NRC.

¶35

JUDGE JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

Gautam Aich v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gautam Aich v. Union of India and 3 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

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

Saitanya Das Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Sandhya Bala Sarkar @ Sandhya Sarkar Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Mani Begum Vs State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Nirodh Das Vs the Union of India and 8 Ors.

Halima Khatoon Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.