Gul Bhanu Nessa Vs the Union of India and Othrs

Heard Mr. A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. G. Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, Home and FT for the respondent nos. 1 & 6; Mr. A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India [ECI] for the respondent nos. 3 & 4; and Mr. G. Bokolial, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent no. 5.

¶22

The petitioner has stated that she was born in the year 1971 and after solemnisation of her marriage with Noor Islam Sheikh in the year 1986, she started residing at Village – Bamunpara, Police Station – Matia, District – Goalpara under 15 No. Dudhnoi LAC.

¶23

Mr. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that earlier, the petitioner was put to notice in connection with a proceeding drawn up as F.T. Case no. F.T.[5] 276/MA/16 [IMDT Reference Case no. 948/2004] before the Foreigners’ Tribunal No. 5^th at Goalpara and the Foreigners’ Tribunal rendered an Opinion on 23.09.2019 releasing the petitioner from the proceeding.

¶24

Mr. Ali, learned Standing Counsel, ECI has submitted that from the Opinion dated 23.09.2019 of the Foreigners’ Tribunal No. 5^th at Goalpara in F.T. Case no. F.T.[5] 276/MA/16, it is evident that the petitioner was released from the proceedings not on the ground that the petitioner was declared as an Indian citizen. He has further submitted that the proceedings of

¶25

Page No. 3/4

¶26

F.T. Case no. F.T.[5] 276/MA/16 was drawn up against one Gulbhanu Nessa, daughter of Late Usman Goni. As the father of the petitioner was Late Abdul Goni and not Late Usman Goni, the petitioner was released from the said proceedings.

¶27

Mr. Ali has submitted, on instruction, that the petitioner has been marked as ‘D’ Voter in the Voters List of 2017 as well as in the subsequent years including the Voters List of 2025.

¶28

The petitioner is aggrieved because of the tag ‘D’ mentioned against her name in the Voters List of 2017 onwards and also in the Voters List of 2025 in respect of 15 No. Dudhnoi LAC, as a resident of Village – Bamunpara, Police Station – Matia, District – Goalpara as repeated approaches to the respondent authorities did not bring out the desired result of removal of ‘D’ mark.

¶29

With a projection that the respondent authorities had failed to do the needful, the petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for an appropriate direction that the ‘D’ Voter tagged with the name of the petitioner in the Voters List be removed.

¶30

Whether a person is a ‘D’ Voter or not is a matter of factual determination and the appropriate forum to do the same is the concerned Foreigners Tribunal. This Court in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not embark on a factfinding exercise to decide such a question which depends on the evidence that may be produced.

¶31

In the circumstances, this Court therefore directs the respondent no. 6 i.e. the Superintendent of Police [Border], Goalpara to verify as to whether the petitioner has already been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal and if upon verification it is found that the petitioner has not been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal, this Court further directs the respondent no. 6 to refer the case of the petitioner as regards the mark ‘D’ in the Voters List in respect to 15 No. Dudhnoi LAC to a competent Foreigners Tribunal, Goalpara district for an appropriate adjudication as regards the status of the petitioner as ‘D’ Voter in

¶32

Page No. 4/4

¶33

the concerned Voters List.

¶34

Reference be made within a period of 2 [two] months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Upon such reference being made, the petitioner may participate in such proceedings and establish her case.

¶35

If the case of the petitioner as per the records had already been referred to the relevant Foreigners Tribunal, there would be no requirement to make any further reference and the detailed information of the earlier reference be communicated to the petitioner.

¶36

With the above directions and observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

Comparing Assistant

Gul Bhanu Nessa v. the Union of India and Othrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gul Bhanu Nessa v. the Union of India and Othrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bikash Talukdar and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Prasanta Kr. Deka Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Ms B. K. Associates and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

M/S Ujjal Dj Enterprise Jv Vs the Guwahati Municipal Corporation (Gmc) and 6 Ors.

Capol and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.