Nurjahan Begum and 3 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010009792019

¶3

undefined

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/310/2019

¶6

NURJAHAN BEGUM AND 3 ORS. W/O- MD. NURUL ISLAM, VILL- BAHA UNNATPARA, P.S. MAYONG, DISTMORIGAON (ASSAM)

¶7

2: MD. NUR MOHAMMAD S/O- MD. NURUL ISLAM VILL- BAHA UNNATPARA P.S. MAYONG DIST- MORIGAON (ASSAM)

¶8

3: MD. NUR AMIN S/O- MD. NURUL ISLAM VILL- BAHA UNNATPARA P.S. MAYONG DIST- MORIGAON (ASSAM) (BEING MINOR REP. BY THEIR MOTHER NURJAHAN BEGUM i.e. PETITIONER NO. 1)

¶9

4: MUSSTT. ROJINA BEGUM D/O- MD. NURUL ISLAM VILL- BAHA UNNATPARA P.S. MAYONG DIST- MORIGAON (ASSAM) (BEING MINOR REP. BY THEIR MOTHER NURJAHAN BEGUM i.e. PETITIONER NO. 1

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS.

¶12

REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, SHASTRI BHAWAN, TILAK MARG, NEW DELHI- 110001

¶13

2:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI- 110001

¶16

3:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPPT. DISPUR GHY-6 4:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZEN GS ROAD BHANGAGARH GHY- 5 5:THE MEMBER FOREIGNERS TRIBUNAL NO. 1 MORIGAON ASSAM 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) MORIGAON ASSA

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MR. MD S HOQUE,MS. A BORUAH,MR. M DEKA

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., SC, ELECTION COMMISSION.,SC, NRC,SC, F.T

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 06-01-2026

¶23

(K.R. Surana, J)

¶24

Heard Mr. Md. S. Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. G. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the Foreigners Tribunal and NRC, Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel for the Election Commission of India, Ms. J. Sarma, learned CGC, and Mr. P. Sarma, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate.

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the impugned opinion dated 12.09.2013, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal, 1^st , Morigaon, in F.T. Case No. 49/2009, corresponding to Police Reference F.T. Case No.17/07, by which the petitioner was declared as an illegal migrant of post 25.03.1971 stream.

¶27

Pursuant to the order passed earlier, the records of the Tribunal is received.

¶28

We have not received any assistance from the learned counsel for the petitioner and therefore the Court had to peruse the records to ascertain the facts and circumstances under which the case was tried.

¶29

Having noticed that the records of the Tribunal do not reflect any reference being made by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Morigaon, the records were shown to the learned standing counsel for the FT matters.

¶30

Having perused the records, the learned standing counsel for the FT matters has still opposed the writ petition on the ground that the fact that there was no reference against the petitioners is not even the case projected by the petitioners and therefore he prays that the matter be heard on merit as the petitioners in this case have not led any evidence and did not prove any document to prove that to discharge their burden of proof as required under section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.

¶31

Having seen from the records of the Tribunal that there is neither any inquiry against the present four petitioners nor there was a reference by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Morigaon against the petitioners, the Court is of the considered opinion that the Tribunals would acquire jurisdiction to

¶32

Page No.# 4/4

¶33

determine about the citizenship of the proceedee only on reference being made.

¶34

Accordingly, as no reference is found that has been sent by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Morigaon, the Court is inclined to allow this writ petition by setting aside and interfering with the impugned opinion dated 12.09.2013, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal, 1^st , Morigaon, in F.T. Case No. 49/2009, corresponding to Police Reference F.T. Case No.17/07.

¶35

However, this order shall not be a bar for the jurisdictional Superintendent of Police (Border), Morigaon to cause an inquiry against the petitioners and if anything adverse is found against the petitioners to make a fresh reference in accordance with law.

¶36

The petitioners are directed to produce a certified copy of the order before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Morigaon to bring the order to the notice of the said authority.

¶37

The learned standing counsel for the FT and Border matters shall also transmit a copy of the order to the concerned authority to bring the order to their notice.

¶38

This writ petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above.

¶39

The Registry shall send back the records expeditiously.

¶40

JUDGE JUDGE

¶41

Comparing Assistant

Nurjahan Begum and 3 Ors. v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nurjahan Begum and 3 Ors. v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

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

Sandhya Dey and 3 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Nurul Islam Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Tarun Mandal Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Akabbar Ali Vs the Union of India and Othrs