Prasenjit Barman Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010263542025

¶3

undefined

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/7033/2025

¶6

PRASENJIT BARMAN

¶7

SON OF LATE BIRENDRA BARMAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- NIZ GOBARDHAN (KALANGPAR), POLICE STATION- PRAGJYOTISHPUR, DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI 110001.

¶10

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006

¶11

3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSION NIRVACHAN SADAN ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI- 110001

¶12

4:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTRATION OF CITIZENS ASSAM 1ST FLOOR ACHYUT PLAZA G.S.ROAD BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI ASSAM

¶13

Page No.# 2/5

¶14

PIN- 781005 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP (M) POST OFFICE- KAMRUP (M) DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN- 781036 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (BORDER) KAMRUP (M) POST OFFICE- KAMRUP (M) DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN- 781036 7:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE OF PRAGJYOTISHPUR POLICE STATION DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN- 78101

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. D GHOSH, MS N DEKA,MR. S. K. CHAKMA,MR A.K. HAJONG,MR I CHAKMA

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., GA, ASSAM,SC, F.T,SC, NRC,SC, ECI

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 06.05.2026

¶21

S. K. Medhi, J)

¶22

Heard, Ms. D. Ghosh, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Also Sri. B. Deka, learned CGC, Ms. A. Verma, learned Standing Counsel for F.T., Ms. S. Kataki, learned Standing Counsel, ECI and Sri. P Sharma, learned State Counsel.

¶23

The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been

¶24

Page No.# 3/5

¶25

filed with the following prayer:

¶26

“In the premises aforesaid, it is most respectfully prayed that Your Lordships would be pleased to admit this writ petition, call for the records, issue a Rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why:-

¶27

I) A writ in the nature of Certiorari should not be issued setting aside the impugned Order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the Learned Foreigners' Tribunal No. 4th, Kamrup (M), Assam, in F.T. Case No.- FT(K(M)-4) 53/2014 [arising out of P.S (IMDT) Case No. 1524/03]. (Annexure-I).

¶28

II) A writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or any other writ of like nature directing the Respondent authorities to cancel, recall or otherwise forbear from giving effect to the impugned Order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the Learned Foreigners' Tribunal No. 4th, Kamrup (M), Assam, in F.T. Case No.-FT(K(M)-4) 53/2014 [arising out of P.S (IMDT) Case No. 1524/03]. (Annexure-I).

¶29

III) A writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or any other writ of like nature directing the Respondent authorities not to take any coercive action pursuant to the Order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the Learned Foreigners' Tribunal No. 4th, Kamrup (M), Assam, in F.T. Case No.- FT(K(M)-4) 53/2014 [arising out of P.S (IMDT) Case No. 1524/03]. (Annexure-I).

¶30

IV) A direction may be issued by remanding back the F.T. Case No.-FT(K(M)-4) 53/2014 [arising out of P.S (IMDT) Case No. 1524/03], to the Learned Foreigners' Tribunal No. 4th, Kamrup (M), Assam, to decide the case a fresh considering all the relevant documents and evidences.

¶31

And/or cause or causes being shown, upon hearing parties, on perusal of the records be pleased to make the Rule absolute, and/or pass such further order/orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.

¶32

-AND

¶33

Pending disposal of the Rule, Your Lordship would be pleased to stay the operation of the Order dated 30.01.2024 passed by the Learned Foreigners' Tribunal No. 4th, Kamrup (M), Assam, in F.T. Case No.- FT(K(M)-4) 53/2014 [arising out of P.S (IMDT) Case No. 1524/03],

¶34

Page No.# 4/5

¶35

(Annexure-I) and/or pass such order/orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.

¶36

And for such act of kindness, the petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray.”

¶37

As per the facts projected, the aforesaid reference was initiated against the father of the petitioner which was answered in the affirmative vide an opinion dated 30.01.2024 declaring the father of the petitioner as a foreigner post 1971. It is however contended that the father of the petitioner passed away on 20.12.2023 even before the opinion could be rendered. It is , however, not discernible as to whether the learned Tribunal was apprised of the fact of the passing away of the father of the petitioner before delivering the impugned opinion. The learned Counsel submits that apart from the fact that the opinion may not be sustainable, she also apprehends that the petitioner and the other family members would be adversely affected by the said opinion.

¶38

Ms. A. Verma, learned Standing Counsel has however submitted that it is settled that without there being a specific reference against the individual, no individual could be declared foreigner.

¶39

The learned Counsel for the rest of the respondents have also supported the same.

¶40

It is no longer res integra that unless there is a specific reference, no individual can be declared a foreigner and the fact that a family member has been declared a foreigner would by itself cannot be the sole ground of declaring the other members as foreigner.

¶41

In this regard one may refer to the case of Sudhir Roy Vs. Union of India reported in 2019 (1) GLT 353.

¶42

In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the present challenge would be merely academic and therefore is not required to be gone into.

¶43

Page No.# 5/5

¶44

The writ petition is accordingly closed, however, with an observation that the opinion dated 30.01.2024 against the father of the petitioner cannot be the sole basis of any subsequent order or opinion against the petitioner or other family members in absence of the specific reference.

¶45

JUDGE JUDGE

¶46

Comparing Assistant

Prasenjit Barman v. the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasenjit Barman v. the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saif Uddin @ Md. Sarif Uddin Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Nayeb Uddin Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Hannas Ali Vs the Union of India and 7 Ors.

Rasida Khatun Vs Union of India and 6 Ors.

Mohiruddin @ Mohur Uddin @ Mohir Uddin Sheikh Vs the Union of India and 10 Ors.

Abdus Chattar @ Sattar Ali Vs the Union of India and 7 Ors.