Page No.# 1/18 vs The Union Of India And 5 Ors on 11 June, 2025

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/18 vs The Union Of India And 5 Ors on 11 June, 2025

Author: M. R. Pathak

Bench: Manash Ranjan Pathak, Malasri Nandi

                                                                    Page No.# 1/18

GAHC010011692025




                                                               2025:GAU-AS:7670-
DB

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

                             Case No. : WP(C)/317/2025

           HAJERA KHATUN,
           W/O- LATE OHAB ALI, D/O- LATE ABUL AZIZ VILL- KALJHAR, P.S- HOWLY,
           DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM.

           VERSUS

           THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS
           REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF HOME
           AFFAIRS, GOVT. OF INDIA, SHASTRI BHAWAN, TILOK MARG, NEW DELHI-
           1.

           2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
            REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
           OF ASSAM
            DEPARTMENT OF HOME
            DISPUR
            GUWAHATI-6.

           3:THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA
           THROUGH ITS SECRETARY NIRBACHAN BHAWAN
            NEW DELHI-1

           4:THE STATE COORDINATOR
            NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS (NRC)
           ASSAM
            BHANGAGARH
            GUWAHATI-5.

           5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF BARPETA
            DIST.- BARPETA
           ASSAM.

           6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B)
                                                                                       Page No.# 2/18

             BARPETA
             DIST.- BARPETA
             ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner    : MR. R ALI, MR H A AHMED

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

BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI

Date of Hearing : 17.03.2025
Date of Order : 11.06.2025

Order
(M. R. Pathak, J.)

Heard Mr. Rahmat Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Lovely Devi, learned
Central Government Counsel for the respondent No. 1; Mr. Gunjan Sarma, learned Standing
counsel, Home and Political Department, Assam as well as Standing Counsel, NRC, Assam for the
respondent Nos. 2, 4 & 6; Mr. M Islam, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Md. Akram Imtiaz
Ali, learned Standing counsel, Election Commission of India for the respondent No. 3 and Mr.
Prem Sharma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent No. 5.

2) Aggrieved with the opinion/order dated 13.12.20219, passed by learned Member, Foreigners

Tribunal, 10th, Barpeta, Assam in F.T. Case No. 202/2016, whereby, the petitioner has been
declared to be foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream under Section 2(a) of the Foreigners Act,
1946 who had illegally entered into the territory of India (Assam) from the specified territory after
25.03.1971 without any valid document, the petitioner has filed this writ petition on 21.01.2025,
after more than five years praying amongst others, to set aside and quash the impugned
opinion/order dated 13.12.2019, noted above and to declare her to be genuine citizen of India
and/or alternatively to remand back the matter for fresh decision by considering the documents
as well as the evidences of the petitioner.

3) The petitioner has also prayed for an order not to arrest her and not to deport her from
Page No.# 3/18

India pursuant to the impugned opinion dated 13.12.2019.

4) By order dated 24.01.2025, the record of F.T. Case No. 202/2016 was called for in which the

impugned opinion/order dated 13.12.2019 was passed by the learned Foreigners Tribunal, 10 th,
Barpeta, Assam; hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal.

5) It is seen from the records that pursuant to the direction of the Election Commission of
India for intensive revision of electoral roll of 46 No. Sorukhetri Legislative Assembly Constituency
in Assam, house to house enumeration was done during the period from 16.01.1997 to
15.04.1997 with reference to 01.01.1997 as the qualifying date.

6) During such enumeration name of the petitioner, Hajera Khatun, wife of Sri Owahab Ali,
resident of Village-Kaljar, District-Barpeta was enumerated for inclusion in the draft electoral roll
of 46 No. Sorukhetri LAC. Said draft electoral roll was published on 24.07.1997 containing various
names including that of the petitioner. The Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) of said 46 No.
Sorukhetri LAC had some doubt about the citizenship of the petitioner and therefore, got the
matter verified on the spot by a local verification. The Local Verification Officer (LVO) on
19.09.1997 visited the petitioner and sought for certain information but the petitioner failed to
place any relevant documents even after repeated request. As such, the concerned LVO
accordingly forwarded its report.

7) Considering the report of the LVO, the concerned ERO of 46 No. Sorukhetri LAC had
reasonable doubt about the citizenship of the petitioner. As such, the ERO of 46 No. Sorukhetri
LAC forwarded the matter along with the local verification report to the Superintendent of Police
(SP), Barpeta to decide the question as to whether, the petitioner is a foreigner or not under the
Foreigners Act, 1946 and the rules made thereunder.

8) The Superintendent of Police (Border), Barpeta vide No.7106/1998 referred the matter to
the Foreigners Tribunal, Barpeta under the Foreigners Act, 1946 seeking its opinion as to whether
the petitioner is a foreigner or not.

9) Accordingly, said reference with regard to the petitioner was registered as F.T. Case No.

202/2016 before the learned Foreigners Tribunal, 10 th, Barpeta at Pathsala, Bajali.

10) The said Tribunal on 18.05.2016 issued notice to the petitioner directing her to appear
before the Tribunal on 06.06.2016 and to submit her reply with all the relevant documents to
Page No.# 4/18

establish her case under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.

11) On receipt of such notice, the petitioner through her advocate appeared before the Tribunal
on 06.06.2016. After taking time on seven occasions including 06.06.2016, i.e., her first date of
appearance, the petitioner on 06.01.2017 submitted her written statement. After filing her written
statement, taking time on four occasions, the petitioner on 01.06.2017 filed her evidence on
affidavit. The petitioner again on 30.08.2017 filed another evidence on affidavit.

12) In her written statement submitted on 06.01.2017, the petitioner denied the allegation that
she is a foreigner to be false and baseless allegation and a concocted one, stating that the said
case has been instituted against her without conducting proper investigation. According to the
petitioner, she is a bona fide citizen of India by birth, name of her father is Abdul Aziz, name of
her grandfather is Hatem Ali and his nick name was Hatem Ali Fakir; name of his father with other
family members figured in the Voters List of 1956 at Village-Jaishihati (89) under 43 No. Sorbhog
LAC at Srl. No.284, House No.56, Police Station-Sorbhog, Circle-Barpeta, District-Kamrup
(erstwhile).

13) Petitioner also stated that name of family members of her father, grandfather and
grandmother appeared in the Voters List of 1960, 1965, 1970 pertaining to said 43 No. Sorbhog
LAC from Village-Jaishihati under Barpeta Circle of the then district Kamrup. Petitioner also stated
that name of her father Abdul Aziz appeared in the NRC details in the Legacy Data of 1951. She
stated that as her father Abdul Aziz was suffering from dementia and he was missing after the
year 1960 from Village-Jaishihati.

14) Petitioner submitted that her father Abdul Aziz before 1985 shifted from Village-Jaishihati
under Sorbhog LAC to Village-Kaurpara under 43 No. Barpeta LAC and got married to one Maziron
Nessa and permanently resided at Village-Kaurpara and that the name of her father Abdul Aziz
and mother Maziron Nessa appeared in the Additional Voters List of 1985 under 43 No. Barpeta
LAC.

15) The petitioner also stated that after her marriage with Ohab Ali of Village-Kaljar, her name
appeared in the Voters List of 1989 and then in the year 1994 at Village-Kaljar along with her
husband under 46 No. Sarukhetri LAC. However, she was marked as ‘D’ voter in the Voters List of
1997 of Village-Kaljhar under 46 No. Sarukhetri LAC.

16) Petitioner stated that the Secretary of 47 No. Kalahbanga Gram Panchayat issued a Link
Page No.# 5/18

Certificate in her favour. Petitioner also annexed one certificate issued by the Gaon Burha of
Jaishihati Village linking her with her projected father Abdul Aziz as his daughter. Similar
certificate has also been annexed by the petitioner issued by the Gaon Burha of Kaljar Village
linking her with Ohab Ali, her husband.

17) Petitioner also placed a revenue receipt issued in the name of her grandfather Hatem Ali at
Village Barbarijhar dated 04.08.1965 and she stated that her name appeared in the Sadar
Jamabandi Copy of the year 1958-1965 of Patta No. 175 at Village-Kalijhar, Mouza-Betbari,
District-Barpeta, Assam.

18) The concerned LVO as prosecution witness adduced his evidence stating that in the year
1997-98, he was appointed as Local Verification Officer by the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta for
verification of the nationality of some suspected persons to be foreigners. During such verification
he went to Village-Kaljar under Barpeta Police Station, met its Gaon Burha and visited the house
of the petitioner and asked her to produce documents in support of her nationality. As at that
time the petitioner could not submit any documents, he issued her a notice asking her to submit
the relevant documentsin that regard within a period of fifteen days. As the petitioner, even after
expiry of the said period, failed to produce any documents in support of her nationality, he took
the signature of the Gaon Burha as a witness and submitted his report before the Electoral
Registration Officer, Barpeta stating that the petitioner did not produce any document during his
visit to the house of said Hazera Begum, the petitioner herein.

19) From the records of case, it is seen that the petitioner before the Tribunal exhibited the
followings to prove her nationality and those are —

(i) Photo copy of a printed copy of 1956 Voters List of 43 No. Sorbhog LAC of Village-

Jaishihati (89), Sorbhog, Mouza-DamkaachakaaBaausi, Police Station-Sorbhog, Sub-
Division-Barpeta, District-Kamrup, (erstwhile), Assam containing a name of Abdul
Aziz, son of Hatem at Serial No. 284, House No. 56 as Annexure-I.

(ii) Photo copy of a printed copy of 1958/1960 Voters List of Village-Jaishihati (89),
Sorbhog, Mouza-DamkaachakaaBaausi, Police Station-Sorbhog, Sub-Division-
Barpeta, District-Kamrup, (erstwhile), Assam containing a name of Abdul Aziz, son
of Hatem at Serial No. 158, House No. 56, with one Hatem Ali Mia, son of
Kalimuddin; Rahiman Nesa, wife of Hatem; Abbas Ali, son of Hajarat; Osman Gani,
Page No.# 6/18

son of Hajarat and Rupjan Nesa, wife of Hajarat as Annexure-II.

(iii) Certified copy of 1965 Voters List of Village-Jaishihati, Part No. 133, Police Station-

Sorbhog, Mouza-DamkaachakaaBaausi, Sub-Division-Barpeta, District-Kamrup,
(erstwhile) containing names of one Hatem Ali Fakir, son of Kalimuddin; Rahiman
Nesa, wife of Hatem Ali; Osman Gani, Fakir, son of Hatem Ali and Khudija Khatun,
wife of Osman at Serial Nos. 53, 54, 55 and 56, respectively, at House No. 19, as
Exhibit-A.

(iv) Certified copy of 1970 Voters List of 47 No. Sorbhog LAC of Village-Jaishihati, Part
No. 135, Police Station-Sorbhog, Mouza-DamkaachakaaBaausi, Sub-Division-
Barpeta, District-Kamrup, (erstwhile) containing names of one Hatem Ali, son of
Kalimuddin; Rahiman Nesa, wife of Hatem Ali; Osman Gani, son of Hatem Ali and
Khudija Khatun, wife of Osman at Serial Nos. 63, 64, 65 and 66, respectively, at
House No. 19, as Exhibit-B.

(v) Photo copy of NRC details of one Aa. Aziz, son of Hatem Ali of Village-Jaishihati, Part
No. 135, Police Station-Sorbhog, Mouza-DamkaachakaaBaausi, Sub-Division-
Barpeta, District-Barpeta, House No. 20, Sl. No. in House-3, Age-23, Gender-M as
Exhibit-C.

(vi) A certified copy of 1985 Voters List of 43 No. Barpeta LAC of Part No. 15, Police
Station-Barpeta, Mouza-Howly, Sub-Division-Barpeta, District-Barpeta, Assam
containing names of one Aa Aziz, son of Hatem Mia; MaajiwanJoje, wife of Aa Aziz;
Md. Anechewv, son of Aa Aziz; Nur Jahan, wife of Aanchewv Ali; Altaf, son of Aa
Aziz and Rejia, wife of Tastaf; at Serial Nos. 942, 843, 844, 845, 846 and 847,
respectively, at House No. 193, as Exhibit-D.

(vii) A computer-generatedcopy of English translation of Assamese Version of Certified
Electoral Roll of 1994 Voters List 46 No. Sarukhetri LAC ofVillage-Kaljhar, Part No.
01, Police Station-Barpeta, Mouza-Betbari, Sub-Division-Barpeta Sadar containing
names of one Uhab Ali, son of Tamej Aji; Hajera Khatun, wife of Uhab Ali and Hanif
Ali, son of Uhab Ali; Nur Jahan, wife of Aanchewv Ali; Altaf, son of Aa. Aziz and
Rejia, wife of Tastaf; at Serial Nos. 942, 843, 844, 845, 846 and 847, respectively,
at House No. 193, as Exhibit-E.
Page No.# 7/18

(viii) Certified copy of 1997 Voters List 43 No. Barpeta LAC of Village-Kaurpara, Part No.
16, Police Station-Barpeta, Mouza-Howly, Sub-Division-Barpeta containing names of
one Aajiran Nesa, wife/daughter of Aa. Aziz and Hanufa Khatun, wife/daughter of
Aa Aziz; at Serial Nos. 1073 and 1074, respectively, at House No. 363, as Exhibit-
F.

(ix) A photo copy of a printed copy of 1989 Voters List of List 46 No. Sarukhetri LAC of
Village-Kaljhar, Part No. illegible, Police Station-Barpeta, Mouza-Betbari, Sub-
Division-Barpeta, District-Barpeta containing names of one Owahab Ali, son of
Tamej; Hajera Khatun, wife of Owahaband Hanif Ali, son of Owahab; at Serial Nos.
128, 129 and 130, respectively, at House No. 28, as Annexure-III.

(x) A Certificate dated 05.12.2015 issued by the Secretary of 47 No. Kalaha Bhanga
Gaon Panchayat, Balavita, District-Barpeta specifying it to be a Link Certificate,
certifying that Hajera Khatun, daughter of Abdul Aziz, presently an inhabitant of
Village-Jaishihati, Mouza-DamkaachakaaBaausi, Police Station-Barpeta Road, under
District-Barpeta was a resident of Village-Jaishihati of Kalah Bhanga Gaon
Panchayat under Chakchaka Development Block in the District of Barpeta, Assam.
Her father’s name appears in the NRC 1951 Sl. No.3, House No.20 of 40 No. LAC
under district of Barpeta, Assam. She was married to late Waheb Ali, son of Tamez,
of Village-Kaljhar, District-Barpeta. Her character was found satisfactory and the
said Secretary wished her all success in life. The said certificate of the Secretary, 47
No. Kalabhanga Gaon Panchayat has been exhibited as Exhibit-G.

(xi) A land revenue receipt of the year 1964-1965 dated 04.08.1965 paid on behalf of
Hatem Ali relating to eksona land of Barbarijaar as Exhibit-H.

(xii) A certificate dated 14.04.2017 issued by the Gaon Burha (Village Headman) of
Charge No. 30, Village-Jaishihati certifying that Hajera Khatun is the daughter of late
Abdul Azizof Village-Jaishihati, Mouza-DamkaachakaaBaausi, Police Station-Barpeta
Road, under District-Barpeta. His name was recorded in the 1960 Voter List of 43 No.
Sorbhog LAC of Part No. 79, House No.56, Sl. No. 158 and said Hazera Khatun,
daughter of Abdul Aziz got married to Wahab Ali, son of Tamejuddin of Village-
Kaljhar, as Exhibit-I.
Page No.# 8/18

(xiii) A Certificate dated 02.08.2017 issued by the Gaon Burha of Charge No. 11 of
Village-Kaurpara certifying that Hajera Khatun, daughter of late Hatem Miah of
Village-Kaurpara, Post Office-Howly, District-Baksa is well known to him and he
knows that he belongs to his Lot and that his name figured in the 1985 Voters list,
Part No.15, Srl. No. 942, House No. 193 and that the said man has already died.
Said certificate dated 02.08.2017 has been exhibited as Exhibit-J.

(xiv) A copy of computer generated certificate of Jamabandi using Dharitree App with the
seal and signature of the Circle Officer, Barpeta pertaining to Patta No. 175, Dag
No. 32 of surveyed Village-Kaljhar, Lot No. 3, Mouza-Betbari, Circle-Barpeta, Sub-
Division-Barpeta, District-Barpeta, whereinnames of (i) Ansar Ali, (ii) Altab Hussen,

(iii) Julhas Ali, (iv) Akbar Hussain, (v) Hajera Khatun, (vi) Hunfa Khatun and (vii)
Sajida Khatun, mother-Ajiron Nessa, father-Aa. Azij, whose names were mutated
pursuant to the order dated 25.01.2017 passed by the Circle Officer, as per the
right of inheritance in place of Pattadar No. 8,Ajiron Nessa as Exhibit-K.

20) Annexure-I exhibited by the petitioner/proceedee before the Tribunal was only a printed
photo copy of 1956 Voters List of 43 No. Sorbhog LAC and it was not been proved by the
petitioner as required under the law. Moreover, it does not contain any other names along with
said Abdul Aziz, son of Hatem in House No. 56. As such the said Annexure-I is not an admissible
document and cannot be considered in evidence.

21) Annexure-II exhibited by the petitioner/proceedee before the Tribunal was again a
printed copy of either 1958 or 1960 Voters List of Village-Jaishihati (89), Sorbhog, containing
names of Abdul Aziz, son of Hatem at Serial No. 158, House No. 56, with one Hatem Ali Mia, son
of Kalimuddin; Rahiman Nesa, wife of Hatem; Abbas Ali, son of Hajarat; Osman Gani, son of
Hajarat and Rupjan Nesa, wife of Hajarat. But it is seen that said Annexure-II Voters List does not
contain the year it belongs to and the name of Constituency and whether Legislative or
Parliamentary Constituency. Further, the years 1958 and 1960 as well as 43 No. Sorbhog have
been inserted by hand. It is also seen that the Petitioner in her written statement did not state or
explain or gave details about the others whose names figured along with projected father and
grandfather of the petitioner. Further, Annexure-II printed photo copy of the Voters List has also
not been proved by the petitioner as required under the law.

22) It is seen from Exhibit-A, certified copy of Voters List of 1965, exhibited by the petitioner
Page No.# 9/18

that the said Voters List does not contain the number and name of the concerned Legislative
and/or Parliamentary Constituency. Moreover, the petitioner in her written statement did not state
or explain or gave details about the other persons whose names figured along with projected
grandfather of the petitioner.

23) Petitioner in her written statement did not explain or gave details about the other persons
whose names figured along with her projected grandfather in the Exhibit-B, certified copy of 1970
Voters List of 47 No. Sorbhog LAC of Village-Jaishihati, Part No. 135.

24) Exhibit-C, NRC details of one Aa. Aziz, son of Hatem Ali of Village-Jaishihati is from Barpeta
district. During 1951 Barpeta was not a district and it was under Kamrup district. As such
Annexure-C copy of NRC cannot be of 1951 NRC document of Barpeta District. Moreover, last
updation of NRC in Assam that took place during 2013-19 has not attained finality as the final
NRC of Assam for the said period is yet to be published. It is also seen that neither the said
Annexure-C contains the year of the NRC nor the petitioner in her written statement specified the
year of which the said NRC belongs to. Law is well settled that NRC extracts adduced to prove
domicile in India is not admissible in evidence for any purpose [reported in ALR 1970 Assam &
Nagaland 206].

25) Exhibit-D, certified copy of 1985 Voters List 43 No. Barpeta LAC exhibited by the petitioner
containing names of one Aa. Aziz, son of Hatem Mia; MaajiwanJoje, wife of Aa. Aziz; Md.
Anechewv, son of Aa. Aziz; Nur Jahan, wife of Aanchewv Ali; Altaf, son of Aa. Aziz and Rejia, wife
of Tastaf; at Serial Nos. 942, 843, 844, 845, 846 and 847, respectively, at House No. 193. But
Exhibit-D, certified copy of 1985 Voters List of 43 No. Barpeta LAC exhibited by the petitioner
does not contain the name of the Village concerned of which, the said Voter List Exhibit-D relates
to.

26) Exhibit-E, a computer generated copy of English translation of Assamese version of
Certified Electoral Roll of 1994 Voters List 46 No. Sarukhetri LAC of Village-Kaljhar containing the
name of the petitioner with her husband and son, but such a computer generated copy of English
translation of the Certified Electoral Roll unless being proved by producing the Certified Copy of
such Electoral Roll and comparing with the original/certified copy before the Court and/or Tribunal
during the trial, such computer generated copy of English translation of the Certified Electoral Roll
cannot be considered as an admissible piece of evidence. Moreover, Exhibit-E placed by the
Page No.# 10/18

petitioner connects her with her husband Uhab Ali. From the said Exhibit, it can be also seen that
the age difference between the petitioner Hajera Khatun and her son Hanif Ali is only 10 (ten)
years, as such, the petitioner gave birth to her son when she was only 10 (ten) years old, which
is biologically impossible. Petitioner did not prove Exhibit-E by calling any officials/personnel of
Barpeta District Election Office for comparison of said Exhibit-E with the original Assamese version
of Certified Electoral Roll of 1994 Voters List 46 No. Sarukhetri LAC of Village-Kaljhar.

27) Exhibit-F exhibited by the petitioner is certified copy of 1997 Voters List 43 No. Barpeta LAC
of Village-Kaurpara, containing names of one Aajiran Nesa, wife/daughter of Aa. Aziz and Hanufa
Khatun, wife/daughter of Aa Aziz; at Serial Nos. 1073 and 1074, respectively, at House No. 363.
But the petitioner in her written statement clearly stated that name of her mother is Majiran
Nessa. However, in Exhibit-D one MaajiwanJoje was shown to be the wife of Aa. Aziz and the
Exhibit-F relates to one Aajiran Nesa. Petitioner in her written statement did not state what
happen to her projected father Abdul Aziz, whose name did not figure after 1985 Voters List.
Moreover, Exhibits – D, E, F exhibited by the petitioner all are post 1971 documents.

28) Annexure-III exhibited by the petitioner is again a printed copy of 1989 Voters List of List
46 No. Sarukhetri LAC of Village-Kaljhar, Sub-Division-Barpeta, District-Barpeta containing names
of one Owahab Ali, son of Tamej; Hajera Khatun, wife of Owahab and Hanif Ali, son of Owahab;
at Serial Nos. 128, 129 and 130, respectively, at House No. 28, which was not proved by the
petitioner from the original as required under the law. Moreover, it is a post 1971 document and
it only indicates the petitionerand her husband and son and not with her projected father Abdul
Azi.

29) Exhibit-G, a certificate dated 05.12.2015 issued by the Secretary of 47 No. Kalaha Bhanga
Gaon Panchayat, Balavita, District-Barpeta specifying it to be a Link Certificate, certifying that the
petitioner, daughter of Abdul Aziz, presently an inhabitant of Village-Jaishihati, Mouza-
DamkaachakaaBaausi, Police Station-Barpeta Road, under District-Barpeta. In the said Exhibit-G
certificate it is also stated that the petitioner was a resident of Village-Jaishihati of Kalah Bhanga
Gaon Panchayat under Chakchaka Development Block in the District of Barpeta, Assam and that
name of her father appears in the NRC 1951, Sl. No.3, House No.20 of 40 No. LAC under district
of Barpeta, Assam and that she was married to late Waheb Ali, son of Tamez, of Village-Kaljhar,
District-Barpeta.

Page No.# 11/18

30) It can be seen from the said Exhibit-G, the certificate issued by the Secretary of 47 No.
Kalahabhanga Gaon Panchayat on 05.12.2015 contains the State Emblem of India. As been held
in the case of Sultana Begum Vs. The Union of India and 3 Others, WP(C) 7115/2016, decided on
20.11.2018, said Exhibit-G exhibited by the petitioner before the Tribunal is not admissible in
evidence to prove her linkage with her projected father, Abdul Aziz of Village-Jaishihati.

31) Further, as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rupajan Begum
Vs. The Union of India and Others, reported in (2018) 1 SCC 579, Certificate issued by the Gaon
Panchayat Secretary and/or President is not a proof of citizenship but it merely acknowledges
shifting of residence of a married woman from one place to another. On perusal of the Exhibit-G it
can be seen thatthesaid certificate issued by the Secretary of 47 No. Kalaha Bhanga Gaon
Panchayat, Balavita, District-Barpeta on 05.12.2015 is specified to be a Link Certificate and
therefore, the same being issued without any authority of law, has no evidentiary value.

32) Moreover, Exhibit-C NRC containing the name of one Aa. Aziz is not of the year 1951 and it
is already stated above that NRC extracts adduced to prove domicile in India is not admissible in
evidence for any purpose.

33) Further, the petitioner did not prove the said Exhibit-G by producing its author or concerned
authority of 47 No. Kalahabhanga Gaon Panchayat. As such said Exhibit-G being not proved in
accordance with law is not admissible in evidence.

34) Exhibit-H exhibited by the petitioner is a revenue receipt of the year 1964-1965 dated
04.08.1965 paid on behalf of one Hatem Ali relating to eksona land of Barbaarijaar. The petitioner
by the said revenue receipt claimed that the said revenue receipt is of her grandfather Hatem Ali.

35) The petitioner in her written statement did not give the details of Hatem Ali, including the
name of his father, mother, resident etc., i.e., the person who was the owner of the land at
Barbaarijaar. The petitioner in her written statement also did not state that her grandfather, son
of Kalimuddin Hatem was the owner or possessor of land at Barbaarijaar. Further, in her written
statement, the petitioner did not specify the said land at Village-Barbaarijaar, like the area of land

– bigha/katha/lecha, dag no., patta no., class of land, lot No., mouza, circle, sub-division and
district etc. Petitioner did not state as to how said Hatem Ali procured the said eksona land at
Village-Barbaarijaar and the present status of the said land of Hatem Ali after 04.08.1965. It is
settled that mere producing or adducing a revenue receipt of a particular land for a particular
Page No.# 12/18

period, a proceedee cannot prove his/her linkage with his/her projected father and grandfather to
be in Indian soil in the year 1965 without showing their continuous residence in Assam (India)
thereafter up to 1971.

36) Exhibit-I, exhibited by the petitioner before the Tribunal is a Certificate dated on
14.04.2017 issued by the Gaon Burha (Village Headman) of Charge No. 30, Village-Jaishihati
certifying that the petitioner is the daughter of late Abdul Aziz is of Village-Jaishihati, Mouza-
DamkaachakaaBaausi, Police Station-Barpeta Road, under District-Barpeta and that his name
(name of petitioner’s father) was recorded in the 1960 Voter List of 43 No. Sarbhog LAC of Part
No. 79, House No.-56, Sl. No. 158, certifying further that the Hazera Khatun (petitioner) daughter
of Abdul Aziz got married to Waheb Ali, son of Tamez Uddin, of Village-Kaljar.

37) It is to be noted herein that the petitioner did not exhibit any certified copy of Voters List of
1960 relating to 43 No. Sarbhog LAC of Part No. 79, of Village-Jaishihati establishing that name of
her projected father Abdul Aziz figured in the said Voters List. Annexure-II exhibited by the
petitioner was only a printed copy of Voters List of Village-Jaishihati (89) without containing any
name of the constituency, whereas the years 1958 as well as 1960 and 43 Sorbhog were inserted
by hand on it. As such the base that name of Abdul Aziz figured in the Voters List of 1960 was not
proved by the petitioner.

38) Exhibit-J, is a Certificate dated 02.08.2017 issued by the Gaon Burha of Charge No. 11 of
Village-Kaurpara certifying that Aa. Aziz son of late Hatem Miah of Village-Kaurpara, Post Office-
Howly, District-Baksa is well known to him, to his knowledge said person (Aa. Aziz) belongs to his
Lot and his name figured in the 1985 voter list at Srl. No. 942, House No. 193, Part No.15 and
that the said person has already expired.

39) Though the petitioner exhibited the Exhibit-J, but she did not prove the said certificate by
adducing evidence of its author the concerned Gaon Burha and therefore, said Exhibit-J is not
admissible in evidence.

40) Exhibit-K, a copy of Jamabandi a computer generated certificate using Dharitree App with
the seal and signature of the Circle Officer, Barpeta pertaining to Patta No. 175, Dag No. 32 of
surveyed Village-Kaljhar, Lot No. 3, Mouza-Betbari, Circle, Sub-Division and District-Barpeta,
wherein names of (i) Akbar Hussain,(ii) Ansar Ali, (ii) Altap Hussen, (iv) Sajida Khatun, (v) Julhas
Ali, (vi) Hunfa Khatun and (vii) Hajera Khatun, mother-Ajiron Nessa, father-Aa. Aziz, whose
Page No.# 13/18

names figured in the said Jamabandi at Serial Nos. 1, 6. 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, respectively, where
their names were mutated by the order dated 25.01.2017 passed by the Circle Officer, as per the
right of inheritance in place of No. 8 Pattadar Ajiron Nessa.

41) On perusal of Exhibit-K, it can be seen that Srl. No.8 of the said Jamabandi does not
contain the name of original Pattadar Ajiron Nessa. Moreover, in her written statement filed on
06.01.2017 before the Tribunal, the petitioner did not mention about her siblings, neither their
names, nor the numbers of brothers and sisters she has. Even in the two evidences on affidavits
filed by the petitioner before the Tribunal she did not disclose the names of her brothers and
sisters. Further, the petitioner in her written statement filed on 06.01.2017 specified the name of
one Majiran Nessa, as her mother.

42) In her written statement filed on 06.01.2017, the petitioner annexed photocopy of certified
copy of Sadar Jamabandi of the year 1958-1965 of K. P. Patta No. 175, Village-Kaljhar, Mouza-
Betbari, stating that her name appeared in the same, but she had exhibited Exhibit-K, acomputer-
generated certificate of Jamabandi.

43) The petitioner deposed herself as DW-1 and in her cross examination stated before the
Tribunal that her paternal home is at Jaishihati, grandfather’s name is Hatem Ali, for the first time
stated that her grandmothers name is Rahimon Nesa; stated for the first time that said Hatem Ali
had two sons, Abdul Aziz and Oman Goni and six daughters, and that she had submitted 1965
and 1970 voters lists of her grandfather and that she cannot not say exactly whose names figured
in the 1965 voters list. It is seen that the petitioner did not name the six daughters of said Hatem
Ali. She stated that she got married to Owahab Ali about 33 years back and for the first time on
02.06.2018, the petitioner deposed before the Tribunal that they are four brothers and three
sisters – (i) Ansar Ali, (ii) Altaf Hussen, (iii) Julhas Ali, (iv) Hanufa Khatun,(v) Sajida Khatun, (vi)
Akbar Hussain and(vii) herself and that she is the eldest amongst all. She also stated that after
her marriage she had cast vote in year 1989 and 1994.

44) In her second evidence on affidavit submitted on 30.01.2017 the petitioner for the first
time stated that her father Abdul Aziz who was missing after the year 1960 from the Village
Jaishihati came to village Kaurpara in the year 1970 and was missing again from the Village
Kaurpara and after few years he returned to his home and died.

45) In her two evidence on affidavits, for the first time the petitioner stated that in the 1985
Page No.# 14/18

voters list of Village Kaurpara name of her mother was wrongly written as Majiban Jaje instead of
Ajiron Nessa and that her grandfather Hatem Ali was also known as Hatem Ali Fakir and said
Hatem Ali Fakir and Hatem Ali is the same and one person and that the name of her mother was
wrongly recorded in the 1985 voters list as Majiban Jaje instead of Ajiron Nessa.

46) But in her written statement filed before the Tribunal, the petitioner stated that her father
Abdul Aziz shifted before 1985 from Village Jaishihati under Sarbhog LAC to Village-Kaurpara
under 43 No. Barpeta LAC and got married to one Majiron Nessa and permanently resided at
Village Kaurpara and names of her father and mother appeared in the 1985 Voters List under 43
No. Barpeta LAC, Exhibit-D.

47) Law is settled that the proceedee must disclose all the details of his/ her family members
and failure to do it cause a serious doubt on the citizenship status of the procedure. It is also
settled that failure to disclose material facts in the written statement by the proceedee itself raise
a serious question on the citizenship of the proceedee. The petitioner did not disclose the names
of her siblings neither in her written statement nor in her evidence on affidavits. But for the first
time stated in her oral evidence (cross) before the Tribunal. As such said oral evidence of the
petitioner is not admissible in evidence.

48) Mere exhibiting Exhibit-K, a computer-generated certificate of Jamabandi the petitioner
cannot climb the ladder of lineage to reach the projected father showing her name figured in the
said Jamabandi because a mutation entry in the Jamabandi is the record of right in respect of
particular plot of land and it does not require any proof of citizenship of the person seeking
mutation [Jamela Begum Vs. Union of India and others WP(C) No. 1817/2020].

49) One Ansar Ali, son of Abdul Aziz as DW-2 on 18-07-2018 deposed before the Tribunal on
behalf of the petitioner reiterating the statements the petitioner made before the Tribunal. He
stated that his maternal grandfather had given land to his father at Kaurpara and that he along
with his brothers and sisters have inherited a land from their mother at Kaljhar and that petitioner
was born at Jaishihati and he was born at Kaurpara.

50) Said Ansar Ali also deposed that name of his father was inserted in the voters lists of 1956
and 1960 along with his grandfather and that name of his father was not inserted in the voters
lists of 1965 and 1970, that his own name was enrolled in the voters list in the year 1985 along
with his parents. He stated that name of his father was enlisted in the 1951 NRC and that the
Page No.# 15/18

name of the petitioner figured in the 1996 voters list of Sarukhetri LAC. He stated that his name
was enrolled for the first time in the year 1985.

51) Said DW-2 in his cross examination stated that he has seven numbers of paternal aunts but
he does not know their names and that he cast his vote under Barpeta LAC. He stated that he
stays at Kaurpara and he does not know the Dag No., Patta No. and area of the land where he is
residing now. He stated that the petitioner resides at Kaljhar with her husband and her name was
enrolled in 1989 for the first time.

52) It is seen that the DW-2 did not name his mother and grandmother, but named his
maternal grandfather. Many discrepancies have been noticed with regard to the deposition of the
petitioner and that of the DW-2. In the affidavit filed on 06-01-2017 by the petitioner with her
written statement, she stated that she is a widow whereas DW-2 alleged brother of the petitioner
on 18-07-2018 deposed that that the petitioner resides with her husband at Kaljhar. The
petitioner in her deposition stated that her grandfather Hatem Ali had six daughters, whereas
DW-2 in his deposition stated that he has seven paternal aunts and that he doesnot know their
names. Petitioner in her deposition also did not name those six daughters of Hateem Ali. DW-2
stated that he and his brothers and sisters inherited land from their mother at Kaljhar, but he
resides at Village Kaurpara. The petitioner In her written statement clearly stated that her father
and mother permanently resided at Village Kaurparaand she in her written statement as well as in
her evidence-in-affidavits did not statethat her mother has land at Village-Kaljhar, how her mother
procured the said land, etc.

53) One Kamala Khatun as DW-3 deposed before the Tribunal on behalf of the petitioner
stating that she is the daughter of late Hatem Ali (paternal aunt of the petitioner) and that the
petitioner is her niece. She has also narrated same as that of the petitioner and DW-2. Said DW-
3 stated that father of the petitioner shifted from Jaishihati to Kaurpara after 1960 and thereafter,
she cannot say whether his name was enrolled in that village or not. DW-3 stated that the
petitioner has four brothers and two sisters, she got married at Village-Kaurpara.

54) During her cross said DW-3 Kamala Khatun stated that name of the mother of the
petitioner as Majiron Nessa and that she had died, but she could not say when she died. She also
stated that father of the petitioner died, but does not know when he died. She further stated that
though she had a paternal uncle, but she does not know his name and that the petitioner was
Page No.# 16/18

born at Jaishihati Para. Said DW-3 in her cross also stated that petitioner has four brothers and
three sisters and that the petitioner was born at Jaishihati Paraand she stays at Kaljhar, whereas
her four brothers stay at Kaurpara.

55) It is seen from the records of the case that one Abdul Rashid Ahmed Gaon Burha of Village-
Jaishihati deposed on behalf of the petitioner as DW-4, who in his chief before the Tribunal
admitted that he had issued the Exhibit-I certificate in favour of the petitioner and also proved his
signature in the said Exhibit. He deposed that after verifying the Voter List, he had given the
contents of the certificate Exhibit-I. He also deposed that he knew that the petitioner is the
daughter of Abdul Aziz. But, during his cross, said DW-4, Gaon Burha of Village-Jaishihati
admitted that he does not maintain any record and stated he can issue such certificate, but there
is no such order in that regard from competent authority. Said DW-4 Gaon Burha deposed that
the petitioner was born at Kaurpara and her father Abdul Aziz was born at Village-Jaishihati, who
died about 30 years ago and that he was not aware about the age of said Abdul Aziz while his
name was entered in the Voter List of 1960 and stated that name of the father of the petitioner
did not figure in the Voter List of 1965 and 1970, whereas, in the years 1965 and 1970, name of
father of Abdul Aziz appeared. Said DW-4 also during cross deposed that he was born in the year
1950 and in the year 1970, for the first time his name was entered in the Voter List. He stated
that Petitioner’s father shifted from Jaishihati to Kaurpara between 1960 to 1965 and the distance
between both the villages Jaishihati and Kaurpara is 10 kms.

56) Said DW-4 Gaon Burha of Village-Jaishihati in his cross clearly mentioned that he does not
maintain any record. It is also stated by him that he gave the certificate Exhibit-I on verifying
Voter List. It is also stated by him that name of the projected father of the petitioner Abdul Aziz
did not figure in the Voter List of 1965 and 1970 and that name of grandparents of the petitioner
figured in the Voter List of 1965 and 1970.

57) Annexure-I exhibited by the petitioner is only a photo copy of a printed Voter List of 1956
reflecting the name of one Abdul Aziz, son of Hatem Ali from Village-Jaishihati. Exhibit-A Voter List
of 1965 of Village-Jaishihati does not contain the name of the concerned constituency. Exhibit-B
Voter List of 1970 of Village-Jaishihati relates to 47 No. Sorbhog LAC but petitioner could not
place any relevant and admissible evidence to connect Abdul Aziz of Village-Kaurpara of 43 No.
Barpeta LAC with that of Hatem Ali of Village-Jaishihati of 47 No. Sorbhog LAC. DW-4 stated that
petitioner was born at Village-Kaurpara, whereas DWs- 3 and 4 stated that she was born at
Page No.# 17/18

Village-Jaishihati/Jaishihati Para, while the petitioner remained silent about her place of birth and
childhood. But petitioner in her written statement stated that after shifting of her father from
Village-Jaishihati under Sorbhog LAC to Village-Kaurpara under 43 No. Barpeta LAC, he got
married to Maziron Nessa and then they permanently resided at Village-Kaurpara and that the
name of her father Abdul Aziz and mother Maziron Nessa appeared in the Additional Voters List of
1985 under 43 No. Barpeta LAC.

58) It is clear that though the petitioner by Exhibit-I certificate and adducing evidence of DW-4,
author of said Exhibit-I certificate tried to link herself to her projected father Abdul Aziz of Village-
Jaishihati but said Exhibit-I Certificate was not on the basis of any record maintained by the
concerned Gaon Burha of Village-Jaishihati, but it was only on the basis of Voters List. Said
Exhibit-I certificate has not been proved on records. It is well settled that a certificate issued
without the basis of any contemporaneous record cannot be accepted in evidence.

59) Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the cases of Md. Rahim Ali @ Abdur Rahman Vs. The State of Assam and 2 others ,
reported in AIR 2024 SC 3551 and Sirajul Hoque Vs. State of Assam & Others, reported in (2019)
5 SCC 534. Considering the back drop of the case, stated above and on perusal of those two
judgments placed by Mr. Ali, we are of the view that those two cases of Md. Rahim Ali @ Abdur
Rahman (supra) and Sirajul Hoque (supra) are not applicable in the present case.

60) Mr. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner also relied on a decision of a co-ordinate Bench in
the case of Abdul Matali @ Mataleb (Md.) Vs. Union of India. However, another co-ordinate Bench
in the case of Basiron Bibi Vs. Union of India & Ors., reported in 2018 (1) GLT 372 differentiated
the said Judgement in the case of Abdul Matali(supra). Therefore, we found that the case of
Abdul Matali (supra) is not applicable in the present case.

61) From the above we found that the petitioner failed place any reliable, cogent and
admissible evidence linking herself with her projected father Abdul Aziz or to prove her lineage
with said Abdul Aziz of Village-Jaishihati and subsequently of Village-Kaurpara. Moreover, said
Abdul Aziz of Village-Kaurpara is also non existent prior to the year 1985 in Indian soil.

62) After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering all the materials on
record, we are of the view that the impugned opinion passed by learned Member, Foreigners

Tribunal, 10th, Barpeta, Assam in F.T. Case No. 202/2016, by which the petitioner was opined to
Page No.# 18/18

be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream under Section 2(a) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 who had
illegally entered into the territory of India (Assam) from the specified territory after 25.03.1971
without any valid document, does not call for any interference in exercise of the power of Writ of
Certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Moreover, petitioner has also failed to
place any valid reasons of her approach this Court after more than five years of the impugned
opinion.

63) For the reasons above, this writ petition, being devoid of merits, stands dismissed.

64) The protection granted to the petitioner earlier by order dated 03.03.2025 is hereby
recalled and stands vacated.

65) Registry shall return the records of F.T. Case No. 202/2016 to the Foreigners Tribunal, 10 th,
Barpeta, Assam forthwith, along with a copy of this Order.

66) Registry shall also forward a copy of this Order to the Superintendent of Police (Border),
Barpeta, for its information and necessary use.

                                            JUDGE                                        JUDGE




Comparing Assistant