Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010122382025 2025:GAU-AS:7841-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3177/2025 SUBHASH MANDAL SON OF LATE SAMBHU MANDAL R/O HOUSE NO. 46, RAGHUNATH PATH, DHIRENPARA, P.O. AND P.S. FATASHIL AMBARI DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, GUWAHATI, PIN-781025 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI, PIN- 110001. 2:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER NEW DELHI-110001. 3:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP (M) HENGRABARI GUWAHATI PIN-781036 Page No.# 2/3 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) GUWAHATI PIN-781007 ASSAM 6:THE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI PIN- 78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M MAHANTA, MR. M J BHATTACHARYYA Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, NRC,GA, ASSAM,SC, F.T,SC, ECI BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI ORDER Date : 13.06.2025 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. M. Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the FT matters and NRC; Ms. P. Barua, learned standing counsel for the ECI; and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate for the State respondent. 2. The case of the petitioner is that suspecting the nationality, a reference was made by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati, which was registered as D.V. Case No. 1633/2019 (P/C No. 5275/1998), which is pending before the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal No.5, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati. 3. In order to establish his case/defence, the petitioner had produced an Page No.# 3/3 affidavit, purportedly sworn by his projected father on 19.10.1985, which was exhibited as Ext.5 in the said proceeding. 4. On 19.03.2025, the petitioner had filed a petition to enable him to prove the said affidavit as Ext.5. The said prayer was rejected by the learned Tribunal vide order dated 19.03.2025 on the ground that the affidavit was sworn more than 40 (forty) years back and the record/register of the exhibited affidavit, in the view of the learned Tribunal, was not maintained at that period. 5. Any interference with the said order dated 19.03.2025 is opposed by the learned standing counsel for the FT matters. 6. Having noted that the petitioner did not make any prayer before the learned Tribunal to call for the record/register of the exhibited affidavit, the ground on which the said prayer was rejected is found to be tenable 7. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to provide that the said order dated 19.03.2025, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal No.5, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati shall be a bar for the petitioner to move an appropriate application in respect of the Ext.5, affidavit, in a manner in which the petitioner may be so advised. 8. With the liberty as indicated above, this writ petition stands closed at the motion stage without issuance of notice on the respondents. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant