Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010127692025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3328/2025 HAJARAT ALI S/O LT NAYEB ALI R/O VILL BANTIPUR JARABARI PS BARPETA DIST BARPETA ASSAM PIN 781314 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVT. OF INDIA, SASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI- 110001. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP METRO DIST KAMRUP METRO GUWAHATI ASSAM 781006 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BORDER KAMRUP METRO PANBAZAR GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN 781001 5:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA REP. BY THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA NEW DELHI-110001 6:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE OF BARPETA POLICE STATION DIST BARPETA ASSAM PIN 78131 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. D GHOSH, MS N DEKA,MR I CHAKMA,MR. S. K. CHAKMA,MR A.K. HAJONG Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., GA, ASSAM,SC, ECI,SC, F.T,SC, NRC BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. SEMA ORDER Date : 25.06.2025 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. B. Chakraborty, learned CGC, Mr. H. Kuli, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A. I. Ali SC, ECI, Mr. J. Payang, learned Standing Counsel for the FT Matters and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate for the State are present. 2. Mrs. D. Ghosh, learned counsel for the petitioner, upon instructions, has submitted that in the meanwhile the procedee in the FT Case No. 348/2016, which was decided opinion dated 12.09.2017, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal 5th, Kamrup (M) in F.T. Case No. 348/2016, arising out of the corresponding Police Ref. Case No. 1471/2025, has assailed the said opinion. 3. In this matter, by order dated 16.06.2025, the Court had already granted to the petitioner, the visitation right to meet his son, namely, Amir Ali @ Amir Hamja and to obtain his signature in the vakalatnama. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the said order has been complied with. 4. Accordingly, the Court finds no purpose to keep this matter alive in view of the Page No.# 3/3 challenge already made by the procedee, against an ex parte opinion referred above. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed without prejudice to Amir Ali @ Amir Hamja, the concerned proceedee who has already filed a writ petition to assail the opinion referred above. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant