Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14609 (GAU)

RASHIDA KHATUN v. THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

WP(C)/3487/2025 · 2025-07-24

Kalyan Rai Surana, Susmita Phukan Khaund

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010134352025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3487/2025 RASHIDA KHATUN W/O- SHAHA ALI @ SAHA ALI, R/O- VILL- SATIPUR, P.O. AND P.S- DHALIGAON, DIST- CHIRANG, ASSAM. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, INDIA- 110001 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF HOME DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-781007 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CHIRANG DIST- CHIRANG ASSAM- 783385 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CHIRANG DIST- CHIRANG ASSAM-783385 Page No.# 2/4 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) CHIRANG DIST- CHIRANG ASSAM-783385 7:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE DHALIGAON POLICE STATION DIST- CHIRANG ASSAM-78338 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R BHUYAN, MR M KHAN,MR S ABDULLAH,MR N Z CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 25.07.2025 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. A.R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as all the respondents. 2. The case of the petitioner is that her husband, namely Md. Shaha Ali @Saha Ali, was taken into custody on 25.05.2025, and thereafter his whereabouts were not known. 3. It is also projected in this writ petition that by an opinion dated 05.06.2017, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal, Chirang in Case No. FT/CHR/08/2016, arising out of P.E. No. 02/2016, the petitioner’s husband is presently being held at the Holding Centre at 7th AP Battalion, Charaikhola in the district of Kokrajhar. 4. Thereafter, pursuant to communication dated 21.04.2020, issued by the Superintendent of Police, (Border), Chirang, Kajalgaon, the husband of the Page No.# 3/4 petitioner was released on conditional bail from the Transit camp, Goalpara. 5. Pursuant to order dated 13.04.2020, passed by the Supreme Court of India in (Suo Motu) WP(C) No. 01/2020 and order dated 15.04.2020, passed by this Court in WP(C) (Suo Motu) 1/2020, on completion of two years of detention, the husband of the petitioner was released vide release order dated 21.04.2020, issued by the Superintendent of Police (B), Chirang, Kajalgaon. 6. As the husband of the petitioner was again taken into custody by filing a writ of habeaus corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for protection of her husband and to return him to the custody of his family members, to quash the illegal detention of the husband of the petitioner and to direct the respondent authorities not to deport the husband of the petitioner without due process of law. 7. Pursuant to order dated 20.07.2025, the petitioner and one family member was permitted to meet the declared foreign national and to obtain his signature in the vakalatnama and to obtain instructions. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per instructions received by him, the petitioner and his family members could visit the Holding centre at 7th AP Battalion, Charaikhola in the district of Kokrajhar and the signature of the detained person is obtained in the vakalatnama. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the meanwhile, the husband of the petitioner may not be deported out of the Country without following due process of law. 8. Accordingly, the Court is of the considered opinion that as the opinion dated 05.06.2017, passed in the writ petition has attained finality by virtue of dismissal of WP(C)/4158/2017 by order dated 13.12.2018, and taking into consideration that the petitioner has been able to obtain signature of the Page No.# 4/4 husband of the petitioner in the vakalatnama, the Court is of the considered opinion that the purpose of this writ petition is served as the whereabouts of the husband of the petitioner is disclosed. 9. Accordingly, the petitioner is allowed to avail any such remedy as available to her or to a detained person in connection with the said opinion dated 05.06.2017. 10. Accordingly, this writ petition stands closed without prejudice to the rights if any available to the petitioner or the detained foreign national namely Md. Shaha Ali @Saha Ali. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant