Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010192522020 2025:GAU-AS:10297-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/160/2021 PIYARA BEGUM D/O- LT. ABDUL MANNAN, W/O- HASAN AHMED, VILL- DOBAKA TOWN WARD NO. 10, P.O. AND P.S. DOBAKA, DIST.- HOJAI, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI- 110001 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT. DISPUR GHY-6 3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NEW DELHI- 110001 4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER HOJAI PIN- 782435 5:THE STATE CO-ORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS ASSAM GHY-05 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) HOJAI DIST.- HOJAI PIN- 78243 Page No.# 2/7 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MS S DAS,MR F U BARBHUIYA Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., SC, F.T,SC, NRC,SC, ELECTION COMMISSION. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER Date : 05.08.2025 (R. Mazumdar, J) Heard Mr. F.U. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned CGC; Mr. M. Islam, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel for the ECI; Mr. J. payeng, learned standing counsel for the FT matters and NRC; and Mr. H.K. Hazariaka, learned Additional Junior Govt. Advocate for respondent. 2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the impugned opinion dated 02.03.2020, passed by the learned Member, Foreigner’s Tribunal, Nagaon-10th at Sankardev Nagar, Hojai, Assam in F.T.(D) Case No. 1496/2015, arising out of S.P. (B)’s F.T. Case No. 1155/2009, by which the petitioner was declared as an illegal migrant. 3. When the matter first came on 21.01.2021, this Court proposed to examine the case records at the first instance and as an interim measure the petitioner was granted the privilege of bail as recorded in the order dated 21.01.2021. 4. Upon receipt of records from the concerned Tribunal, by order dated 01.03.2021, notice was issued and the matter was fixed for admission. 5. The brief facts of the case is that, on the basis of a reference made by Page No.# 3/7 the Superintendent of Police (Border), Nagaon, Assam, F.T. (D) Case No. 1496/2015 was registered and notices were issued to the writ petitioner herein to participate in the proceeding before the Tribunal. Responding to the notices, the petitioner appeared and filed her written statement on 11.02.2019 and thereafter, filed an additional written statement on 29.03.2019. The acceptance of the additional written statement is reflected in the order sheet of the learned Tribunal in order dated 29.03.2019. The proceedee adduced her evidence as DW-1 on 25.04.2019 and she was cross-examined on 17.05.2019. DW-2, namely Jalil Ahmed who projected himself as the brother of the proceedee, filed his evidence on affidavit on 11.06.2019 and he was cross-examined on 26.08.2019. 6. The proceedee had relied upon and exhibited the following documents during the proceedings:- i) Ext.1: Certified copy extract of a voter list (computer generated) for the village: Kadamoni Pather under 86 No. Dhing LAC in the year 1965, ii) Ext.2: Certified copy extract of a voter list (computer generated) for the village: Kadamoni Pather under 86 No. Dhing LAC in the year 1970, iii) Ext.3: Certified copy extract of a voter list (computer generated) for the village: Kadamoni Pather under 84 No. Batadroba LAC in the year 1985, iv) Ext.4: Certified copy extract of a voter list (computer generated) for the village: Kadamoni Pather under 84 No. Batadroba LAC in the year 1989, v) Ext.5: Transfer certificate issued vide No. DGHS/363/18 on 22.11.2018 in the name of Piyara Begum by the Head Mistress of Dabaka Girls’ High School, vi) Ext.6: Gaon Panchayat certificate issued vide No. KGP/M.W/CFT/2015/1796 on 07.07.2015 in the name of Mussa. Piyara Begum by the Gaon Panchyat Secretary- Sri Ranjit Ch. Borah of Kadamoni Gaon Panchyat, vii) Ext.7: Xerox-copy of a voter list, viii) Ext.8: Certified copy extract of a voter list (computer generated) for the village: Ward No. 10 under 90 No. Jamunamukh LAC in the year 2010, ix) Ext.9: Certified copy extract of voter list (computer generated) for the village: Ward No.10 under 90 No. Jamunamukh LAC in the year 2014, x) Ext.10: Certified copy extract of voter list (computer generated) for the village: Doboka Town under 90 No. Jamunamukh LAC in the year 2018, Page No.# 4/7 xi) Ext.11: Xerox-copy of an Elector Photo Identity Card in the name of Piyara Begum and xii) Ext.12: Gaon Burah Certificate issued vide No. 336 on 06.02.2019 in the name of Piyara Begum by the Gaon Burah of Kadamoni Pather Gaon. 7. The concerned Headmistress of the school from which the Ext. 5, namely, Transfer Certificate from the Doboka Girls High School was issued, adduced evidence to prove the authenticity of the certificate and similarly the Gaonburah of Kodomoni Pathar Gaon appeared to prove the authencity of Ext. 12. Though both the aforesaid 2 (two) witnesses had presented themselves and given evidence, however, the learned Tribunal did not record them as “DW” and no DW numbers were given to them. 8. The learned Tribunal, after having examined the records available before it, had declared the proceedee to be a foreigner of as per Section 2(a) of the Foreigners’ Act, 1946 who illegally entered into the territory of India on or after 25.03.1971 without any valid documents. 9. Mr. F.U. Barbhuyia, learned counsel for the petitioner by making reference to the records available has emphasized that several of the exhibits marked by the proceedee in the proceedings were either not taken into account or were ignored because of discrepancies which were actually not fatal to the case of the proceedee. He submits that such rejection of evidence had prejudiced the proceedee and therefore, he prays that the impugned opinion be interfered with and the matter be remanded back for proper consideration of evidence led by the proceedee. 10. Mr. J. Payeng, learned standing counsel for the FT matters has opposed such prayer and has supported the impugned opinion. He has argued that the rejection of certain exhibits and the fault found in those exhibits which were taken into account were in accordance with law and therefore, the impugned Page No.# 5/7 opinion does not deserve any interference and the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 11. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and we have also perused the records as received from the concerned Tribunal. 12. Without going into the merits of the documents which were exhibited and the evidence which was led by proceedee in support of her claim to be an citizen of India we have noticed from records that the learned Tribunal totally failed to take into account the additional written statement which was filed by the proceedee and which, by order dated 29.03.2019, had also been accepted. The learned Tribunal has observed in the impugned order that inspite of having a clear date of birth as projected in the school certificate (Ext. 5), the proceedee had failed to disclose her date of birth in her written statement. 13. We have perused the written statement filed on behalf of the proceedee and it is seen that at paragraph no. 12 of the written statement the proceedee had very clearly stated that her date of birth is 01.03.1985. The same statements have been reiterated in paragraph no. 14 of the additional written statement filed by the proceedee. The relevant paragraph is extracted below:- That, the Opp. Party was staying of her relatives house at Doboka Town under Doboka P.S. and studied at Doboka Girls’ High School up to Class VI and she left the said school on 31.12.1996 and in this regards the Headmistress of the said school issued a certificate in the name of the Opp. Party and in the said certificate her father’s name is appeared as Abdul Mannan resident of Vill. Kadamoni Pather, Mouza Batadrava under Batadrava Police Station in the Dist. of Nagaon, Assam and her Date of Birth is 01.03.1985. 14. We have also noticed that the learned Tribunal has recorded that “Ext. 12 is not pleaded by the O.P. in her written statement and hence, this document is un-attended for appreciation”. It is at this stage that we must also say that at Page No.# 6/7 paragraph no. 20 of the additional written statement the petitioner has referred to the certificate issued by the Govt. Gaonburah of Kadumoni. Therefore, it appears that the additional written statement filed by the proceedee did not receive the attention of the learned Tribunal. 15. From the records of the learned Tribunal and our observation here in above we find that relevant documents exhibited during the evidence of the proceedee and several contentions raised in the written statement did not receive proper and due attention of the learned Tribunal below. In fact, the additional written statement which was accepted by order dated 29.03.2019, was wholly ignored when the opinion was rendered on 02.03.2020. This, in our opinion, will vitiate the decision making process followed by the learned Tribunal and therefore, we are inclined to interfere with the opinion rendered by the learned Tribunal in F.T.(D) Case No. 1496/2015, arising out of S.P. (B)’s F.T. Case No. 1155/2009, in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 16. Resultantly, the writ petition stands allowed to the extent of setting aside of the opinion dated 02.03.2020. We remand the matter back to the learned Tribunal to render a fresh opinion by taking into consideration all relevant pleadings and exhibits already available on record. 17. The petitioner shall appear before the learned Tribunal along with the certified copy of this order within 20 (twenty) days from today without requirement of any further notice. 18. We expect the learned Tribunal to expeditiously render its opinion on the basis of materials available on record preferably within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of the records or date of appearance of the proceedee, whichever is earlier. Page No.# 7/7 19. Registry is directed to send back the records to the learned Tribunal along with a copy of this order. 20. There will be no order as to cost. 21. The writ petition is allowed to the extent as indicated above. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant