Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010195382024 2025:GAU-AS:1987-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4876/2024 MD. AMIR ALI S/O- MANGUL ALI MIYA, VILL- KARAGARI NONEKE BLOCK NO. 9, P.O.- NALIGAON, P.S.- SARTHEBARI, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, SHASTRI BHAWAN, TRILOK MARG, NEW DELHI- 1. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY NIRBACHAN BHAWAN NEW DELHI-1. 4:THE STATE CO-ORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS (NRC) Page No.# 2/6 ASSAM BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-5. 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF BARPETA P.O. P.S. AND DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301. 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) BARPETA P.O. P.S. AND DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI, MR. R ISLAM,MR H A AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, ECI,SC, F.T,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI ORDER Date : 24.02.2025 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. H.A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned CGC; Mr. J. Payeng, learned standing counsel for FT matters and NRC; Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel for ECI; and Mr. R.K. Talukdar, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State respondent. 2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the impugned ex parte opinion dated 06.04.2024, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal-III, Barpeta in Page No.# 3/6 FT Case No. 468/(III) of 2013, arising out of Ref. IM(D)T/F.T. Case No.413/10, by which the petitioner was declared as an illegal migrant. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the order dated 29.11.2024 and it is submitted that the petitioner has been arrested and taken into custody on 09.08.2024 and presently lodged in Transit Camp at Matia, Goalpara. 4. Accordingly, by referring to the order dated 29.11.2024, it is submitted that an affidavit has been filed by Rabina Khatun, daughter of the petitioner, wherein she has stated that there is no village by the name of “9 No. Block Naligaon”. It is further stated that there are several blocks under Naligaon Post Office and Block No.9 is village Karagari Nonke Block No.9. Accordingly, when the learned Tribunal had issued notice wherein the address of the petitioner was stated as 9 No. Block Naligaon, the petitioner had refused to accept the notice as he is a resident of Karagari Nonke Block No.9. It is further submitted that although the border police had came and enquired about the petitioner and had taken his photograph and fingerprints, but the petitioner not put to notice that his address is being shown as 9 No. Block Naligaon, which is incorrect and accordingly, the petitioner could not contest the ex parte proceeding against him. 5. The learned standing counsel for the FT matters has opposed the prayer made in this writ petition and it is submitted that the Border Police had enquired into the matter, visited the house of the petitioner and recorded his statement and also took his photograph as well as thumb impression for the purpose of identification and therefore, it is not acceptable that the house of the petitioner is in different village. Page No.# 4/6 6. On perusal of the records received from the learned Tribunal, we take note of the fact that although notice was issued by the learned Tribunal upon the petitioner at the village address of 9 No. Block Naligaon, but from the service report, it is seen that out of 3 (three) witnesses, who have signed the process server’s report, third witness, namely, Md. Amir Ali, who a Member of Village Defence Party (VDP) has recorded the name of village as Karagari Nonke-9. Therefore, the address given by the witness no.3 to the process server’s report supports the contention of the petitioner that his village name is Karagari Nonke-9. 7. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to accept the projection made by the petitioner that the name of his village is Karagari Nonke Block No.9 and not village 9 No. Block Naligaon. The Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has been able to make out a case for remand of the matter back to the learned Tribunal so as to give the petitioner an opportunity of contesting the reference made against him. 8. Accordingly, due to reasons assigned hereinbefore, the ex parte opinion dated 06.04.2024, passed by the learned Member, Foreigner’s Tribunal- III, Barpeta is set aside. 9. The matter is remanded back to the said learned Tribunal for a fresh decision in accordance with law. 10. In the meantime, having noted that the petitioner has been taken into custody on 06.04.2024 and is currently lodged in the Transit Camp at Matia, Goalpara, despite objection made by the learned standing counsel for the FT matters, the Court is inclined grant bail to the petitioner, namely, Md. Amir Ali on Page No.# 5/6 the following conditions: a. The family members of the petitioner shall appear before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Barpeta and furnish bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) with 2 (two) solvent sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the said authority. b. Before releasing the petitioner on bail, the Superintendent of Police (Border), Barpeta shall obtain the biometrics of the iris of both eyes, the fingerprints of both hands and the photographs of the petitioner. c. The said authority shall also obtain necessary information and documentation as required under the Rules from the petitioner for securing his presence. 11. Thereafter, steps shall be taken by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Barpeta to have the applicant released from the Transit Camp within 3 (three) days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 12. The petitioner shall appear before the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal-III, Barpeta within 10 (ten) days from the date of release from the Transit Camp without expecting any fresh notice to be served, failing which it would be open to the Tribunal to treat the petitioner absent on call and pass a fresh opinion in accordance with law. 13. However, in the event the petitioner appears before the Tribunal, he shall be given a reasonable time to file his written statement. 14. This writ petition stands allowed with the order of remand of the FT proceeding as indicated above. Page No.# 6/6 15. Registry shall send back the Tribunal records expeditiously. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant