Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010208752019 2025:GAU-AS:9990 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6542/2019 JAHURA KHATUN W/O. HUSSIAN ALI, VILL. NO.5 BARUAJHAR, P.O. BECHIMARI, P.S. DALGAON, DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, HOME AFFAIRS DEPTT., NEW DELHI-01. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THECOMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-06. 3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NEW DELHI-01 INDIA. 4:THE STATE CO-ORDINATOR NRC ASSAM. 5:THE DY. COMMISSIONER DARRANG MANGALDOI DIST. DARRANG Page No.# 2/4 ASSAM PIN-784125. 6:THE SUPDT. OF POLICE (B) DARRANG DIST. DARRANG ASSAM PIN-784125 Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. A Ali Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. AI Ali Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India Ms. U Das, Addl.Senior Govt. Advocate Mr. K Gogoi, CGC B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER 30.07.2025 Heard Mr. A Ali, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K Gogoi, the learned CGC for respondent Nos.1 and 4, Mr. AI Ali, learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India and Ms. U Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the State Page No.# 3/4 respondents. 2. The case of the petitioner is that in the voters list of 1997, the name of the petitioner was marked with the letter “D” and thereupon the petitioner has approached the concerned respondent authorities for removal of the tag “D” in his name from the voters list. 3. As the concerned respondent authorities had failed to do so, the petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for an appropriate direction that the letter “D” tagged with the name of the petitioner in the voters list be removed. 4. Whether a person is a “D” voter or not is a matter of factual determination and the appropriate forum to do the same is the concerned Foreigners Tribunal. This Court in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not have the competence to decide such a question which depends on the evidence that may be produced. 5. In the circumstance, this Court therefore directs the respondent No.6 i.e., the Superintendent of Police(Border), Darrang to verify as to whether the petitioner has already been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal and if upon verification, it is found that the petitioner has not been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal, this Court further directs the said respondent No.6 to refer the case of the petitioner as regards the mark “D” in the voters list Page No.# 4/4 in respect to 68 Dalgaon LAC to a competent Foreigners Tribunal, in the Darrang district for an appropriate adjudication as regards the status of the petitioner as “D” voter in the concerned voters list. 6. Reference be made within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Upon such reference being made, the petitioner may participate in such proceedings and establish her case. 7. If the case of the petitioner as per the records had already been referred to the relevant Foreigners Tribunal there would be no requirement to make any further reference and the detailed information of the earlier reference be communicated to the petitioner. 8. With the above directions and observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant