Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010278942024 2025:GAU-AS:1455 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/4096/2024 JAHERA KHATOON W/O- MOFIJUDDIN, VILLAGE- KENDUGURI, P.S. NAGAON (SADAR), DISTRICT- NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI, INDIA. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA NIRVACHAN BHAVAN NEW DELHI. 4:THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 5:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTRAR OF CITIZENS (NRC) ASSAM Page No.# 2/6 GUWAHATI. 6:THE FOREIGNERS REGIONAL REGISTRATION AUTHORITY (FRAA) NAGAON ASSAM. 7:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM REGURNING OFFICER DISTRICT- NAGAON ASSAM. 8:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE NAGAON ASSAM. 9:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) NAGAON DISTRICT- NAGAON ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BARBHUIYA, MS A BEGUM,MS S R MAZARBHUIYA,S. M. ZINNA,MS B PATHAK Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., GA, ASSAM,SC, F.T,SC, NRC,SC, ECI Linked Case : WP(C)/2526/2023 JAHERA KHATOON W/O- MOFIJUDDIN VILLAGE- KENDUGURI P.S. NAGAON (SADAR) DISTRICT- NAGAON ASSAM. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT Page No.# 3/6 NEW DELHI INDIA. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA NIRVACHAN BHAVAN NEW DELHI. 4:THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 5:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTRAR OF CITIZENS (NRC) ASSAM GUWAHATI. 6:THE FOREIGNERS REGIONAL REGISTRATION AUTHORITY (FRAA) NAGAON ASSAM. 7:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM REGURNING OFFICER DISTRICT- NAGAON ASSAM. 8:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE NAGAON ASSAM. 9:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) NAGAON DISTRICT- NAGAON ASSAM. ------------ Advocate for : MR. A M BARBHUIYA Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS. Page No.# 4/6 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI ORDER Date : 12.02.2025 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. B. Sarma, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the FT matters; Mr. H. Kuli, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel for the ECI; and Mr. R. Talukdar, learned Govt. Advocate for the State respondents. 2. By filing this interlocutory application under Section 151 CPC, the applicant, who is the petitioner in WP(C) 2526/2023 has prayed for 15 (fifteen) days extension of time for taking bail in terms of order dated 23.05.2023, passed by this Court in the said writ petition. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that this Court was pleased to grant bail to the applicant. The counsel for the applicant had promptly obtained the certified copy of the said order on 23.05.2023 itself. However, the applicant, being an illiterate lady, could not understand the time limit of 15 (fifteen) days granted by this Court to take bail and accordingly, she was under a bona fide belief that she can take bail at any time on the strength of the said order if police reaches to her. It is submitted that when the applicant came to meet her learned counsel, she was asked about the status of bail as per order dated 23.05.2023 and accordingly, the applicant has informed her learned counsel that she had not taken bail due to inadvertence and ignorance. The learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that having obtained bail, the applicant would have taken it as there was no reason not to take bail. Page No.# 5/6 Accordingly, the applicant has expressed her unconditional and sincere apology. 4. The relevant part of the order dated 23.05.2023 is extracted below: “In the meantime, if the petitioner has not been detained on the strength of the opinion dated 08.09.2022 passed by the Foreigners’ Tribunal No.1, Nagaon in F.T. Case No. 197/2014 the petitioner shall not be taken into custody and deported from India. However, we direct the petitioner to appear before the Superintendent of Police (B) Nagaon within 15(fifteen) days from today, who may obtain necessary information and documentation as required under the Rules from the petitioner for securing his/her presence. On such appearance, the petitioner shall furnish bail bond of Rs.5,000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the said authority, whereafter the petitioner shall be allowed to remain on bail. The concerned Superintendent of Police (B), Nagaon shall also take steps for capturing the fingerprints of both hands and biometrics of the iris of the petitioner. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of Nagaon district without giving details of the place of destination and his/her place of stay to the Superintendent of Police (B) Nagaon including relevant contact/mobile number. It is further made clear that failure on the part of the petitioner to provide the relevant mobile/contact number will warrant recalling of this bail order.” 5. From the above, it is seen that there was a categorical order of the Court that failure on part of the applicant to provide relevant mobile/contact number will warrant recalling of the bail order. Therefore, as 15 (fifteen) days time was granted from 23.05.2023 to take bail and to furnish contact/mobile number has expired long back, the Court is of the considered opinion that for all intents and purposes, by virtue of directions contained in the order dated 23.05.2023, failure on part of the applicant to provide the relevant mobile/contact number, has already triggered the recalling of the bail order, and bail granted vide order dated 23.05.2023, stands automatically recalled on expiry of 15 (fifteen) days from the date of the said order. 6. 6. Under such circumstances, as the applicant has failed to comply with the directions of this Court and this application for extension of time has been Page No.# 6/6 filed on 23.12.2024, which is after one year seven months from 23.05.2023, the date of the order, the Court does not find this to be a fit case to extend the time to the applicant to appear before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Nagaon to take bail. 7. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to hold that due to non-compliance of the directions contained in the order dated 23.05.2023, the directions for recalling of the bail order, as contained therein, has taken effect. 8. Accordingly, the prayer for extension of time is refused and rejected. 9. Be that as it may, the Court is inclined to pass appropriate order in the connected writ petition to expedite the hearing as the records of the Tribunal is received. 10. This application stands dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant