Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010261052025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6688/2025 TAZNUR ALI SON OF KHALIL ALI, RESIDENT OF VILL- JYOTI NAGAR, P.S. AND DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 7 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 NALBARI ASSAM-781335. 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE NALBARI DIST- NALBARI ASSAM-781337. 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (BORDER) Page No.# 2/6 NALBARI DIST- NALBARI ASSAM-781337. 7:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE NALBARI POLICE STATION DIST. NALBARI ASSAM-781335. 8:ASSISTANT HIGH COMMISSIONER OF BANGLADESH GUWAHATI GREEN VALLEY TOWER NEAR SILPUKHURI DOMINOS OLD POST OFFICE LANE MANIRAM DEWAN RD. SILPUKHURI GUWAHATI ASSAM 781003 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R BHUYAN, MR N Z CHOUDHURY,MR S ABDULLAH Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, ECI,GA, ASSAM,SC, NRC,SC, F.T BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 28.11.2025 (S. K. Medhi, J) Heard Shri A. R. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Home Department; Ms. M. Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Shri S. K. Medhi, learned CGC and Shri P. Sarma, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate, Assam. 2. The instant petition has been filed with the following prayer: “In the premises aforesaid, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court Page No.# 3/6 may graciously be pleased to admit this writ petition, call for the records and issue Rule, calling upon the Respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Certiorari and/or any other writ shall not be issued to:- a) direct/ command the Respondents for production of Musstt. Sakina Begum, wife of Khalil Ali, daughter of Late Makbil Ali before the Court of appropriate jurisdiction or any other authority or Court or even before this Hon'ble Court within a specific time frame and also complete all formalities like their medical checkup and submit the reports before this Hon'ble Court; b) direct/ command the Respondents more particularly the Respondent No. 1 with the assistant of the Respondent No. 8 to return back the mother of the petitioner namely Musstt. Sakina Begum wife of Khalil Ali, daughter of Late Makbil Ali from Bangladesh to India and produce her before this Hon'ble Court; c) set aside/ quash the illegal detention of the detenue i.e. the mother of the petitioner namely Musstt. Sakina Begum, wife of Khalil Ali, daughter of Late Makbil Ali; d) direct/ command the respondents to release Musstt. Sakina Begum, wife of Khalil Ali, daughter of Late Makbil Ali and hand over her to her family member; e) direct/command the respondents not to resort to deportation of Musstt. Sakina Begum, wife of Khalil Ali, daughter of Late Makbil Ali without following due process and maintaining utmost transparency; f) pass such other order/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper for the ends of justice; -AND- Upon cause/causes being shown by the respondents and on perusal of records Page No.# 4/6 and hearing the parties be pleased to make the Rule absolute. -AND- INTERIM PRAYER In the interim pending final disposal of this Writ Petition Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondents to forthwith produce the mother of the petitioner namely Musstt. Sakina Begum, wife of Khalil Ali, daughter of Late Makbil Ali before the appropriate Court of law and further may be pleased to allow the family members of Musstt. Sakina Begum, wife of Khalil Ali, daughter of Late Makbil Ali to meet with her and/or pass such further order/ orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper; And for this act of Kindness, the humble petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 3. It transpires that against the proceedee, who is the mother of the present petitioner there was initially an ex-parte opinion passed by the Foreigners Tribunal, No. 1 Nalbari dated 01.10.2012 in FT (Nal) Case No. 181/2006 arising out of SP Ref. Case No. 1481/2004 whereby she was declared a foreigner post 1971. However, an application was filed for vacating the said ex-parte opinion which was also rejected vide an order dated 07.10.2015. The same was the subject matter of challenge in WP(C)/5493/2016 which was dismissed by this Court vide an order dated 27.03.2017. The operative part of the judgment is extracted herein below: “We also find that the default of the petitioner before the Tribunal is further compounded by the long delay in approaching the Court. Impugned order was passed by the Tribunal on 01.10.2012. After about 4 years, the present writ Page No.# 5/6 petition has been filed. Plea of the petitioner that she was unaware of the proceeding before the Tribunal, cannot be excepted in the facts and circumstances of the case a s narrated above. In such circumstances, we do not find any error or infirmity in the view taken by the Tribunal. Consequently, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.” 4. A subsequent Review Petition/103/2017 was filed which was also dismissed by this Court on 19.07.2017 by making the following observations: “ On due consideration, we are of the view that ground urged in the review petition are not good grounds for review of the order dated 27.03.2017. We do not find any error apparent on the face of the record to review the order dated 27.03.2017. Consequently, review petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.” 5. Though the mother of the petitioner was stated to be granted conditional bail, it has been alleged that on 25.05.2025, she was picked up and deported to Bangladesh. The petitioner has contended that such deportation has been done without following the due process of law. 6. Though it is stated in the petition that the whereabouts of the mother of the petitioner is not known, Shri Bhuyan, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after being deported to Bangladesh, she was taken into custody by the authorities of the Bangladesh. However subsequently, she has been granted bail by the Court at Bangladesh. 7. We are of the opinion that the relief prayed for in the present petition would amount to reviving the challenge of the initial action of declaring the proceedee as foreigner which was upheld by this Court. We have noted that the Page No.# 6/6 order passed by this Court on 27.03.2017 dismissing WP(C)/5493/2016 has been reiterated while dismissing the Review. Pet/103/2017 vide order dated 19.07.2017. It also transpires that the aforesaid orders of this Court was not the subject matter of any further challenge and therefore, have attained finality. 8. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the present writ petition would not be maintainable and the same is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant