Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010213122025 2025:GAU-AS:14643-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3102/2025 XXX ASSAM VERSUS IN RE. MUSSTT. MONOWARA KHATUN @ MONOWARA BEGUM D/O RUSTAM ALI, W/O ZAKIR HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE 3 NO. RAJAPUKHURI, PS SARUPATHAR, DIST GOLAGHAT, ASSAM 7856001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T J MAHANTA, SC, GHC Advocate for the Respondent : MR G CHOUDHURY (FOR ABDUL KUDDUS , NOTARY PUBLIC), MR J ABEDIN (FOR KAJIBAR RAHMAN, ADVOCATE CLERK),MS N KALITA (FOR ABDUL KUDDUS , NOTARY PUBLIC) Linked Case : WP(C)/4720/2025 MUSSTT. MONOWARA KHATUN @ MANOWARA BEGUM D/O RUSTAM ALI W/O ZAKIR HUSSAIN R/O VILL- 3 NO. RAJAPUKHURI P.S.- SARUPATHAR DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-785601 Page No.# 2/4 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NEW DELHI-110001 2:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NEW DELHI-110001 3:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 4:THE ASSAM STATE CO-ORDINATOR OF NRC BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-05 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER GOLAGHAT DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-785621 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) GOLAGHAT DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-785621 ------------ Advocate for : MR. S A AHMED Advocate for : DY.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 30.10.2025 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned Amicus Curiae and senior counsel, Page No.# 3/4 assisted by Ms. P. Sarma, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Mr. G. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for Abdul Kuddus, Advocate and Notary Public appointed by the Govt. of India vide Registration No. 37610 as well as Mr. J. Abedin, learned counsel appearing for Kazibar Rahman, Advocate’s Clerk vide License No. 30/2020, issued by this Court. 2. The background facts leading to the registration of this case is that one Musstt. Monowara Khatun @ Manowara Begum, who is the petitioner in WP(C) 4720/2025, at the relevant time, was taken into custody and was lodged in the Transit Camp, Matia, Goalpara and while in custody, the purported affidavit sworn on 31.07.2025 was filed before this Court. In the affidavit, the deponent was identified by the Advocate's Clerk and she is shown to have appeared before the Notary Public, who has affixed his signature and rubber stamp along with another rubber stamp, by which the Notary Public has certified that he has read over and explained the contents to the declarant. This could not have been possible because the declarant was then in custody. 3. In view of the false declaration made by the Notary Public, which in the opinion of the Court, would erode the sanctity of the proceedings. Accordingly, in order to examine whether an appropriate contempt proceedings could be drawn up against them, this interlocutory application was ordered to be registered vide order dated 20.08.2025, passed in WP(C) 4720/2025. 4. In response to the show-cause notice, Kazibar Rahman, Advocate's Clerk, and Abdul Kuddus, Advocate and Notary Public have filed separate affidavits and have tendered unconditional apology and they have stated that the affidavit was signed, identified and notarized in good faith. They both seek pardon for their act. Page No.# 4/4 5. The learned counsel appearing for the Notary Public as well as for the Advocate’s Clerk have both submitted that the mistake of this sort will not be repeated in future. 6. Considering their apology and the submissions made by the respective learned counsel that the mistakes of this sort will not be repeated in future, the Court, by expressing caution to the Notary Public as well as to the Advocate’s Clerk to take care in identifying the deponent and to swear and notarize the affidavits to be more careful in future so that such unfortunate situation does not arise, specifically in respect of the present respondents. 7. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to close the matter without initiating any action against the Notary Public and the Advocate’s Clerk. 8. We put on record our appreciation towards the learned Amicus Curiae for his able assistance to the Court. He would be entitled to his usual honorarium. 9. With the note of caution, as indicated above, this interlocutory application stands closed. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant