Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010025112017 2025:GAU- AS:13904-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3297/2017 AMBIA KHATUN W/O- RUSMAT ALI, VILL- SAGUNBAHI, P.S- MOIRABARI, DIST- MORIGAON VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA and 3 ORS. REP. BY SECY, MIN OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY COMMISSIONER and SECY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE MORIGAON DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICEB MORIGAON DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MORIGAON DIST- MORIGAON ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.N H MAZARBHUYAN, MR.K MIRA,MR.N ISLAM,MR.R ALI,MS.L WAJEEDA Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the Respondent : , ASSTT.S.G.I.,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 14.10.2025 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Ms. L. Wajeeda, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. J. Saikia, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the FT matters and NRC; Mr. N. Kalita, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission of India and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate for the State respondent. 2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the impugned opinion dated 30.11.2016, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal-5th, Morigaon, in Case No. F.T.(D)91/2015 (New Number), F.T.(D)1059/2012 (old Number), by which the petitioner was declared as an illegal migrant. 3. In course of the hearing and on perusal of the Tribunal’s records, we have noticed that DW-1, who was examined on 29.01.2016 is Ambia Khatun, who is the petitioner and DW-2, who was examined on 18.05.2016 is Jahura Khatun. However, the left hand thumb impressions in both the depositions are taken of Ambia Khatun. Therefore, the said error on the part of Foreigners Tribunal – 5th, Morigaon, in maintaining the records, is found to vitiate the impugned opinion dated 30.11.2016. Page No.# 3/4 4. Accordingly, in the opinion of the Court, no purpose would be served to refer to the pleadings and evidence and to appreciate the impugned opinion dated 30.11.2016, as indicated in the above referred paragraph, the same is found to be vitiated. The said impugned opinion dated 30.11.2016 passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal 5th, Morigaon in Case No. F.T. (D)91/2015 (New Number), F.T.(D)1059/2012 (old Number), is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal- 5th, Morigaon, directing the said learned Tribunal to re-examine the DW-2, Jahura Khatun and thereafter, pass a fresh opinion in accordance with law. 5. The petitioner, who is duly represented by her learned counsel is directed to appear before the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal–5th, Morigaon on 07.11.2025, without requirement of any further notice of appearance. 6. We make it clear that in the event the petitioner fails to appear before the learned Tribunal on the date fixed, it would be open to the said learned Tribunal to treat the petitioner as absent on call and proceed with the matter in accordance with law. 7. The learned Tribunal, after receipt of the records, shall issue summons to the DW-2, Jahura Khatun, requiring her presence for the re-examination/fresh- examination as DW-2. 8. On appearance of DW-2, the learned Member shall make enquiry if the evidence-in-chief and the cross-examination of DW-2, which is under the left hand thumb impressions of the petitioner (DW-1), was by DW-1, then the same would stand expunged, however, in the event the DW-2, Jahura Khatun, accepts that the evidence recorded on 18.05.2016 was given by her, the same shall be Page No.# 4/4 accepted and her left hand thumb impression may be taken and the records be rectified accordingly. 9. We request the learned Standing Counsel, FT and Border matters, to transmit a downloaded copy of this order to the Superintendent of Police (Border), Morigaon to bring the order to the notice of the said authority. 10. Although the Court has not recorded a finding as to at whose instance the inadvertence had happened, however, this would call for an examination by the State through its Home and Political (B) Department as to whether they think fit and proper to have a training conducted for the Superintendents of the Foreigners Tribunals and Bench Assistants, so that such clerical mistakes can henceforth be prevented. 11. Accordingly, we also request the learned Standing Counsel for the Home and Political (B) Department to transmit a downloaded copy of this order to the said Department to bring the order to the notice of the concerned authority. 12. In terms of the above observation, this writ petition stands disposed of. 13. Send back the records of the Tribunal. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant