Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010224202023 2026:GAU- AS:14641-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5847/2023 MUSSTT SARIFA BEGUM W/O- MD. AJIBAR RAHMAN, D/O- LATE SOHRAB ALI @ SORHAB ALI, R/O- VILL- BHALUKDUBI, P.S AND DIST- GOALPARA, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS,GOVT. OF INDIA, SASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI- 110001. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GOALPARA ASSAM PIN-783101 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) GOALPARA ASSAM PIN-783101 5:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NEW DELHI-01 Page No.# 2/5 6:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS ASSAM BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-05 DIST- KAMRUP (M Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R SIKDAR, MS. A DAS,J A SIKDAR,MR. S I TALUKDAR Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, NRC,GA, ASSAM,SC, ECI,SC, F.T BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 30.09.2026 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. A.R. Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Ashim Kr. Chaudhury, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the FT and Border matters; Mr. N. Kalita, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel for the ECI; and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Addl. 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 opinion dated 15.10.2022, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.1, Goalpara, in F.T. Case No. 6642/G/16, arising out of Dist. Case No. 04/2005, whereby she was declared to be a foreigner of post-25.03.1971 stream. 3. In view of the nature of order of remand which is proposed to be passed, the Court is of the considered view that this order need not be Page No.# 3/5 burdened with the discussion on the defence taken by the petitioner in her written statement and the evidence of four witnesses examined by the petitioner. 4. The records of the learned Tribunal were called for and the same have been received. On a perusal of the records as well as a comparative reading of the impugned opinion, this Court has taken note of the fact that during examination of Shri Zakirul Hoque, Headmaster of Kismatpur L.P. School, who was examined as DW-3, he had exhibited the Block Elementary Education Officer’s document and his own signature as Ext.E(1) and Ext.E(2), respectively. He had also deposed that he had brought the admission register of the school, which was stated to have been exhibited as Ext.E(3). The record also reveals that the petitioner had examined Sahera Bewa, projected mother of the petitioner, as DW-2. 5. Although, in the opinion, reference is made to the evidence of Sahera Bewa (DW-2), there is no discussion in the impugned opinion regarding her evidence. It is also seen that although the admission register was stated to have been exhibited as Ext.E(3), the photocopy of the said document available at page 81 of the learned Tribunal’s records do not contain any endorsement by the learned Tribunal showing the said document marked as Ext.E(3). The said photocopy of the school admission register bears the signature of Zakirul Hoque, Headmaster of the school, dated 05.05.2022, being the date on which the evidence-in-chief and cross-examination of DW-3 were recorded. 6. In view of the aforesaid position and the absence of appreciation of the evidence of DW-2, the Court is of the considered view that this is a fit case Page No.# 4/5 for remand of the matter back to the said learned Tribunal for a fresh decision on the pleadings and evidence already available on record. 7. It would be open to the learned Tribunal to call for DW-3 for the purpose of marking the photocopy of the purported school admission register available at page 81 of the Tribunal’s records as Ext.E(3), in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, to facilitate a fresh determination of the matter, the Court is inclined to set aside the impugned opinion dated 15.10.2022, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.1, Goalpara, in F.T. Case No. 6642/G/16, arising out of Dist. Case No. 04/2005. The matter is remanded to the said learned Tribunal for a fresh decision as indicated above. 9. The petitioner, being duly represented by her learned counsel, shall appear before the said learned Tribunal without fail on or before 26.11.2026, and by producing a certified copy of this order, await further orders to be passed by the said learned Tribunal. 10. On the appearance of the petitioner before the learned Tribunal, she shall furnish fresh bail of Rs.5,000/- to the satisfaction of the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.1, Goalpara. The bail so furnished by the petitioner shall remain valid for a period of 30 days from the date of passing of the fresh opinion. 11. Registry shall return the Tribunal’s records expeditiously. 12. With the observations made above, the writ petition stands partly Page No.# 5/5 allowed to the extent as indicated above by remanding the matter back. The parties are left to bear their own cost. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant