Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16025 (GAU)

HABIL UDDIN @ HABIL MAMUD @ HABEL MAMUD @ KAJI HABELUDDIN v. UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS

WP(C)/7175/2023 · 2026-10-06

Kalyan Rai Surana, Pranjal Das

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010253052023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7175/2023 HABIL UDDIN @ HABIL MAMUD @ HABEL MAMUD @ KAJI HABELUDDIN SON OF LATE KASHEM ALI, A RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KACHUMARA NC, P.S.- KACHUMARA, DISTRICT- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781127 PRESENT ADDRESS- VILLAGE- SARU ARIKATI, UNDER BOKO POLICE STATION, IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP, ASSAM. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI-1. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (BORDER) KAMRUP AMINGAON GUWAHATI-31. 4:DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP Page No.# 2/3 AMINGAON GUWAHATI-31. 5:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER NEW DELHI-1. 6:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS (NRC) ASSAM ACHYUT PLAZA BHARALUPAR BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-5 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S ALIM, MR. A T SIKDER,MR. B HUSSAIN,MR. M H ANSARI Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, ECI,SC, F.T,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 07.10.2026 (K. R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. M. H. Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Upon instructions, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had died. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not aware of the exact date of death and therefore the matter is abated. 3. As there are consequences attached to the opinion passed by the Foreigners Tribunal, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner, the Court had put query to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether any family Page No.# 3/3 members are interested to substitute themselves. 4. In response, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that none of the family members have consented to substitute themselves. 5. The matter stands dismissed on being abated on the death of the petitioner. 6. The Registry shall return back the Tribunal’s record along with a copy of this order to be made a part of the record by the said learned Tribunal. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant