Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010076992020 2026:GAU-AS:9188 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2412/2020 REKHA DEBNATH @ DEVI D/O- LATE JATINDRA DEBNATH, W/O- SRI PRADIP DEBNATH, R/O- VILL- KHURA BAR KATIA KUCHI, P.S- NALBARI, PIN- DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA, MIN OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI- 110001 2:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA REP. BY THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NIRVACHAN BHAWAN ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI 3:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 06 4:THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZEN REP. BY THE STATE COORDINATOR ACHYUT PLAZA BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI- 05 DIST- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER NALBARI DIST- NALBARI ASSAM 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) NALBARI P.O AND P.S- NALBARI DIST- NALBARI ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S NATH, MS C MEDHI Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., SC, NRC,SC, F.T,SC, ELECTION COMMISSION. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 24.06.2026 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. R. Saha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Ms. C. Medhi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M.R. Adhikari, 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 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 06.12.2019, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.1, Nalbari, in F.T. Case No. (N) 3851/06, arising out of IM(D)T Case No. 89/2002, by which the Page No.# 3/5 petitioner was declared as an illegal migrant of post 25.03.1971 stream. 3. It is suffice to mention that the petitioner, along with her evidence-on- affidavit, had exhibited 11 (eleven) documents, out of which Ext. 1 is a sale deed dated 16.10.1970 in favour of the projected father of the petitioner and Ext. 11 is the sale deed dated 08.10.1956 in favour of the projected father of the petitioner, namely, Late Jatindra Deb Nath. However, the learned Tribunal, in paragraph- 6 of the impugned opinion has referred to the said two documents as photocopies of registered sale deeds. Accordingly, in paragraph- 15 of the said opinion, both the exhibits were discarded on the ground that those were photocopies and were not proved in accordance with law. 4. On a perusal of the learned Tribunal’s records, it is seen that along with the evidence-on-affidavit of the petitioner, she had filed photocopies of all the exhibited documents and all the photocopies were signed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal No.1, Nalbari, as Ext. 1 to Ext. 11, clearly indicating that those were proved in original. The said evidence-on-affidavit is available at pages 80 to 82 of the TCR, and the photocopies of the exhibited documents, which were proved in original, appear at pages 83 to 97 thereof. The original sale deed marked as Ext. 1 is available at pages 98 and 99 of the TCR, which is duly marked as Ext. 1 and signed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal No. 1, Nalbari. Ext. Nos. 2 to 5 are available at pages 100 to 103, which are certified copies. Ext. 8 is the Gaonburah Certificate in original available at page 104. Ext. 9 is an affidavit filed in original and is available at page 105. Ext. 10 is a computer-generated printout of the NRC, which is available at page 106, but is not signed by the learned Member. Ext. 11 is the above referred original sale deed, available at pages 107 and 108 of the TCR. Page No.# 4/5 5. The oral depositions of OPW-1 and OPW-2 are available at pages 109 and 110 of the TCR. The Electoral Photo Identity Card and PAN Card of OPW-2, which were proved in original and bear a signature dated 26.07.2019. However, although those documents appear to have been proved in original, but no exhibit numbers were given. 6. Thus, the rejection of Ext. Nos. 1 and 11 on the ground that those were photocopies stands negated by the availability of the original exhibits on the TCR along with the photocopies thereof, which are also signed by the learned Member and marked as Ext. Nos. 1 and 11, which were also proved in original. Accordingly, due to the improper rejection of Ext. Nos. 1 and 11, the impugned opinion dated 06.12.2019, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.1, Nalbari, in F.T. Case No. (N) 3851/06, arising out of IM(D)T Case No. 89/2002, stands vitiated by perversity in the findings and accordingly, the said opinion dated 06.12.2019 is hereby set aside. 7. The matter is remanded back to the said learned Tribunal for a fresh decision in accordance with law after considering all the exhibited documents, including Ext. Nos. 1 and 11. 8. The petitioner, who is duly represented by her learned counsel, is directed to appear before the said learned Tribunal on 30.07.2026 and by producing a certified copy of this order, await for further orders that may be passed by the said learned Tribunal. 9. The Registry shall send back the TCR to the learned Tribunal along with a copy of this order to be made a part of the records by the said learned Tribunal. Page No.# 5/5 10. This writ petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above. 11. There shall be no order as to cost. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant