Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010132262025 2026:GAU-AS:9859- DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1936/2026 KABEDA BIBI @ KABEDA KHATUN W/O- MOHIBUL HOQUE @ MEHEBUL HOQUE, D/O- LT.. KALEMUDDIN SK., VILL- CHAGALCHARA PT-I,, P.S. AND DIST- DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA,, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, SHASTRI BHAWAN, TILOK MARG, NEW DELHI- 01 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHUBRI P.O. AND P.S. DHUBRI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) DHUBRI P.O. AND P.S. DHUBRI Page No.# 2/7 DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301 5:THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY NIRBACHAN BHAWAN NEW DELHI-01 6:THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 7:THE STATE CO-ORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTRATION OF CITIZENS (NRC) ASSAM BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-0 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M MONDAL, MR M CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, ECI,SC, NRC,SC, F.T,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS O R D E R 15.07.2026 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. L. Devi, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the FT & Border matters; Ms. S. Katakey, learned standing counsel for the ECI; and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate for the State respondent. Page No.# 3/7 2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the impugned opinion dated 25.01.2023, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.1, Dhubri, in F.T. Case No. 4298/D/11, corresponding to (Police Ref. ‘D’ Voter Case No.576/D/07) by which the petitioner was declared as an illegal migrant. 3. In view of the nature of the order proposed to be passed, this Court does not deem it appropriate to burden this order with the pleadings and evidence on record. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for the F.T and Border matter has made his submissions in support of the impugned opinion dated 25.01.2023. 5. It would suffice to mention that in support of the statements made in the written statement of defence, the petitioner had examined herself as DW-1, her projected mother, namely Majiron Bibi, as D.W.-2 and one Khairul Alom, Tax Collector at Adabari Gaon Panchayat as D.W.-3. As D.W.-1, the petitioner had exhibited the following documents:- 1.Birthe Certificate (Ext. 1). 2.G.P. Certificate (Ext. 2). 3. Electronic Certified extract translated copy of E/Roll 1966 (Ext.3). 4. Electronic Certified extract translated copy of E/Roll 1970 (Ext.4). 5. Electronic Certified extract translated copy of E/Roll 1977 (Ext. 5). 6. Electronic Certified extract translated copy of E/Roll 1989 (Ext. 6). 7. Electronic Certified extract translated copy of E/Roll 1993 (Ext.7). 8. Electronic Certified extract translated copy of E/Roll 1997 (Ext. 8). Page No.# 4/7 9. Electronic Certified extract translated copy of E/Roll 2005 ( Ext. 9). 10. Electronic Certified extract translated copy of E/Roll 2010 (Ext.10). 11. Electronic Certified extract translated copy of E/Roll 2014 (Ext. 11). 12. Electronic Certified extract translated copy of E/Roll 2018 (Ext. 12). 13. Final Khatian (Ext.13). 14. Kecha Patta (Ext.14). 15. Elector Photo ID (Ext.15). 6. The D.W.-2, along with her evidence-on-affidavit had exhibited her Electoral Photo Identity Card (EPIC for short) as Ext.A. 7. The learned Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record, had discarded the birth certificate of the petitioner (Ext.1), on the ground that the petitioner had failed to prove the document by calling any authority. The Gaon Panchayat certificate issued by the Secretary of Adabari Gaon Panchayat (Ext. 2) was discarded as it contained the State Emblem, which the Secretary was not empowered to use. 8. The petitioner had exhibited certified copy of electoral rolls of various years as Ext.3 to Ext. 12, which were discarded as the electoral roll was not proved through the contents of the voters list. The final khatian (Ext.13) and Kecha patta (Ext.14) in the name of projected father of the petitioner, were discarded as they were not proved by calling any authority. The EPIC (Ext.15) of the petitioner was discarded as it was not sufficient to prove the linkage. Page No.# 5/7 9. It would be relevant to quote Rule 8 (1) of the Assam Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999, which is reproduced herein below:- 8. Extracts of Registration entries to be given under Section-12.- (1) The extracts of particulars from the register relating to births or deaths to be given to an informant under Section 12 shall be in Form No.5 or Form No.6, as the case may be. 10. From the above quoted rule, it is noted that the jurisdictional Registrar of Births and Deaths is required by the said 1999 Rules to provide extracts of particulars from the Register relating to birth and death to the informant. 11. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that insofar as Ext.1 is concerned, as it is an extract which is legally permissible to be given to the informant, the petitioner would be entitled to an opportunity to call for the records to prove the said document. 12. In respect of the electoral roll of previous years, which were exhibited as Ext.3 to Ext.12, it appears that the said documents were issued as certified copies of the electoral roll and they were valid if duly signed by the learned Member. 13. In the examination of the petitioner by the learned Tribunal, no questions were asked to the petitioner regarding the said Ext.3 to Ext.12 disputing the correctness of the certified copies of the electoral roll. However, in view of the law laid down by this Court in the case of the Isiron Nessa vs. Union of India, (2019) 4 GLR 685: 2020(3) GLT 531, wherein, it is held that certified copies are admissible as secondary evidence, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner should be provided with an opportunity to call for the electoral roll corresponding to the said Ext.3 to Ext.12 to prove the same. Page No.# 6/7 14. In respect of the certified copy of the Khatian (Ext.13) is concerned, applying the same principles, the petitioner would be entitled to call for the original records to prove the said exhibit. 15. In respect of the kecha patta (Ext.14), which was exhibited is the original document for which, it is not required to be exhibited by calling for the original records. 16. In light of the discussions above, in respect of Ext.1, Ext.3 to Ext.12 and Ext.13, the petitioner is found entitled to an opportunity to call for the original records to prove the secondary evidence. 17. Accordingly, the matter stands remanded back to the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.1, Dhubri for a fresh decision after giving one opportunity to the petitioner to call for the relevant with documents from the concerned authorities. 18. The petitioner, who is duly represented by her learned counsel, is directed to appear before the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.1, Dhubri, within the outer time limit of 21.08.2026 by producing a certified copy of the order, shall also take steps for calling the original records of the above referred Ext.1, Ext.3 to Ext.12 and Ext. 13. 19. It is made clear that in the event the petitioner fails to appear and take steps as directed, it would be permissible for the learned Tribunal to complete the petitioner as absent on call and proceed to decide the matter in accordance with the law. 20. The Registry shall send back the records before the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.1, Dhubri as expeditiously. 21. The writ petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above by Page No.# 7/7 remanding the matter back to the said learned Tribunal. 22. There shall be no order as to cost. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant