Facts
The petitioner, Hajera Khatun, was referred to the Foreigners Tribunal 6, Sonitpur, Tezpur, on suspicion of being a foreigner who entered India after March 24, 1971
Source reference: p. 3The petitioner claimed Indian citizenship by birth (1967) at Jurgorh, Assam, and marriage to Miraj Ali in 1984
Source reference: p. 4-5To establish her claim and linkage to her projected father, Usman Ali, she produced several documents, including a 1966 voter list (Ext. 1), a Gaon Panchayat Certificate (Ext. 2), and an EPIC (Ext. 3)
Source reference: p. 5-6The Tribunal, vide opinion dated March 28, 2017, declared her a foreigner of the post-1971 stream, finding her evidence insufficient to establish the claimed linkage
Source reference: p. 3, 7The petitioner challenged this opinion via the present writ petition on grounds of defective enquiry and mechanical acceptance of the reference
Source reference: p. 3Issues
1. Whether the reference made by the Superintendent of Police (Border) was defective due to an incomplete Verification Officer's Report
Source reference: p. 3-42. Whether the petitioner successfully discharged the burden of proof under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, to establish her linkage to her projected father and her status as an Indian citizen
Source reference: p. 11Law Applied
Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, which mandates that the burden of proving a person is not a foreigner lies upon such person
Source reference: p. 11Manowara Bewa v. Union of India regarding the requirement that Gaon Panchayat certificates are private documents requiring the author’s testimony to prove the truthfulness of contents
Source reference: p. 8-9Ramila Khatun v. Union of India regarding the principle that proof of a document is distinct from the proof of its contents, and the latter must be established from contemporaneous records
Source reference: p. 9Sayam Uddin v. Union of India, which held that references arising from Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) "D-voter" markings do not require a separate police enquiry
Source reference: p. 16-17Reasoning
The court found that the petitioner failed to prove her linkage to Usman Ali, the individual named in the 1966 voter list. The Gaon Panchayat certificate (Ext. 2) was deemed inadmissible because its author was not examined, and it contained a disclaimer stating it was only a "supporting document"
Source reference: p. 8The testimony of the Gaonburah (DW-2) and the Panchayat Secretary (DW-3) was discarded as they both stated they did not know the petitioner and had only issued documents based on statements from her husband
Source reference: p. 6-7The court noted that most of the exhibited documents were photocopies and were not proved in original
Source reference: p. 7-8Regarding the procedural challenge, the court held that even if the Verification Officer's report was incomplete, the petitioner had participated in the Tribunal proceedings without demur, thereby subjecting herself to its jurisdiction
Source reference: p. 18Furthermore, as a "D-voter" reference, the Electoral Registration Officer's doubt was sufficient to initiate the process regardless of gaps in the verification form
Source reference: p. 16-17Holding
The court answered both issues in the negative and dismissed the writ petition. It held that the petitioner failed to discharge the statutory burden of proof under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, as she could not establish a legal linkage to an Indian forefather
The court affirmed the Tribunal’s opinion dated March 28, 2017, declaring the petitioner a foreigner of the post-March 24, 1971 stream, and ordered that the legal consequences of the declaration follow
Source reference: p. 18-19Original Court PDF
Hajera KhatunvsThe Union Of India And 5 Ors.
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in