The Gauhati High Court has established strict prohibitions on recording and live streaming court proceedings under THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (LIVE STREAMING AND RECORDING OF COURT PROCEEDINGS) RULES, 2022. These rules mandate that no person or entity, including print and electronic media and social media platforms, shall record, share, or disseminate live streamed proceedings or archival data without authorization. The Court retains exclusive copyright over all recordings and archival data. Any unauthorized usage of live streams is punishable as an offence under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, the Information Technology Act, 2000, and provisions of law including contempt of court. Additionally, parties and litigants-in-person accessing live streams are bound by these rules, and recordings cannot be reproduced, transmitted, uploaded, posted, modified, published, or re-published without prior written authorization from the Court.
Court No 5Added:
Keep.
The impug judgment and order dated 37 2016 passed by the learned foreign tribunal took is appelled and confirmed.
Repetition stands dismissed. In mod 10 seconds 1 to 10.
The repetition stands dismissed. The impure judgment dated 28 to9 appeal and confirm WBC7.
We have dealt with all the submissions including the submission of some blanks in the LV report. Then stream not mentioned. The repetition has been dismissed.
Item number 32 38 32 for 38 32 two that's two >> 32 minutes >> in from the other side >> yes ma'am already >> on a request made by SQ major leard CDC for the appalent maj to be listed on third of >> 1st of June >> yes sir >> one six number 11 My personal difficult I will leave the mayor >> next Monday. Next Monday. A prayer for adjournment has been made by S Islam learned council for the petition.
However, considering that this matter is a long pending one, a short short accommodation is granted directing listing of this matter on 16.
May please to mention item number 10. You lost 10. Yes. Maybe Monday of June. You lost.
>> Why? Why are you sticking at 19?
>> My health condition is not >> health. You look very fit and fine.
>> But sound is broken. You lost.
>> Problem is inside.
>> Yes. You lost. So on Monday only that till then I I'll be recovered. I think >> same order. Huh? 16 is a816.
>> Mr. Lordship. I to mention item number four lo for the day lo any >> why 19 joining madam >> yes lo >> why reason >> conducting council is out of station fix any day >> on a request request has been made by 16 item 416 you're not on record madam >> no request has make a difference. Yes, please number 15 and 23.
>> 15 and 22. Upgrade matter might be taken on next week.
>> No, we are upgrading these matters.
>> Have to leave early.
>> I have to leave early.
>> You have to leave early.
Allow us to leave early also. We also want to leave early but we cannot like some people.
Next >> some people do not attend in the second half we don't have that liberty >> yesterday I have submitted the adjournment list so >> that is that will that mean that adjournment is for granted okay 26 m 15 is 26 and the other matter >> 18 and 23 >> okay 26 matter you received 21 >> Monday okay uh your >> on the request of three h a learned Council for the petitioner mount to be listed at 16 separately. Huh?
>> May I please your lordship? My lord lordship pray for an accommodation in item number 30 of the daily list.
>> 330 lordship.
>> Yes. What is it?
>> Just in convenience of senior council Mr. HKIP.
>> What is the matter about matter pertaining to lordship >> on a request made on behalf of the appellent? Met to be in from the other side to be listed on when 3rd of June.
>> Second week of June.
>> Second week of on 8th of June.
>> 86 item number 30 for item number seven. Senior senior colleague is out of stations and he also apply for leave application also.
1st of 1st of June 1 item seven.
Yes, >> I mentioned item number five in this matter. I have been newly engaged earlier.
>> You have been engaged. You argue the case.
>> No, I'll argue. I'll argue after >> argue. Why? When were you engaged?
Yesterday I got that.
>> No, your name your local has been filed long back. Long yes.
>> So we have seen those. So those excuses are not going to work in this court.
>> Only two days.
>> Let it reach.
You don't need time to prepare Mr. Bora.
You are sharp council >> and you're making a wrong submission that have been recent engage yesterday.
I seen the >> yesterday only see the file for a matter today. Will you see a file one a week earlier?
>> Okay. On Monday on Tuesday on a request made by Shriha VP Bora 19 ming Tuesday 26.
>> May I please your lordship? I beg to mention item number 18. Your lordship.
>> Yes. We'd like to withdraw the matter.
Your lordship. Uh we have we have mistakenly missed out some important documents for the matter which is needed for this uh to >> what is your name madam?
>> Solj yes madam ver sj learned consent for the petition of submits that while presenting the repetition comma due to inadvertence comma certain important documents were left out full stop. See accordingly submits.
See accordingly prays for uh see accordingly submits that the repetition be dismissed on withdrawal with a liberty for also heard miss a verma learned so and so who does not seriously object to the foret prayer.
In view of the forced submission, comission is dismissed. Honor with liberty is paid for my judge.
>> May please me lords.
>> I'm in item 45 in the supplementary list today. Yes.
>> In orders, me lords. I'm going out on a limb and I humbly pray before this honorable bench mess with folded hands.
Me >> that the matter may be heard as a first matter.
>> Orders.
>> Yes. Mos.
>> What is this grave urgency? Urgency is not there. Milards the the thing is millets or not >> we cannot upgrade a matter unless there is greater urgency. These are 19 matters are pending >> you can give you a date another day.
>> Put utmost respect to the benches time.
Milards >> we we can today reaching you also difficulty it may not reach >> in my is why I'm making a mention >> on Monday >> my mal >> uh on a request made on behalf of the petitioner matter is a joint state on no not Monday Tuesday is a better day.
>> What is the matter? Uh it's an ABS corpus petition. I'm seeing a declaration and prayer.
>> Okay. You have made a 2 p.m.
>> Yes. Tuesday.
>> I'm so obliged. Obliged.
>> Uh what is the stage Mr. Benerjee?
>> Uh you know the stage is for I don't know why it is placed in orders. Mills.
Uh however the compliances were made on the 13th of uh November.
>> Let us just a minute. Let us see the record.
>> Yes. Yes. The last date of the uh the order was passed on 4th of November 2025.
Page three par seven. Yes.
>> File the returns.
>> Yes.
>> By R4. Who is R4?
>> Officer in charge.
>> What is your >> What is your stand Mr. Sharma?
sisters and >> who Mr. Benner who are four and five.
>> Uh four five and four is the officer in charge mullets of the Fatasi Lambar police station. Five is the second OCI.
>> Five and six.
>> Five and six. Five mils is the second OCI of Fatasi Lumbar police station the SI sub inspector and another sub inspector mess the arresting apprehending officer SI Sanjay Modi Mils. So Melab on the last date on the 4th of November I was supposed to this honorable bench the predecessor bench uh uh asked me to submit the full names. So at that time when I appeared before the police station they only told me Modi Modi. So therefore mil so thereafter I did my investigation found out his full name is Sanjay Modi son of Suraj Modi.
So thereafter mil. We need to take steps on >> I I took steps you know was on the 13th of November I served opposite parties number 1 to4 respondent number 1 to4 by hand >> no there is an office note of recent origin 165 2026 yes >> that is why this matter has been listed you should check the record then you'll be apprised what record says 165 a opposition filed on so and so by4 has been received okay no problem but neither card nor unserved notices have been received from responders Five and six in response to the notices issued by speed post on 171 2025 which you have said >> yes >> in compliance of the court's order under reference correction memo before HP has been tagged >> so there would be a requirement to wait for five and six or in the alternative you can take first steps on five >> first steps I'll take first step >> I think that will be that will expedite the matter >> and the matter if it there is no report we can have the matter checked by learned loa on the postal track.
>> Okay.
>> Your deep energy.
>> Yes.
>> Deep energy learned council for the petitioner also. Sharma learned state council parent office note dated 165 2026 has been perused. Posts.
We have also noted that the learn council for the petitioner has filed a correction memo.
What uh correction me uh giving the names complete names of the respondents five and six full stop.
Since there is no certaintity on the aspect of service of notice upon the respondents five and six comma let first steps be taken for service of notice upon the said respondent numbers five and six steps by speed post within two working days >> list on we give a date um today is 20 27th uh list on 19th of June along with service report. I'm so obliged. So, so obled my lord. In this case my lord the petitioners father my lord came from east while east Pakistan my lord now Bangladesh in the year 195354 my lord and >> just give us give us a minute just a tonight.
Mr. Py will be appearing sahaali alias shali in the in the reference it is shali mention shali >> alasali Where is which page is the opinion >> my page 50 >> 50?
>> Yes.
NXLP1.
>> Date of the opinion 257 >> 257 2018.
>> Which FT >> FT second?
>> No.
>> FT second.
>> Second. No.
>> Yes. What is your date of birth or year of birth?
My lord, date of birth, my lord, year of birth, year of birth, my 1974, >> what is the age disclosed in the affidavity?
>> 61 years my lord >> on in 2019.
>> 2019.
>> So what will be her year of birth? 61 years.
1961 1965 >> 1940 >> 40 years 61 years >> 19 what? 1965 >> 65 >> 60 H >> 6 >> Oh 2019 >> 19 not 60 >> as on 2019 >> back >> it'll be around 1960 I think or 61 >> 19 1958 man as on >> 58 >> 19 >> 19 >> 58 years 58 years >> no no 19 we on the year of birth. Year of birth >> 58.
>> 58.
>> Okay.
Okay. What is your case?
>> My petitioner's father came from East Pakistan now Bangladesh and he has registered himself as a citizen of India. My lord, page 21.
This is the certificate of registration.
My lord, he hails from district Dhaka village Joshua PS. under PS Shipur and since then my lord >> page 21 >> page 21 Radhaaran Paul >> Radha Pal son of late Ram Shundar Pal okay this is so far as the petitioner's father is concerned >> father is concerned >> now you have to establish a link Think >> my lord >> of the petitioner with her projected father.
My lord petitioner's brother brother's name is page >> 21 is 18460 >> 1960 >> yes >> 1841 1960 >> correct >> yes thereafter >> my petitioner's brother's name is lopal >> where are you from where are you My lord his list is page 23 >> 23 >> 23 >> alone >> alone my lord his father's name rahacharan >> this is what this which year >> this is 1971 lal >> brother >> brother my lord Take it in her WS. My lord, she stated, >> "Where is your document, >> my lord? My document, my lord.
only my lord Gbor certificate and >> list >> the brother's evidence >> list my lord she was doubted as a doubtful >> doubtful when >> in 1994 my lord >> 94 >> my lord >> but you are born in 1958 >> 58 >> around 79 you had attained the age minimum age to vote >> my lord >> and 78 >> that's why my lord link is my lord is a only only link is his brother. So my lord my humble submission before your lordship I want protection since it is clearly stated my lord his brother cididence also in the judgment also it is reflected that the petitioner's father came from east Pakistan and due to religious a fear of religious persecution my lord so my lord I pray for protection under the immigration and foreigner act 19 2025 Five specifically my lord uh the orders that is exemption order my lord exemption that is >> foreigners act 19 2025 >> 25 and exemption immigration and foreigners exemption order 2025 Five.
>> What about the CA? You are not entitled to benefit of CA. My lord CA uh CA it is not applicable because my lord I I protection especially my lord under this act because this act given protection under original my lord act that is 19648 48 orders foreigners order 1948 order three capital a that is my lord after subsequently amended by this act immigration and foreigners exemption order 2025.
So my lord specifically my lord if is specifically exemption is given under that exemption order 2025 3 e order 3 e >> capital >> small my lord >> this is of new act new act >> new act under the new act and originally it was three capital a under the foreigners Order my lord.
>> Now it is >> now it is immigration and foreigners act 2025.
Now that is uh immigration and foreigners exemption order 2025.
>> Order E.
>> Order three is small E.
So my lord it is clearly stated uh that the provisions of subsection 1 2 and three of section three of the act means my lord this act immigration and foreigners act 2025 no present is an act or order 2025 is also order >> order. So that will not be act is something different. Uh following following the act I'm reading exemption order three book sorry we have I'm talking compilation.
24 US what is there Mr. P. What do you say? Go broadly.
>> By the 2025, the immigration and foreigners act or order >> exemption order.
>> Immigration 2025 was that on the basis of section 33 of the order immigration and foreigners and foreigners exemption exemption. Mhm.
That is probably my senior friendly order.
It is in fact one of this has been brought subsequent to car to facilitate the provision of car because here there is no provision of registration here in this but they are exempted.
They are accepted but they have to register under cards provision >> but that cannot be without any rigors.
>> Anyone and everyone cannot go and register himself.
>> Yes ma'am.
>> He has to fulfill the requirements >> requirement provided in the >> there are some provisions but that these documents must be there.
>> Mr. day is very is very candidly submitting that instead of pursuing the present challenge.
>> Yes, >> he would like uh if an he would be happy if an order is given there is no restriction as such for him to apply.
Yes, there is no restriction. Even pendency of this petition is not part for application under this >> then you can withdraw this or what >> my lord I am I press for exemption as >> understood. What about the challenge to the opinion dated 257 2018 that opinion is the subject matter of challenge.
So my I have stated in my petition my lord.
>> No that challenge what will happen to the challenge? Are we withdrawing the challenge or would you like ask to answer the challenge?
>> No my lord I I press for exemption >> that is a subsequent what about the challenge to the opinion? opinion declared you a foreigner.
>> My lord, >> if you can if you withdraw if you draw the challenge >> that opinion I have challenged because I have specifically mentioned in paragraph uh 27 my lord page 16 that it was the duty of the learned member tribunal to consider that aspect of the matter.
>> Mr. Today we have understood but there is an opinion against you declaring you to be a foreigner.
>> Yes, >> that is the subject matter of challenge.
>> Side by side you have stated that you may be entitled to some benefit under the 2025 act.
>> Yes.
>> So now we are required to pass final orders. We can we can we can pass orders on merits either accepting or declining to accept your prayers so far as the challenge is concerned. But irrespective of what we hold, you will always be entitled to apply under the 25 orders. So therefore we are asking you will you like to withdraw your challenge to the order in principle and we pass an order that uh this 25 orders 25 you'll be getting the benefit or would you like us to answer the challenge in on merits?
My lord on merit my lord on >> see priaside there there are no documents we can >> only document that his father was registered as a >> no that is so far as your >> claim under 2025 rules >> may may I pray my lord in this regard one judgment may I place one judgment of this honorable court what view has taken by that my lord judgment my lord my lord I I like to give the my lord uh citation my lord I could not got extra copies my lord that is supreme supreme today my lord uh supreme today 2022 supreme goati 1369 equivalent to 2022 forg 4 to6 >> 2020 >> 20 >> 2022 zero supreme Goarti 1369 page party name is Uttam >> and Union of India >> GLT citation >> GLT >> GLT GLT 2022 4G glT >> page >> page 426 Party's name is Utam Goss versus Union of India decided on my lord 236 2022 my lord in paragraph 56 57 58 59 60 I beg to refer my lord what is there my lord in paragraph 56 Six.
Apart from the importance attached to citizenship by the honorable Supreme Court as well as by the court this court as referred to above and in many other decisions of this court. What is important to be noted in this particular case is that procedi is claiming to be a son of a person who had taken refuge in this country after the independence on account of the religious persecution in the then east while Pakistan and who was granted Indian citizenship by way of registration in 1956 under section 51A of the citizenship The fact that many persons like the present >> today you have not understood us. We are not on the legality of the your of your prayer so far as consideration under the 2025 orders are concerned.
>> We are asking you a very pertinent question.
The there is an opinion against you.
Yes.
>> Declaring you to be a foreigner.
>> Now that opinion is the subject matter of challenge.
>> Challenge. You are you going to withdraw this challenge and have an order from us for consideration under 25 act >> or will you will you like us to answer the challenge also?
>> No, my submission is that I I was also raised this point before the tribunal that I have I have my father came because of religious >> what will happen to the >> that was not considered.
>> So what will happen to the aspect of the opinion which by which heed ground also my lord that opinion can be my lord decided because I have raised this point >> different point that we are considering we have said >> my lord >> so so for holding on marriage that you are not an Indian citizen then you can apply that's a different matter if you want us to answer the challenge we'll answer it or if you want to withdraw the repetitions you can pray for a liberty to apply under the 24 that part that are part of The opinion we can think we can say something.
>> My lord, kindly see the judgment. My lord, it is a page 52 my lord. Page 52 at the first beginning page 52 first paragraph.
My lord during clarification over this above statement he has stated that they have they came to India due to conflict between Hindus and Muslim. they are they they were retreat from east Pakistan out of fear. So my lord that point I have raised before the tribunal also and the land tribunal ought to have considered that consider that my lord uh by dent of the earlier 1948 act that was not considered that is my humble submission will the tribunal have the jurisdiction to decide a challenge on this ground or will it be before the appropriate authorities >> I leave your worship because it's true this you his protection under that means my sub >> who will determine whether you are entitled to that protection there's a particular authority >> my lord my >> is not the authority >> my submission is that my landed tribunal since the landed tribunal has not decided this point so your lordships may be decided on that point >> so Mr. There is no question of deciding us. These are questions of fact. There is a particular authority under the 25 act as well as the orders. You have to approach that authority for getting the benefit. That much liberty we can give it to you.
My lord question of registration under this exemption order so far I think my lord subject to your lordship's correction there is nothing about the registration if is exempted there is nothing to be no direction to register themselves >> because it is exempted that is suffici is so she may also be given that now as your pointed out rightly there is no link to show herself sex is the particular person now unless that is proved she will not get benefited by that is why could not have go to that aspect now this issue of coming in 2019 after that 2024 there is Stenc has specifically provided exemption as per the act they are exempted but how they will get the benefit the benefit how they will get that is given in the rules they have to apply before the central office for a long-term visa and until until and unless they >> which roles We we are to we have to see under under the order 25 order is not there specifically mentioned by it is exemption orders. No no no no I'm coming to that now the exemption has what exemption provided pilot I I would like to read I like to read that first of all the 2025 rule order exemption order has exempted the petitioner from three points of the act section three of the act we have to see the act what are exemption these are exempted from these three are exempted Section three of the immigrants and foreigner act 2025 >> act >> foreigners immigration and foreigners exemption order it >> they have to apply for which authority of central government >> which authority of central government >> concern they will have to apply there is a >> yes there is a committee the details procedure is there in 2024 rules matter car rules 2024 the detailed proced procedure is given now by the exemption order the person has been a person belonging to minority community of Afghanistan Bangladesh and Pakistan namely Hindu sik prison were compelled to seek shelter in India due to religious persecution for fear of religious persecution and entered to India on before 31st day of December without valid documents including the passport of travel documents or with valid documents including passport or other travel and validity of such documents have been expired they have been exempted prior to that the provision of subsection 1 2 3 of section three of the act and rules 789 of the rules with regard to the passport and other validity to traverse will not apply to this category of persons. So we have to see what is there in section one two subsection one and three of section three. What is there in section 3?
Section three of the act number one 31.
No persons proceeding from any place outside India shall enter or attempt to enter India by air, water or land unless his position of valid passport or other travel documents and is a case of foreigner. also a valid visa and for so they this provision no person will enter in India that is exempted they can enter due to this this category of person they can enter secondly not standing second provision not standing anything contained in the section 350 passport 1967 no person shall defer or attempt to depart from India by air water whatever movement so they can be deported from India India.
So that is second exemption. And the third exemption is the immigration officer may examine the passport or other travel documents and buy visa of foreigners during his entry into transit say stay within India and also require him to harness such information as may be necessary and appropriate. So they are exempted from doing this.
They Indian authority will not do all these things money under this exemption.
Now why K necessary? A person who came from is Pakistan or Bangladesh Afghanistan but he is Hindu sick and he has come due to religious persecution they are exempted.
Now whether they will be citizen of India or not they can remain here for the time being they can be given asylum.
>> Whether they can be citizen or not that is not clear. That is not here. It has to be silent.
>> We have to go to that >> under citizenship. He will have to apply for citizenship >> and till then he will be exempted for 6 years under long-term visa. He can apply for long-term visa because he is not a citizen of India. He's still now a foreigner but he is exempted.
>> And this provision enables the person to enter in India in >> enter legal legally but without papers.
without papers. He may enter illegally illegally but they exempted from doing this cannot. Yes, >> because due to religious persecution have he this this is qualified by religious persecution that due to religious persecution they entered. Now he the person the present person he she is exempted from this doing all these things. Now whether she will get citizenship or not that will be decided under car by the central government.
There is a committee who will have to may not go through all the documents whatever she applied there are some criteria to show that he has come due to religious persecution all this has to be examined then only for the time being he can apply for longtime vision he can stay that is the provision that's why I'm saying it should be it should not be it each and every act has to be and those has to be reached harmonious this is not is a separate one. Obviously by this is just enabling the provision of car because in car citizenship amendment act under citizenship back this amendment and they have been given liberty this this this exemptions are given in citizenship act itself by under by 2019 citizenship.
So this is enabling here also.
>> But uh if a procedure a link with the parents what will happen? Oh, that's why another submission was there is a provision in the rule by 2025 rules they have 11 categories of 11 numbers of documents which has to be produced by the proceeding or the informant the by the applicant that I have come from east Pakistan or Pakistan or Afghanistan due to religious question those document one of any of the document has to be produced before the authority now that's why My submission was that >> so there there might be a slight difficulty in this case. It is not the case of the petitioner that she had entered India due to religious persecution.
>> She says that she is the son daughter >> of Radhapan >> who had migrated to India in 1960.
>> It is up to the central government.
Central government may exempt that provisions also. This if she applied it in numbers of cases it may be another aspect my because >> what my submission is it may not be terable because she has been declared to be a foreigner coming from east Pakistan >> correct >> if she gets that order there is a determination that she's a foreigner who has come from east Pakistan so she may get the benefit without in fact she should not have ch instead of challenging is kind of border on the basis of disorders he can go to the resting >> I I'm minority there in East Pakistan >> that is what we asking Mr. That's why he is by a different tangent.
>> Yes. My suggestion was that only section 33 >> section 33 of the immigration and foreigners act 25 my lord >> on the basis of this rules of frame rules >> on the on the basis of this my lord this power is vested upon the in the principal act 25 milot section 33 power to exempt in certain cases the central government may by order published in the official gadget declare that all or any of the provisions of this act or any rule or order made there shall not apply or shall apply only in such circumstances or which such exemptions or modifications or subject to such conditions as may be specified in such order or to or in relation to number one. A the citizens or class of citizens of any such country as may be so specified or B any other individual foreigner or class or description of foreigner.
So my lord under this this provision the exemption order has been passed my lord.
>> Yes.
There are another act this exempting the application of this act. This exemption is order has been passed under this provision. So if protection is my my understanding my subject to correction of your lordships then exemption order is exemption order exemption from the act of the principal act foreigners immigration and foreigners act 20 2025 and this exemption order under protection protection is given under the exemption bypassing the act >> order cannot by the order is clear my lord is exempted from section exempted from the principal act by this order that is my understanding so exemption by this order my lord that's why I'm saying subsection 1 2 and three proved yes he can he can he not specifically he's exempted from coming to section 33 my lord clearly this act is not applied when exemption is given If you lying at least seated order 2025 I I like to read the entire order which exempted it is not only people from Pakistan if we see in exemption the provision of section three I'm reading Again the provision of sub section 1 2 3 and se of section 3 act and rule 7 8 9 and of the rules with regard to the requirement of valid passport or other valid travel documents and valid visa for entry into stay entry into stay in and exit from India shall not apply in the following cases subject to conditions mentioned there namely so only these are exempted.
He can stay. She can stay.
>> Not get citizenship.
That is the only choice. She can stay.
She will not be thrown out, but she will not get citizenship.
Yes.
>> Second stay here.
>> Yes. Yes.
My lord, my interpretation direction of your lordship >> only car I only CA.
My lord, page paragraph 27, my lord.
Paragraph uh paragraph 27 of my repetition, my lord.
have stated in paragraph seven also my lord another another act my lord immigration expulsion from assemb that under that act also he protected my lord section two of the immigrants expulsion from assam act 1950 50 page 16. Mil 1950.
Page 16. 16. My lord. Paragraph. Second paragraph. My lord.
and uh 27 116.
My lord, that the petitioner further states as per as her parents came to Assam from East Pakistan due to fear of civil disturbances, communal riots and due to religious persecution, they are protected under the provisions of section two of the immigrants expulsion from Assam Act 1950 and they should not be deported from India. The learned learners tribunal number two did not consider that aspect.
My lord, that section two of the act. My lord, if the may I read my if the central government is of opinion that any person or class of persons having been ordinarily resident in any place outside India has has or have whether before or after the commencement of this act come into India.
and that that the stay of such person or class of person in Assam is detrimental to the interest of the general public of India or any section or of any fidel tribe in Assam. The central government may order direct such person or class of persons to remove himself or themselves from India or asham within such time and by root as may be specified in the order and gives such further directions in regard to his or their removal from India or Assam as may consider necessary or expedient. Provided that my this is provided that nothing in this section shall apply to any person who on account of civil disturbances or fear of such disturbances in area in any area now forming part of Pakistan has been displaced from or has left his place or residence in such area and who has been subsequently residing in Asham. So they are my lord protected on the expansion act.
by this segment. Apart from those categories of person, prosecution of civil disturbance, they could be thrown out to immediately there was no provision of foreigners order in 1950.
So this act was in fact this act is applicable still to using this Yes, we can remove they directed to remove themselves.
This is expulsion.
>> This is expulsion. We used to expel them but my submission was this was not necessary at this projected father was there in 1960 according to him. Had she could clearly establish herself her to the projected father. All these arguments were not necessary to then it could be a different case because his father is seems to be foreign Indian in 1960 because he whether he has migrated or that is not an issue but he was there in 1960. Only thing is that only problem arises here is that mother she could not establish herself to her projected father that's why we she may given the benefit of otherwise she's citizen by birth if her father is an Indian if she could establish that 1960 person is his father her father there was no question of registering etc no question of exemption this question doesn't arise linkage is not That that is why >> my lord linkage linkage in the brothers if your lordship considered the brothers evidence my lord >> provision of law >> and and and my lord ws my lord she stated that pal is his elder brother she he get married his sister that the petitioner to not >> so my lord brothership if your lordship consider the brotherhance then it Brother's evidence my lord relations my lord relations evidence my lord one judgment is there my lord brother evidence Illiterate lady that the problem entire problem arises my lord she has not gone to the on the dead steps that's what my lordship says I have placed all my my lord my lord that is the question mark my lord that doubtful so my lord under protection my lord that can be passed my can be passed the protection that's sort of >> my brother is uh page 42 my lord page 42 do.
>> Sorry.
24 25 Shapali shapalik is shapali actually she is shapali and in in her she clearly stated my lord that shapali shapal dw3 my lord kabura Page 48 my lord for it 48 Moafali.
for more.
Fore!
Foreign! Foreign!
foreign.
for more.
My English official Official record mention only only my lord his brother's evidence is important only his brother evidence and my lord in that regard my lord brother's evidence Brother Sen uh page 43 DW2 Foreign speech. Foreign foreign foreign speech.
Foreign speech. Foreign speech. Foreign speech.
for moyur.
for Junujib.j Hindu Muslim or uh Only only registration certificate only registration certificate father since the father's name is only no documents has given the only statement the brother since since he is claimed the brother so rel blood relation my lord that's why my lord in in one case that is brother's relation my lord it is given in roarab's case my lord this honorable court held that the brother's evidence is relevant documentary only my registration certificate father's name is same so son and daughter my lot statement of relations that is that is has been considered In this case, broader relations.
My lord, in this case, same my lord brother has given evidence and this honorable court held that uh from the from the opinion it appears that the petitioner apart from filing her written statement and aducing evidence had also examined her elder brother as DW2 which finds reference in paragraph 9 of the opinion while the learned tribunal had elaborately discussed The implication of the various evidences reduced. The learned tribunal unfortunately as submitted by the landed council for the petitioner had not referred to or considered the said evidence in the form of deposition of DW2.
Now it is well settled that whenever a decision making authority takes a decision, it is obligated to take into consideration all the relevant facts and materials. And if any relevant and material fact or material has not been taken into consideration by the decision making authority, the said decision arrived at cannot be considered to be valid. In the asthma says it will be shed due to non-lication of mind on the important material or evidence. It will be equally true of a decision rendered by foreigners tribunal which is question judicial bing. In our opinion, evidence of DW2 will be highly relevant and material and as such the issue before the tribunal is to determine the citizenship of the petitioner relating to which the evidence of his close relative become highly relevant and material. So that aspect is accordingly we are the opinion that the landed tribunal having not considered the evidence of projected elder brother of the petitioner its opinion would stand beated.
So this this is my lord held by this quote in Roshan space me that is right petition number 7893 2000 >> my lord I have I have it is judgment ara roa Citation WPC 78 9th 2022 citation probably it is the one uh 72 2022 yes 7 2020 in that case it is clearly said that TWW2 was not considered but here it is considered yes definitely It has to be considered evidence.
>> Yes.
>> Yes.
>> Yes.
>> No discussion.
>> Yes. That's fine.
>> Yes.
Yes ma'am.
Definitely relevant if brother comes along with the document.
But if whatever has to be considered but if it is not considered definitely.
>> Yes.
Yes. Yes.
is that there is no evidence to give her son to her projected father. Yes, I think one person projected father was there in 1960.
And from the evidence of the oral evidence of DW not is not enough to establish her need to project that is the only asalenc and mother came before this trial. Their evidence is discarded in absence of other documentary evidence to link themsel to each other. So that is another matter during 19 prior to 1971 the process the citizenship has provided how to register if he comes from east wherever from that time this 1964 order was not there. So if they want to register they have to go through a certain province certain system they have to wait for seven years in this wait for as you know six years section five six five of the citizenship provision is given that now the car has amended to this provision for enabling this provision. So that the person here it was subject to the provision of this section of this section and such other conditions and restrictions as may be present. The central government may on application made on in this behalf register a citizen of India any person not being an illegal migrant.
>> Here was the question illegal migrant who is not already a citizen of so if he's not a illegal migrant he can apply under section five. Now these classes of person mother who has come due to religious pursuit >> and he will not be an illegal migrant due to this illegal.
>> No he will not be an illegal migrant due to these provisions >> and they can apply under section five.
>> That is the This is not like this. What does Thank you.
Everybody's there to talk after 6 years after 6 years.
I don't think There's some for six years.
and kind of direct.
after six years.
Okay.
as to why this matter this Friday.
I think six may the worship worship in order at page 41.
Yes. This 41 in order petitioner was declared as a foreigner of 1971idas on the ground that link was not not established otherwise uh in The impion order her father was declared as a citizen of India. Documents were found but linkage was not established.
register lead of uh >> my lord.
Uh I had exhibited my lord linkage document as maris certificate that is uh lecture exhibit >> with father.
Yes.
>> It was issued by my lord. Oh my lord.
>> Who car?
>> Nobody was FDR because mar certificate at page 626 and it was issued by >> my lord. I have stated in my pleadings that uh due to the uh negligence of the conducting council because uh she is a layman she doesn't know how to prove this document she had submitted but u >> yes that very >> so author of this document was not called upon depos.
So it was discarded. Second page >> my lord >> page 26.
>> It is a type copy and the original copy is 27.
So it looks on the office of circle officer.
It was issued.
>> No, it is not a certain my it's not a minister >> my lord. It was issued by the circle officer.
>> Uh maybe my lord on the report of the mandal because he has a knowledge of the factual in ground reality.
But uh >> this is not a medicine.
My lord, another link is one.
>> My lord, >> yes.
Uh what is your uh year or date of birth?
>> Date of birth is uh 19, my lord.
stated >> you know the date or you will go by the year.
>> There is a year my lord.
>> Year of birth.
>> Yes. Yes.
1964.
1964.
Okay. The opinion is at which page is at 41. My lord.
>> 41.
>> Yes.
Opinion is dated.
>> Opinion is dated my lord. 256 2019.
>> 256 19. Which FT?
>> It is my lord. F >> number eight.
>> FT number eight.
>> 8 Tb.
>> Okay.
Yeah. How many DWS did you file?
Uh >> it was filed my lord. Uh on 10th of uh >> how many >> my lord?
>> How many DWs?
>> After how many days?
>> How many DWs? How many witnesses?
>> Witnesses. How many witnesses?
>> Yes. Witnesses my lord. Here uh only one witness that is yourself. Yes. The petitioner >> younger brother of the younger brother of the petitioner >> petitioner did not reduce the evidence.
She she also witnessed >> that is what we are asking how many two witnesses >> two witnesses DW1 and DW4 >> two DWs one is petitioner >> yes >> and two >> two is brother >> younger brother >> named >> Lanchandra Das Len >> Lon >> Lon >> Yes Lanchchendra Das >> Yes. What are your documents then?
documents similar. Uh exhibit exhibit A is uh a sal >> at page 11. It is a 19669 documentaries that my father knows had purchased a land.
>> Page page >> page 11 which date >> it is uh 176 1969.
>> Norandas.
>> Yeah. Nores Chundraas son of Mukunda Chandraas.
>> Norris is your father.
>> Yes, my father. Nores Chundraas purchase land.
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
So second document my lord uh petitioner had uh exhibited that is exhibit B citizenship registration certificate at page 19. Father.
>> Yes. Of father.
>> Page 19.
>> Page 19.
But here my lord, what happened that uh the year of that registration is not uh visible and uh accordingly that document was not considered page 19. It is type copy only first two digit are visible that is 143 but year is not visible and then my lord exhibit C page 21 1971 water In the name of my father Norandas page 21 >> 21.
>> Yes.
>> Exhibited >> that was exhibited.
>> Where is the original?
>> Original it is 22.
It is a computer generated one.
>> Yes.
Nores son of Mand 71. Okay.
Acceptable computer.
Another border list was exhibited that is 1997 having the name of the petitioner.
Uh at page 28 >> 20 >> SP 24 >> page 44. Yes, >> I just text copy and uh 25 is the original >> 1997.
>> 1997 >> exhibited >> after her marriage.
>> That is the problem.
>> Yes. With her husband.
>> Husband name is reflected there. Pushani then my lord marriage certificate is page 26 issued by the circle officer my lord >> when did you get married >> uh in 1982 1982 >> where have you stated >> I have said that in I in my petition >> in your written statement you have stated.
>> Yes, I have stated in >> regarding our marriage in 1982.
>> Yes.
>> Where which >> there is a slight difference in my written statement.
Uh at page 36, my lord 36.
>> Yes, it is. Here it is.
>> 35.
>> Yes. 1998.
>> Marriage.
>> Marriage. Yes.
>> 98.
1998 1998 to >> page 36 it is some mis mismatch is there six >> otherwise in the certificate >> no have you stated in 1998 which which paragraph >> it is page 36 >> yes >> pay parag Class six my shifted.
>> Yes.
And in the year Oh, you got married before to 1998.
>> Yes. But in the my uh marriage certificate it is stated that in 1982.
>> No, you have not stated that in 1998 you have got married. You have said in 1998 it shifted and before that you had got married. I think that is okay >> my lord. My lord sorry got married. Why do you make your case >> from bad to worse?
>> Sorry my lord. Here >> got married to susant das and in the year 1998 death.
>> Yes my lord.
>> So marriage was prior to that.
>> Yes.
>> But uh you have not given the date of marriage.
>> In written statement there is no date actually.
>> Yes.
shifted to this.
What your next next let us go next after 35 what is there after 25 list of 2027?
>> Yes, >> you have got a 27 page 27 uh certificate. Yes ma'am. M certificate.
>> No no don't term this as M certificate.
This is what circle officer >> circle officer >> certificate by date 196.
What is the date?
>> Date is my >> 2015 >> 20 22nd March 1982 >> is 26. No. 196 26 >> 166 2015 196 2015 196 >> certificate by >> by the circle officer >> circle officer it is >> is certified daughter of renewable >> actually m it was issued by l mandal and the counter Signed by circle officer.
Thereafter my lord a linkage documented this gora certificate page 28 issued in the year of 2015.
So in this case also my lord the author of this document did not appear before the >> even the department did not appear >> my lord and uh additionally this uh certificate was rejected on the ground that state emblem is there page page >> page 29 9 type copy at page 28 original is 29.
It was rejected that unauthorized state emblem was please read what is this?
This is by the whom?
>> By the gauura.
>> Gauura of my lord. It is uh >> date >> 15.
>> What is the date? 156 or 16?
>> Yes. Yes. It is uh 166. 2015 >> 2015 >> 2015 that is the it was issued from the birthplace of the petitioner that is vetagago under udaluri district >> you be not exam not examined >> he was not examined thereafter my lord uh DW2 that is my younger father at the post and uh his statement is page 33 at page 33 >> 30 >> 33 my lord >> what about 30 >> uh 30 it is my lord uh his evidence in se starts at 30 >> yes 30 >> evidence of brother >> brother >> on a bit >> on a bit >> and where is Cross examination. Cross examination page 33. Type copy.
>> Yes. The op is my elder brother. He stated she was born at Betagaw in the year 1964.
She got married in the year of about 1985. He >> said here in 1985 with the Susan Pradas of Kushigo. My mother was late renovaladas.
My father was born at Betagal.
My grandfather was late Mukund Chandraas. The Opi is residing at Nuruandanda Misamari. My father resided with me at Kubiha due to his illness. No foreigner case is pending against my member of our family except the Here it is stated that uh her marriage it is uh was uh solemnized in the 1985 and certificate says it is 1982. So on that ground also the rejection was inevitable by the planet tribunal.
And uh these are the documents supporting documents my lord.
So basically my lord tribunal has held that uh yes there is a sufficient proof that uh father of the petitioner norm of das was found to be resided in in the territory of India before 1971 but linkage was not established since uh meta certificate as well as gabbora certificate was not proof. in the format of the required by the law and uh regarding the statement regarding the malar evidence of DW2 uh there is uh the tribunal did not uh given much importance to this uh evidence my lord uh literally rejected this uh evidence and uh have arrived this decision that she is a petition, she is a foreigner of 253 1971. My lord, so my lord uh here although this is uh I have staken this plea in my pleadings that uh uh this might have been the uh ignorance or negligence of the conducting council that he could not uh he did not uh bother to call upon the author of this documents to depose before the tribunal.
But uh as a layman she uh here my prayer would be that uh she may be given a second chance to approve this documents so that she can deliver her burden of proof under section 9 of the foreigner act 1946 and uh uh in regard to the statement of the DW2 that was not considered otherwise it is also a cause and proof although it is oral evidence but it is a closing proof that his uh her younger brother has depos oral oral evidence >> oral evidence my lord anything My lord beyond the record I could not >> citation >> my lord citation uh this uh rejection of oral evidence of DW2 True.
>> Yes.
Well, at present I have no sation in this regard. Uh so you produce the citation after the decision is given otherwise my lord uh the evidence of uh the younger brother as per evidence act and uh See, we are not doubting the probative value of the oral evidence by a family member.
>> But in the subject matter which we are dealing with, there is a requirement to support all oral evidence with documentary evidence. That is the law.
Oral evidence is relevant but that by itself will not be sufficient. It can only uh lend support to existing materials >> which are to be available in the form of documents.
That is what is the reading of all the laws and conclusion if we arrive at >> we're not saying it is irrelevant.
>> Section 50 of the evidence act is there.
We have to reconcile 50 with section 9 of the foreigners act.
>> How a burden of proof is to be discharged.
That's all >> mal uh I will produce uh citation.
>> No, you cannot produce.
>> If you have to produce produce at 2:00 give the list of citation we reserving for judgment after hearing Mr. I will submit.
Mr. Shade was about 55 years in the year 2019.
Though he sometimes born in 1964 he said already stated his first right is from 1985 but till 1997 there is no list in respect of the petition first list of which >> here I have 1997 I have is is along with her husband lordship.
>> Yes.
>> Not along with her father. Lord apparently lordship is failed to prove his group with the person whose name reflected it in 1971 is or the person whose name was registered in the year of 1986 and evidence of brother is here but there is no connection with with the brother along with his father lordship that also has to be proved lordship there is no link between naras and brothers projected brothers along with his father so other link document certificate these are lordship notable document and and apart from that did not come before the tribunal.
I think not tribunal rightly rejected this document because emblem was at the top of the certificate already certificate and exhibit. Yes, >> the exhibit was exhibit F is page 28.
>> 29 is the photographic.
>> 29 is the original and relying on document.
>> He's from which village? Tanapara tanapara.
>> This tanapara tanapara >> tanapara originally it was my lord.
So but that locality is my lord VGA >> and the proced belongs to which village Mr. He was bad.
>> She Yes. She was better >> under Majikos Moa. Moa is same my majimo.
>> That's all.
>> That's all. Even officer has issued one certificate not officed to give such kind of certificate apart from that he was not come forward to the trial.
>> What is the name of the land?
>> He may be a pur also nobody knows.
No then not possible.
cannot priest.
>> He's not is not a priest.
>> Yes. Well, at this juncture I may lag agree. I must submit that my lord if he may be award she may be awarded the benefit of k >> that will explode that will explode >> my lord >> that will explode we will consider that will be there >> and exemptions under the immigration and foreigner sect 1925 is there okay any any citation State.
>> Which one? Rupagean or Rupjan?
>> Rupan.
It is in respect of government certificate.
>> Not Rupjan.
>> No.
>> State.
State emblem. Vasan.
is >> no.
2018 for second.
>> Okay.
Rest we have some citation we have been citing these days 14 13 and 14 not 2018 347 >> 134 Mr. Thus by 2:00 you kindly give some at least one or two citations which and including the paragraph numbers. Okay.
>> And what is the point you are relying upon? Just write it down.
teammate.
>> Yeah. Yes. What my infin order at p 46.
Just a minute please.
6893.
Bush. Yes, mother.
With this surname, you are a foreigner.
Why?
You have adopt have adopted this surname.
>> No in uh >> possible >> in Bengali community as well as in Assam community bushu is common s >> even in Bengali.
>> Yes my lord.
>> It's a but very rare my lord >> you said very common not found just now it said common then you become rare.
You must be adopted this surname to get some benefit.
>> We have not I have never come across any anyone single one.
>> Yes ma'am.
>> It's a typical surname.
>> Yes.
very rare.
>> Are you related to Sharma's friend?
>> Not related.
>> She'd have got some benefit.
>> Well, otherwise uh it is uh her name.
So >> where is the opinion page?
>> My letter 46 46. Yes.
>> M I had exhibited before the Lana tribunal.
>> Just a minute. Please.
>> Yes ma'am.
Date of the opinion 89.
>> Yes.
18.
FT 7th.
Yes. Seven.
Yes.
Okay. Your uh date of birth, year of birth, >> year of birth my lord is 19 uh 52.
>> Exact date is there 2nd of August 1952.
>> What do you is there? Date of birth is pankard is there. My >> 2nd of August >> 2nd of August 0 to 8 >> 1952 >> 52.
Uh, how many DWs?
>> My lord, >> how many witnesses?
>> DW here only one. She only witness.
>> Yes.
>> Yes.
>> So, my lord, exhibit A, >> where is your written statement? Which page?
>> At page 12. Well, >> yes. 1964 sell it.
>> Where is your written statement?
>> The written statement might find at page uh page uh 36 17 12 17 What are your documents? Docus is 70 1964.
1964 at page 12.
My father was Monuranjan Sarcat.
She got married with Wisha mother.
here my lord about the citizenship of my father there is there was no doubt but the thing is that linkage uh me this case was conducted during the uh hustle bustle of uh NRC upgradation so she could not uh obtain v list relevant var list and could not submit before the land tribunal. So there is uh not a single hotel list was exhibited before the planet tribunal but subsequently she got subalist I have annexed in my repetition.
So my lord first of all I may draw uh lash's kind attention to at peace uh 22 it is a 1989 voter list giving a relation with my father page page 22 >> these are not 35 not exhibit exhibited Not certified copies.
>> This document was not exhibited.
>> It's not certified copy also.
>> It is not a certified copy my Yes, it is.
>> What is there here? So, so what is your father?
>> No, no, no, my lord. Sorry. It is uh my husband. Uh there is a document I'm trying to show.
It is with my husband. So my here uh uh opinion from the foreign tribunal that is at P41 my lord.
Uh I have a next here that uh that was drawn against my sister.
She is Mayarani and she was declared by the Lana tribunal that not a foreigner citizen of India. So in her relation and uh to show link >> page page >> page >> page it is my lord uh 41 may circle 41 one.
It is my wishes.
Order dated order dated 013 1999.
>> Uh 21416 >> my lord.
>> Not 99. 21416.
That is the >> Yes. Yes madam.
That was previous reference mam. It was passed on 20 21 2016.
And here Mayani Bushu was declared to be a citizen of India. And her relation with my father that is uh Monurangjan is reflected at pace page 18. My lord ralist of 1989 this Mayani is your sister.
>> Yes my lord.
>> Now what is your what is your document to show that my is a sister?
>> That that is the gap my lord. There is no document.
>> How will it help you my lord?
is the father of his dad.
That one exhibit two is a mar certificate.
Page 20.
Two or three documents were exhibited before the learner tribunal. One of the document is mar certificate >> page page >> page 20 my lord >> 20 >> 20.
It was issued from the da punch >> exhibited. It was exhibited m >> 21.
>> Yes. As exhibit two originally page 21.
>> Marriage certificate.
>> Yes.
>> Not marriage GP certificate.
>> Yes.
What has been stated? It is stated that uh my father is Summon Mahanar and uh mother is Bimola resident of Siraata that is uh in the district of Sunitpur and I have stated in Sorry.
>> This man, what is your age?
>> My age it is 1952. As of now, >> huh?
>> 1952 was date of birth.
into 73 years.
>> As of now, I'm 74 years old.
>> 74 years.
>> Yes.
>> In the marriage certificate, you have been stated as 70 years.
In marriage certificate, it was issued in 201 15.
>> 15 70 years.
>> Yes, it is. It is 70 years.
>> Punchad secretary was examined.
He was not examined. Not true. Yes.
Other exhibits like uh oration card, motor identity card all these were exhibited.
Panchad secretary not examined. Then what what other documents did you produce and prove?
It is a P card that was issu exhibited.
>> Pard will not help you my cannot be helped. showing my father >> page >> page 33 >> 33.
>> Yes ma'am.
It was exhibited as uh I think >> exhibit what?
>> No, it was not exhibited.
>> Not exhibited.
>> Not exhibited.
against here in this repetition I have managed consecutive list is uh showing my name but uh relation with my husband. It is >> what is list of which years? It is from 89 93 2005 >> 1989 93 >> 2005 >> 2005 >> 13 16 uh and next year my lord >> those were exhibited >> my >> approved >> no these documents were not >> not exhibited just uh for the first time I have annexed in this petition So what are these documents which you have exhibited based on sale?
>> Sell it >> by father.
>> Yes. to show that your father was an Indian citizen so far as 1964 is concerned.
>> Yes ma'am.
>> So the vital aspect is to establish a relationship with your father namely man >> moan sir.
>> Now the second exhibit is a JP certificate.
Punch secretary has not been issued not been examined.
>> Yes.
>> And what is the third? Third is electoral voter identity.
>> Which one? It is >> dated date my lord. It is which year?
>> It is 2013 I think.
>> 13 page my lord at page 34 ID card. Oh >> I epic. Epic is not epic is not a ID card. My epic is not a this thing. Proof proof. This has been proved.
>> Yes.
>> Huh? As >> year it is 70 years.
>> No. No. The proved as exhibit >> exhibit three. Exhibit three. My lord.
>> Epic is not proof.
>> My lord.
It was issued on it is in the year of 2013.
And fourth is my lotion card.
>> Card my lord here.
>> Card here. My lord. Exhibit four. I have not I have not enched here but it was exhibited before the tribal as exhibit 4.
It is in the records.
>> Yes. Should be four.
>> Rational card indicates what?
>> Ration card. Uh showing that uh her name and relation with her her husband. Yes. But here it is. Not a next.
My lord, in my petition I have stated that I got married with uh Suda in the year of 1967 and subsequently my name appears uh all the subsequent whatever is from starting from 1989.
>> Where have you stated in written statement?
>> Yes. uh written statement there is I have in written statement it is very 36 >> 36 36 m >> you have uh once you have led us to the written statement is 36 okay 36 written statement okay summary written statement We have heard of summary order. We have not heard of summary written statement.
My love >> Mr. Sharma. What is the summary written statement?
>> Yes.
>> Mr. D is coming up with new expressions, new ideas.
>> Summary of the written statement. It's possible to make it In my repetition I have stated you have stated where you had got married.
uh in parition is repetition there is no specific statements but in mind anything else my lord at at last but not the least uh I will be able my lord the benefit of ka as well as the act of immigration as well may be given to her mother.
>> Mr. Sharma, same submission like like the last case.
>> Yes. What was this certificate?
No proof and a similar case between 2018 3GT or 2018.
3GT 347. here regarding consult certificate has been >> what is that I have >> paragraph >> paragraph 59 15.1 same thing certificate same certificate they say this certificate is based issued based on evidence placed before me same thing has been mentioned in this paragraph 15 certificate 2015 secretary certifying that was the daughter of Junabali. At the top of the certificate government of Assam was prominently printed. It was also mentioned in the certificate that same was issued on the basis of the evidence placed before the secretary. Firstly this document does not appear to be a genuine document in as much as a gam is not a department of the government of Assam. Therefore, government is not authorized to use the letter government of Assam with that therein. Secondly, the secretary of the government did not testify before the tribunal along with the evidence on the basis of which agreed the certificate was refused to prove the certificate as well as the comp. Therefore, this certificate was not proved. Thirdly, Supreme Court has clarified in Rubadan beam versus Union of India reported in 2018 one SC579 that s certificate of government secretary is by no means of proof of citizenship. Such a certificate has to be verified at two stages. At the first stage, authenticity of the certificate itself is required to be verified to find out as to whether it is genuine or not. The second stage of verification relates to verification of the contents. There is nothing on record to show that activity had under any such verification exercise. Therefore, activity cannot be accepted as a valid piece of evidence. 10.
Regarding what is the 2018 >> 3 GMT 347 15.
>> What What do you see on Russian card?
Our discussed on previousship 2014 GLR 295 >> 495 >> 295 >> 29 >> GLR >> Yes sir.
>> 295 Name >> S A R U S H E I K of India.
six.
>> Yes.
>> And 16. Finally, exhibit six is a copy of the ron card issued by the government of Assam in the food and safety supplies and consumer affairs department. This card is in the name of Basia B of that is the pet. There is no date of issuance of this ration card which makes it highly suspect and certainly ransom card cannot be treated as a proof of one citizenship.
Therefore narrative which was projected by the petitioner that he is the son of a citizen of India and born in India cannot be believed regarding regarding and loyc 2016 >> 3 5 4 7 of 16 >> 16 Lord it is reported >> name name >> baboon >> baboon baboon >> bc 3547 of 2016 I have to clarify 2023 GLT 5 to1 >> paragraph >> paragraph 20 in respect of 10 card 16 to 20 21 and 21.2 Two lordship lordship 20 only discuss about card and >> okay epic lordship it is in respect of epic lordship it is said in so far exhibit 7 electro photo identity card is concerned besides not being proof it is a post 71 document besides merely producing sen identity card in absence of supporting evidence would not be proof Okay.
We'll try to have one more m in the second half there. Thereafter perhaps it will not be possible. We'll sit around 210.
Okay.
>> Tell us what the what are the names of your parents >> in her evidence is also there my lord.
Page 39.
>> 39 written statement.
>> Written statement.
Evidence. No, no. Come on. Come to the written statement where page >> written statement. It is not an >> close.
record. Kindly check the record. Mr. >> Yes, >> written statement is there.
>> Yes, sir.
>> Filed on >> filed on 245.
Which p of which p of record?
>> 194 2015.
>> Yes.
>> Any any mention about the father parents?
>> No lord. Only that part was reflected.
My father's reflected in the portalist of 1966 as >> as what and so >> as as Lord Noi Hussein Noi Hussein >> father no Hussein and mother >> mother's name was Samala >> he's not saying he doesn't have the instruction you have not been so we asked you who sa you said you said you do not know You do not have any connection at Osmot.
You have brought in only because of a linkage before to make it before 1970.
Along with there is one name of sonal son, one hazer.
Now thereafter therefore you have got 1977 there is another nose.
not connected person name is This two name may be different.
Yes. After page 18, which page 18 then my lord page >> 20 Do anything.
The school certificate has been exhibited approved >> at page 22. Not is not exhibited.
24 date 281, 2016.
Gabur had had deposed >> depos.
>> What is written here in this certificate? Please read >> certificate it was rejected because this state emblem was state emblem was used.
Therefore, >> it doesn't matter what is the cont what are the contents? content.
Please read please.
Word number three.
So and so in a Iosauri tanner to do.
But since last Um yeah washer.
Oh yes. Oh yes.
This was discarded because of use of national emblem.
Wool certificate my lord here one mention in the order part my lord uh exhibit five according to order my lord opinion it is full certificate my lord as part my learn is saying my is not exhibited but page 74 of the opinion my lord exhibit Five is stated to be certain >> age 74 >> 74 clause 10 exhibit five is stated to be schools are present.
It is proved Mr. Uh Sharma >> there is a mention of school certificate >> certificate >> at page 74 >> exhibited but not perhaps not exhibited perhaps did not come by >> exhibit certificate but it is not that the school authorities did not come to What else there after? Another page 25.
This is uh this document. So far I know was issued at the time of NRC as per guidelines to prove linkage counter counter signed by the block development officer in the disclaimer column below Down below it is clarified that my in the NRC purpose it was issued. It may be it may be added that this certificate shall be accepted only as a supporting documents for establishing linkage with the parents of the aformentioned person for whom the certificate is issued. This document shall be valid only if the accompany made by legacy data or any of the other admissible document issued for the person with whom the linkage is claimed for inclusion in updated NRC NRC purpose >> only for NRC purpose >> NRC purpose that there's a guideline given by the honorable Supreme Court what kind of document may be relied upon for proving the linkage. This document is one of that kind document.
>> It was not exited. It is not exhibited in the record but not exited. What exited?
>> The record but not exited.
Next.
Next. My direct one document.
>> This is not certified copy.
>> No.
>> 2019.
>> 19.
>> Not certified copy.
14 also.
14 at page 29. Where is your name? 29 month page in the serial number 822.
My right hand side my page 29 right hand side after my lord cre person her photograph is not there only name and her husband's name is page 31 serial number 781 >> 35 >> 351 >> 3 is which year?
2010 my >> 11.
>> Oh, sorry. It is 11. Then page 33 is the lord 10. 2010 2005. Another my lord there. Uh page 31.
What is the serial number?
>> Page 31. My lord. Serial number 781.
Page 33.
>> Page 33, my lord. 775.
>> Not not exhibited.
>> Not exhibited.
Page 35, Mall, serial number 732.
It is 2005 33 is 2010 10.
>> Where are you? Serial number >> serial number 775.
2005 my another list page 35 here my lord B is added serial number 732 two.
33 is also not exhibited.
>> Not exhibited.
35 is also not exhibited.
This is pertaining the year 2005. My load are name appearing at serial number 7 32 with letter D.
>> Even 33 had letter D.
>> Yes.
>> 33 did not have letter D.
>> Yes ma'am.
Letter D is there my lord. Perhaps >> 33 >> 33 of page 33 D is there. Perhaps in the malard dx there has not mal printed but here my d is visible in my page >> 33 also d is visible >> page 33 pertaining the year 2010 is there is there number >> serial number 775 >> what is there no d is there is Right now after page 35 my lord pertaining the year 2005 my lord serial number 732 with letter D again my lord >> is which year 2005 >> 2005 >> serial >> serial number 732 Yes. Here my lord some NRC poems my lord submitted just to show my lord family members.
It is not a next my lord but just to show the family members my lord page 37 onwards my lord it is given my lord >> who has prepared this >> it is at the time of my lord this form was required to be my submitted >> this is your docu filled up this is relevant at all >> yes page 39 are evidence My lord, according to her, my lord, page 40, clause 9, I have two brothers respectively, Muhammad Samoj Ali, Muhammad Majul Islam and include wei, me, we we are five sisters respectively. meat mus.
I believe this my knowledge She was married my lord close 11. I was married in about 19 years ago with Abdul Kasim son of Abdul Malik village Udmari Moa NPS Durya district Naga Assam and P. Presently I am permanent resident of the above. I believe this is my knowledge. I have three children. One is daughter and two son. I believe this my knowledge.
Police do not properly investigate otherwise all all should be prosecuted together then better evidence would have come my because there are normally if police goes to any part of my definitely this person will show entire family dynasty Then why not all should be prosecuted together. Then why not all should all the better documents why not together?
Muslim model is very clear my lord conducted inquiry >> not police.
>> Yes my >> because according to her statement there are >> so Mr. What are your clinching documents?
Documentary evidence based upon which your claim for citizenship can be inferred.
>> My lord, >> my father's my lord.
>> No my lord. No evidence is there my lord. If father my lord my humble understanding my lord is that my lord father is claiming he is not yet declared foreigner. Is there any document of yours connecting your name with the name of your father?
>> If a school certificate >> school has not been proved, the gamura certificate has been proved. We can we can look into the gamba certificate that is for consideration. Rest are not relevant.
>> Gabbor came as DW3.
>> Yes ma'am.
Now we have to read evidence page 48. I have an extra >> that would be 48.
>> 48 in 12.
I Muhammad Rondon early aged about 61 years son of late so and so village so and so that I am the permanent resident of the above not territory and amian citizen by school. I am the government gabur of village so and so. This is true. I know the above mentioned bos party.
She was born at village so and so. This is true. The opposite party's father's name is Mahm and her mother's name is Muhammad Ku. This is true. The opposite part is grand.
father's name is late Amat Ali and her grandmother's name is late.
This is true. The opposite part is father Mahmi and her mother resi about 13 years ago. The opposite party's father the village and residing now with his familiar village.
Yes.
The evidence of the gamura is there but Mr. Sharma. Yes. Yes.
>> Yes.
>> Yes.
Nurse is cross examination.
H >> use not cross examination examin not the on record 35. This is on fourth quitt no cross pro.
Before the courtyard queries put by the courtship only that deposition has been given a edit of international code uh from OPW number three.
forchech.
Foreign speech. Foreign speech. Foreign speech.
Exhibit More ideas from one book.
What are your views Mr. Sharma? Lordship on evidence by lordship and during deposition before the court he does not say that lordship may deposition was uh based on any record lordship was not based on any record lordship and lordship when he filed evidence on a deficit on NTH1.
>> That's it was not based on any record.
>> Yes. Lordship and it is based on only personal knowledge that will not will not have the petitional lordship and lordship in evidence partipular record 334.
>> Go record. Yes.
>> Record 33.
Which case you waiting for?
We may not have time after this.
Tomorrow is a holiday so you can leave early.
But that is one one sentence three sentence whether all are based on his personal knowledge or are there any verification authentication authentification with with the documents >> that was not mentioned notification >> not mentioned >> Mr. certificate goes only my lord at page 49 of the in my application my lord and part my lord part my lord here he stated under my clause n my lord opposite >> page 49 >> yes >> clause nine opposite part is grandfather's 10 grandmother's name was enlisted In the electoral v list on so and constituency so and so village so and so and so there my lord 10 in the electoral bal list of so and so opposite parties father and mother's name are enlisted under 84 number but conuency and so and so so and so >> it is there no it's not there mentioning will not be there certificate is required to be proved from contemporary record which are required to be proved Yes sir.
>> That certificate cannot be granted in in support of these two documents.
Electoral voter list of 7797.
>> Where is your voter list or any document? See Gauora certificate has made a link of you and your father. So that needs to be supported by contemporaneous record means record what are records of that period. So what has he referred to? Even these are not production of records. Even if you assume that these are production of records, he has referred to 66 and 70 voters list and 1977 and 1977 voters.
All these we have seen 66 66 is Osmot and sonatan nothing to do with you. 70 is Osmotaban Rustam Hazer nothing to do with you. First time 1977 one Nobi has come and one Sumla that is no problem. There is no problem with Nobi and Suma. They are not the proceeding. But this after this >> 97 >> 97 B 20 gap 20 years gap and that to Noi and Suma nothing to do with you. Your name has to be in one voters account which has parents and their continuous stay from 19 post pre970 has to be proved. Even a gap may be at times uh we can excuse a gap. Mal I bet my linkage DC 77 father's name and his name his father is mentioned whose name is also there in the 1966 and 77 my lord then my subsequently my lord some documents >> father's name is not there in 66 >> not 6 77 my lord but the person who is in the year 66 and 70 my lord uh his name be shown my as father of my lord this noi push in the year 197 in that case the complication may arise also kindly come to page 16 and 18 >> 16 and 18 there are four names okay is your grandfather is your grandmother as as per your projection and one rustam and one hazer >> okay cannot be the son of Usmat.
He's 54 years old.
He cannot be the son of Andaban.
>> He He may be my lord. Son of a >> huh?
>> Amat my lord.
>> How can he be son of a 64 he's 54?
>> Age my lord?
>> That that that is besides the point.
What point we are trying to say is in 1977 the the father's name has come for the first time in 1977 with age 35.
>> Yes.
>> Now if if Nabi is your father connected to Rustm.
>> Yes ma'am.
>> Then where was Nabi in 1970? 70 he should have been there along with us not all documents are my lord not submitted my lord discrepancies are there my lord discrepancies >> no see discrepancies which can be ignored we definitely do there are minor discrepancy even supreme court has said provided other things are consistent in the case of sirajun Yes.
Indians are also sending my lord after 1977 >> when father my lord is deposing my lord my lord unless father is prosecuted my lord one person is saying >> that is from ganda lordship what is I have not got what is it?
>> Father has proceeded.
>> Yes. No. Father was my opinion before the tribunal.
>> Yes. What what has he said?
>> My he accepted >> that his daughter.
Malad one malad person is yet not prosecuted or malard deemed Indian my lord and uh >> let us see his evidence father's evidence >> have we enclosed >> enclosed >> paragraph page >> page 44 my lord >> 44 let us say 44 Please read close one. My lord that I am the permanent resident of the above noted address and am an Indian citizen by birth. This is true to my knowledge.
I know for opposite party she is my daughter. I believe my statement are true to to my knowledge. I have two sons respectively Muhammad so much Ali and Muhammad Mo Islam and five daughters respectively Mushammed Pulsum Kun Musad Kun Musatma Kun Mama Rumina Kun Muhammad Parina Kun I believe my statements are true to my knowledge. My wife name is Musama. So Sola Kun I believe this my knowledge. My father name is late and my mother's name is late.
I believe this my knowledge. Me and my father mother there is a permanent resident at village. Mr. Uh Sharma please see page 19 of the records written statement.
See what what has been stated regarding the siblings.
We can record this page 19 page 19 of record siblings.
>> Yes.
He's silent.
>> Silent.
>> Yes.
>> Father says he he has two sons and five daughters. That means there are in total seven siblings including the petitioner.
There's no mention in the statement. Right.
>> Yes.
>> But in her mother, she stated individual followership page 40. My lord, paragraph 9 page paragraph please.
>> Page 40 paragraph 9. This is my lord.
Evidence part.
Paragraph 9. My lord, I have two brothers respectively. So Jali, Muhammad, Mo, Jul Islam and include me are five sisters respectively.
So, so bleeding is not there but evidence is there.
>> Yes, >> there's one case law cl that you cannot expand >> yes sir >> your uh version which you have made in the written statement >> the evidence is required to be confined to those you cannot expand the Nominally >> nominally correct.
>> There cannot be a variance. That is the expression used. Variance between >> pleading and proof >> 2017 GT 1076.
between pleading and is not >> that is the principle of civil law >> yes >> but uh can it be applied strictly that's the law that unlimited restriction of rendering of their needs while there They need to give importance to the investigation.
This if investigation is properly done whenever case will come alert there would not be any room otherwise cases are being referred mechanically.
My lord without proper investigation my lord Muslim mandal is very clear my lord to give emphasis on my investigation is silent in respect of it 96 onward member this is very categorically given full benching >> 2017 72 yes anything else no this one >> any citation you'd like petition against Krishna master. What is Krishna master?
Check it. 2010 2010 12 sec 324 why Rupajan has been cited by the petitioner Rupajan will be against the petitioner >> in the other case which was argued by Mr. Das >> Rupajan has uh in detailed uh disc made a discussion regarding the ga child certificate.
>> Yes.
>> The authority powers.
>> It expiated upon the uh the powers >> Yes. of government secretary. Kindly check this.
>> 12C 324 Ali also have a look. There are two copies.
This one is not required.
I think paragraph 47 he has marked it.
Okay, you have a look in the meantime you can Mr. Ali you have a look at this Krishna master >> regarding certificate I want to rely on a decision of this 2018 forg 373 >> 2018 >> 373 number was not given here >> 2017 2018 yes also 373 >> 373 Romeil par 22 I have marked 22 it is that documentary evidence would have to be proved on the basis of the record and the contemporaneous record must substantiate substantiate and prove the contents of the document. Proof of document is one thing and proof of content is another. Not only the document would have to be proved but its contents would also have to be proved.
That part the truthfulness of the contents of the document would also have to be established from record. A document or contents of the document cannot be proved on the basis of personal knowledge.
This is in respect of Gabra's certificate lordship. This is par 22 probably lordship marked and lordship in return statement if we return statement 26 one has not been followed by the proced because here date of birth was not mentioned place of birth was not mentioned and name of his parents, grandparents, everything has not been mentioned properly. Although he has she has stated in her readings that my father's claim has been reflected in the list of 1963 or seven grandfathers has been reflected in the list of 196 as so and so but he has noted that so and so and no positive statement.
>> No positive. Yes. In respect of death of participated in paragraph number five that the answering opposite party read up to class four situated at zuja under the district of noa assam and according to according to school certificate her date of birth is 11 1978 that much only he has not stated that my date of birth is so and so and according to My date of birth was inserted in the school register as Lord that was not reflected. So no positive statement has been made in the WS lordship one dat and after that lordship has already pointed out since 1977 to 1997 there is no con no appearance in respect of her parents or any other family members lordship although fat projected fat came and deposed before the tribunal lordship See and float.
Regarding evidence lordship, our high court has decided in nasia kon's case WPC 4020 2017 paragraph number 16 >> not WPC number 4020 of 2017 >> disposal >> 2111 2019 19 >> name >> A S I A K H A T WL.
>> The statement of DWIN who claimed to be the father of the petitioner cannot be relied upon in the absence of any documents showing his relationship to the petitioner.
In this we would observe that in a proceeding under foreigners act 1946 and the coroner's tribal order 1964 the evidentiary value of oral testimony without support of documentary evidence is solely insignificant.
>> Oral testimony alone is no proof of citizenship. The evidence of DW2 does fall short of being considered as coent reliable and admissible evidence so much so to establish linkage of the petitioner to him. And if we see the >> Lord just 17 date of disposal >> 2119 >> 2111 2019 >> it's not reported no matter evidence was reported 20 >> no same it is on same footing not >> norbeam 2023 G 347 >> 2020 20 >> 3 GLP 347 >> N U R N O R N >> N >> paragraph >> paragraph six lordship lordship regarding lordship case lordship I am relying Fat weapon 13 dropship.
This written statement of the petitioner was fully inadequate and did not disclose any material fact as noticed above. It was the allegation of the state that the petitioner was a foreigner. Therefore, as per mandate of section 9 of the foreigner act 1946, it was the bount duty of the petitioner to have disclosed all material facts which were specially within his knowledge in the region statement but he did not do so. petitioner neither mentioned his date of birth nor his age. He was silent regarding the name of his mother and identity of his grandparents both paternal and maternal. He did not mention anything about his brothers and sisters or about his marital status. On the basis of such written statement it cannot be said that petitioner had stated anything substantial to show that he was not a foreigner but a citizen of India. It is a settle proposition of law that where a party fails to set up a case in his pleadings, he would be dearred from aducing evidence in his support at this stage of trial. As a matter of principle, variance between pleadings and proof is not permissible.
>> Correct.
>> Okay.
So here in this case link between and also not establish this projected father no >> and amod >> and amod was known come because if we put this chip his name reflected in the list of 1977 no at the age of 35 years.
If he is 35 years, his name should be reflected in the potterist of 1971 lordship also in 1966 also lordship his name should be there along with his other lordship but it is not there and lordship stat in 14.
>> A Z A Z I Z.
>> Yes.
A Z I M Y >> MIA.
>> Yes.
>> Uh citation >> citation 2023 for GT 246.
Connected WBC number is 2370 2020.
>> 246 >> 246 >> WBC 23 >> WBC >> 2370 2023 pair of 14.
>> We are constraint to observe that claim by suspect 2370 of 2370 2023. on new matter >> decided on 69 2023 96 2023 0906 2023 par 14 I am reading we are constraint to observe that mere claim by suspected person by referring to a claiming a person therein to be his is not a conclusive proof and that by doing so the person has discharged the burden that he is not a foreigner This is because there is also a further requirement to prove that the person who is reflected in the fter's list relied upon is actually the father of the person who makes the claim the claim will have to be substantiated with further material materials accepted in law.
scholarship here in this case although no husin's name reflected in the list of 1977 >> and connected person's name has been reflected as but that as that link has to be established by further material by using some further reliable evidence should be placed to establish that link between asmot and no lordship that was not there in this case.
My humble submission is that apparently pro has failed to establish his name which is projected parents from grandparents who is continuously residing since 1966.
And regarding school certificate, I think Lord I need not to make permission lordship in respect of school certificate as it was not lordship.
Already law has been set in respect of school certificates that related issuance of school certificates some doubt in more than This certificate was issued on 10 to 2015 whereas proceed there is one major thing which you should have you should point out. You should you haven't pointed out >> not yet.
>> See the endeavor of the petitioner is to create a link.
>> Yes sir.
>> Therefore 66 70 and 77.
>> Yes sir.
>> After 70 kindly note 77 has been used.
Why 66? There is one Osmot Ali and one Sunan BB.
70. Why 70? Osmot is still there. Father is not there. But one Rustam has come in.
>> Yes.
>> See the age of Rustam in 1970.
>> Yes Lord.
>> At P 16.
>> Yes. 54.
>> 54. This Ram cannot be the son of Ammat.
>> Yes Lord.
>> Okay.
>> Yes.
This rust if this Rustam the uncle so-called uncle he is also the uncle at 77 kindly see what is the age of Rustam in 77 after 7 years he is reduces by 10 years >> yes Lord >> have you noted this >> yes Lord >> 70 he was 54 in 77 he becomes 45 >> 45 years >> reverse >> yes Lord >> so this by no means can be the other which is along Osmot.
>> Yes.
Yes.
>> Could not have been. That is the only purpose why 66 from 66 it has been tried to be linked. 66 70mm. 77 Osmot is not a rust comes in. And how rust is connected? Because of 70.
>> Yes.
>> Rusmat and Osmot. But this Rusmat cannot be the Rusmat of Rust. So Rusttom of 1977. Yes.
>> Cannot be.
Yes.
>> Unless and this Had Katon also see why our the Hunch is appears to be fortified. This Hazer Katun who is the uh maybe the wife of Rustam her age in 1970 was 27 and after seven years her age becomes only 28 >> always this kind of mistake they do my lord I have seen my in the list I have found my >> and ultimately who suffers Mr. suffers >> that's it is my personal level I have seen my without mistake my there is rare name in the list >> one way one way or two even little mistake should be there such a vital matter >> no no uh minor inconsistencies can be uh it's not overlooked can be considered that That is what honorable Supreme Court has also said in uh the case of uh >> Sirajulhawk where the grandfather's name was Kataha all along in one vot but honorable Supreme Court has in paragraph 3 has laid down a rider all other things are consistent names of father village everything else in the same voters list are consistent except the name of M and F in two voters So on that ground tribunal had uh had given an rendered an opinion of as foreigner upheld by the high court but interfered by the supreme court. So in ma matters where inconsistencies can be considered uh provided other all the other things are consistent it can be done but here the inconsistency appears to be very grave but let us see we'll check the records also yes if my lord one chance is given I'll be satisfied my lord because full certific appears to be very difficult let us Uh we'll consider >> but I will try to furnish some judgment with case number Friday. Friday we will deliver judgment aware that judgment judgment we not aware >> how can we be aware what judgment you'll be supplying we not know >> if you have some judgment you can give yes early in the morning on Friday >> okay we arrest matters the court master will give dates may not be possible Yes.
Related Videos
Trump Impeachment STORM IGNITES as 29 Judges Vote for Conviction!!
DanielBriefDaily
2K views•2026-06-02
सुप्रीम कोर्ट में 5 जजों का शपथग्रहण समारोह #supremecourt #judges #oathceremony #shorts #ytshorts
Bharat24Liv
4K views•2026-06-02
THE STREISAND EFFECT AT BARBARA STREISAND’S HOUSE! - First Amendment Audit
KULTNEWS
1K views•2026-05-30
Jury seated in the Frisco Track Meet stabbing trial — opening statements set for tomorrow
Wfaa8
343 views•2026-06-03
Monkton family worries husband who murdered wife could inherit all of her assets
WMAR2news
152 views•2026-06-02
ترمب وأسواق المال الأميركية.. كيف أنعش "رأسمالية المطلعين"؟ - شرق غرب
AsharqBusiness
282 views•2026-06-04
They Dismissed Every Black Juror in the Karmelo Anthony Trial — Every Single One
Tim_Black
406 views•2026-06-04
How a Court Clerk Broke the Murdaugh Verdict: How Becky Hill Primed the Jury
GuiltyWords
192 views•2026-05-30
