Foreigners Act, 1946 – s.9 – Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003 – r.4A(4) – Appellant was declared foreigner by the Foreigners Tribunal – The High Court upheld the findings of the Tribunal – Whether the findings returned by the Tribunal and the High Court suffer from any legal infirmity as to warrant an interference in exercise of this Court’s power u/Art.136 of the Constitution of India:
Held: Section 9 of the 1946 Act places the burden of proof on the proceedee to prove that he is not a foreigner – Consequently, the burden was on the appellant to establish by cogent documents or other evidence that either he himself had entered the territory of Assam prior to 25.03.1971 or his ancestors had entered the territory prior to the said date – The Courts below considered these documents – The probative value of voter list entries were discarded – The school leaving certificate was obtained 10 years after passing from the institution and there appeared no reason for obtaining it after 10 years – Moreover, the headmaster of the school was not called for to prove the authenticity of the certificate of which duplicate was produced – After considering the documents on record along with the evidence produced, the Tribunal and the High Court held that the appellant could not discharge his burden of proving that he is not a foreigner, the view taken by them cannot be held perverse, or manifestly erroneous, or unreasonable, as to warrant interference under Article 136 of the Constitution of India – That apart, it is not the case of the appellant that any material/admissible evidence was ignored or there was misreading of any of the documents produced by the appellant – Therefore, the view that the findings returned by the Tribunal and the High Court do not suffer from any legal infirmity. [Paras 13, 15, 16 and 17] Foreigners Act, 1946 – s.9 – Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003 – r.4A(4) – Whether on inclusion of the name of the appellant in the draft NRC published by the competent authority in the year 2018, the declaration made by the Tribunal, as affirmed by the High Court, would be rendered invalid:
Held: In view of the decision of this Court in Abdul Kuddus, consequent to the declaration by the Tribunal that appellant is a foreigner, the name of the appellant could not have been included in the draft NRC and, secondly, even if it has been included, it would not annul the declaration made by the Tribunal – The inclusion of the name of the appellant in the draft NRC would have no bearing on the order passed by the Tribunal, affirmed by the High Court, declaring the appellant a foreigner. [Paras 27 and 28]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.