Supreme Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Order Of Foreigners Tribunal Which Declared A Woman Non-Indian
The Supreme Court recently directed Foreigners’ Tribunal, Kamrup, Assam to consider afresh plea of a woman against whom an order alleging that she had entered Assam from East Pakistan after 25 March 1971, was passed by the tribunal ex parte. The petition was heard by a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice Dipankar Datta The matter was concerning an order of the...
The Supreme Court recently directed Foreigners’ Tribunal, Kamrup, Assam to consider afresh plea of a woman against whom an order alleging that she had entered Assam from East Pakistan after 25 March 1971, was passed by the tribunal ex parte. The petition was heard by a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice Dipankar Datta
The matter was concerning an order of the Foreigners’ Tribunal, Kamrup which issued a notice on 28 December 2007 to the appellant alleging that she had entered Assam from East Pakistan. The appellant did not appear before the Tribunal and was proceeded against ex parte. The Tribunal relied upon the report of the Enquiry Officer who stated that in pursuance of the order of the Superintendent of Police he visited the house of the appellant, but on being asked to produce documents, she was unable to do so. Hence, the appellant was held to be a foreigner who had entered India after 25 March 1971. The appellant moved the High Court against the order and her petition was dismissed as the High Court held that though the appellant had placed reliance on certain documents, it was not open to the court exercising writ jurisdiction to sit in appeal over findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal. The High Court noted that the appellant failed to appear in the enquiry and that since her citizenship status was enquired into on the orders of the Superintendent of Police, the ultimate conclusion which was arrived at by the Tribunal could not be faulted.
Advocate Prateek Dhankhar, appearing on behalf of the appellant relied upon following documents, which he stated were not considered by the tribunal:
(i) An extract from the Voters’ List of 1971 in respect of Abdul Rashid s/o Sonaullah, who the appellant claims to be her father;
(ii) A copy of a registered sale deed executed by Abdul Rashid on 27 May 1976; and
(iii) A copy of the school leaving certificate dated 3 July 1997 describing the appellant as a daughter of ‘Abdur’ Rashid.
Accordingly, the Apex Court noted–
"We are of the view that it would be in the interests of justice to remand the proceedings back to the Tribunal so that the material which has been relied upon by the appellant in support of her plea of citizenship can be duly evaluated in accordance with law. The appellant has furnished cogent material in support of her absence during the proceedings before the Tribunal. Serious consequences will follow if the finding that the appellant entered into India after 25 March 1971 is sustained without considering the defence on merits."
The court set aside the order passed by the Tribunal and the High Court to facilitate a fresh determination of the matter by the Tribunal.
The appeal was accordingly disposed of.
Case Title: Rashida Begum @ Rashida Khatun v. Union of India | Civil Appeal No 559 of 2023
Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 85
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Prateek Dhankhar, Adv. Mr. Rahul Pratap, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G. Mrs. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Mrs. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tyagi, Adv. Mrs. Archana Pathak Dave, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Aman Sharma, Adv. Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, AOR Mr. Deepayan Dutta, Adv. Mr. Sai Sashank, Adv
Citizenship Act 1955- Assam NRC- Section 6A- Supreme Court sets aside ex-parte order of a Foreigners Tribunal which declared a woman to be not Indian citizen- Directs that the matter be considered on merits afresh with opportunity to the appellant furnish materials