Indian Citizenship Should Not Be Doubted Due To Minor Variations In Name Spellings In Electoral Rolls Or Govt Records: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Thursday (July 11) highlighted the challenges faced by uninformed or illiterate individuals in rural areas, particularly in Assam, to prove Indian citizenship without having official documents.

A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah highlighted that it is common for such persons to lack government-issued documents, especially when they do not own any property.

“Another relevant aspect is the prevalent situation on the ground where uninformed/illiterate persons or persons not being well-informed, in the absence of any requirement to obtain and hold an official document and without possessing property in their own names, would not have any official document issued by the government, State or Central. It is neither difficult nor inconceivable to fathom such scenario amongst the rural populace, including within Assam.”

The court referenced the literacy rate in Assam, which was 72.19% according to the 2011 Census, with lower rates in the 1960s and 1970s.

The court observed that variations in name spelling are common in the preparation of Electoral Rolls, and a casual entry by officials for the preparation of Electoral Roll cannot lead to the conclusion that the person is not an Indian national.

“Variation in name spelling is not a foreign phenomenon in preparation of the Electoral Roll. Further, the Electoral Roll has no acceptance in the eyes of law insofar as proof of date of birth is concerned. A casual entry by the enumerators when noting and entering the name(s) and dates of birth(s) as also the address(es) of the person(s) while making preparatory surveys for the purposes of preparing the Electoral Rolls cannot visit the appellant with dire consequences.”

The court further pointed out that name spellings on government documents often vary based on language and pronunciation, a common occurrence throughout India. Thus, such discrepancies in documents are not sufficient to disbelieve them and declare someone a foreigner, the court held.

“Not just in Assam but in many States, it is seen that names of people, even on important government documents can have and do have varied spellings depending on them being in English or Hindi or Bangla or Assamese or any other language, for that matter. Moreover, names of persons which are written either by the persons preparing the Voters List or by the personnel making entries into different Government records, the spelling of the name, based upon its pronunciation, may take on slight variations.”

The court made these observations while setting aside a Foreigners Tribunal's ex-parte order wherein it had declared one Md. Rahim Ali a foreigner disbelieving his documentary evidence of Indian citizenship due to discrepancies in spellings and dates. The appellant was alleged to have illegally migrated to Assam from Bangladesh after the cut-off date of March 25, 1971.

“…not being in the wrong, and being an ignorant person, he, truthfully and faithfully produced the official records as they were in his possession. We do not see any attempt by the appellant to get his official records prepared meticulously without any discrepancy. The conduct of an illegal migrant would not be so casual”, the court opined.

Additionally, the use of aliases and the attachment of titles as suffix or prefix to names are prevalent practices in India, which the tribunal overlooked, the court opined.

The appellant produced documents showing his parents' residency in Village Dolur Pather since 1965. He also provided evidence that his sibling had been declared an Indian citizen by the Tribunal and that he and his elder brother were listed in the 1985 Electoral Roll for the Bhabanipur Legislative Assembly Constituency. After his marriage, the appellant's name appeared in the 1997 Electoral Roll for the Dharmapur Legislative Assembly Constituency.

The court declared the appellant an Indian citizen, holding that the discrepancies in the documents were not sufficient for the tribunal to disbelieve him.

Case no. – Diary No. 20674 of 2017

Case Title – Md. Rahim Ali @ Abdur Rahim v. State Of Assam & Ors.

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 462

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment