ISMAIL ALI @ ISMAIL Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE writ petitions being against the common judgment and order dated 26th March, 2008 passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal, Hojai at Sankardev Nagar in Case Nos. FT/H/711/2007; FT/H/712/2007 and FT/H/754/2007, are taken up together for hearing and disposal, as agreed to by the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

(2.) ON the basis of 3(three) references made by the Superintendent of Police (Border), Nagaon vide Exhibit-2 series, the aforesaid proceedings were registered in the Foreigners Tribunal, Hojai at Sankardev Nagar against the present petitioners, doubting their citizenship. The Tribunal, in due course, issued notices to the writ petitioners, who were the opposite parties in the aforesaid proceedings, under the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946. The petitioners accordingly, appeared and contested the said proceedings contending inter-alia that they are Indian nationals by birth and the name of the father of the petitioner in WP (C) No. 4976/2008 and grand-father of the petitioners in WP (C) Nos. 5164/2008 and 5166/2008 appeared in the voters list of 1966, apart from the name of the petitioner in WP (C) No. 4976/2008 in the voters list of 1970. While the respondent authority examined Abdul Minar, the Sub-Inspector of Police (Border), the writ petitioners/opposite parties examined Md. Ismail Ali (the petitioner in WP (C) No. 4976/2008). Altogether 5( five) documents were marked as Exhibits, out of which, 3(three) documents namely Exhibit-1, 2 and 3, were marked at the instance of the respondent authority and 2 (two) documents, namely Exhibits-A and B, were marked at the instance of the writ petitioners/opposite parties. Exhibit-1 is the communication dated 30th August, 2001 issued by the Superint-endent of Police (B), Nagaon to the Sub-Inspector (B), PW1, directing him to make and enquiry relating to the citizenship status of the writ petitioners. Exhibit-2 is the particulars furnished by the PW 1 in Form No.I and Exhibit -3 is the report of the enquiry submitted by PW 1 in Form No.II with endorsement of the Superintendent of Police (B) referring the question of citizenship of the writ petitioners to the Tribunal for opinion. Exhibit-A is the voter list of 1966 in respect of No.56, Chhaigaon Legislative Assembly Constituency pertaining to Part 56. Village- Mohmari, PS-Chhaigaon in the district of Kamrup, Assam and Exhibit-B is the voter list in respect of the said Constituency for the year 1970. Though both the parties have adduced evidence of 1(one) witness each, they were, however, not cross-examined by either of the parties.

(3.) MR. Mahmud, learned counsel for the petitioners leading me to the evidences adduced by the parties, both oral and documentary, in the proceeding before the Tribunal, has submitted that the grounds on which the Tribunal has refused to place reliance on Exhibits-A and B, voter list, being contrary to the evidences on record, is not sustainable in law. According to MR. Mahmud, Md Ismail Ali in his evidence has made categorical statement that his father's name is Murtab Ali @ Latif Ali, which fact was not taken into consideration by the Tribunal while recording the finding that the father's name of Ismail Ali is Murtab Ali, whose name does not figure in the voters list of 1966 and 1970 (Exhibits-A and B). MR. Mahmud, therefore, submits that the evidences adduced by the parties have not been appreciated in its proper perspective by the Tribunal and hence the judgment passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal needs interference of this Court in exercise of the certiorari jurisdiction.