State of Assam v. Md. Akbar Ali and
Case Details
WP(C) 2924/2013 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA JUDGEMENT AND ORDER (CAV) This writ petition is directed against the judgment and order 22.04.2013 passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal (1st), Morigaon, Assam in FT(C) Case No. 57/2006 )Police ref. IM(D)T Case No. 1/96 (State of Assam Vs. Md. Akbar Ali and 3 others) by which the petitioners have been declared to be foreigners (Ille gal Bangladeshi Migrant) who entered into Assam illegally after the cut off date 25.03.1971 from Village - Pakundichar, under PS- Pakundia in the district of Ma imansing, Bangladesh.
Legal Reasoning
2. I have heard Mr. F.U. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioners. Al so heard Mr. M. Bhagabati, learned CGC and Mrs. R. Gogoi, learned State Counsel. I have also perused the materials on record including the records received from the Tribunal. 3. On receipt of notice from the Tribunal, the petitioners appeared before the Tribunal and submitted a written statement. In the written statement filed o n 22.11.2012, the petitioners stated that they are all citizens of India by birt h. They named their father as late Moizuddin @ Moiruddin. It was stated in the w ritten statement that their said father’s name appeared in the voter list of 196 6 and 1970 and that after his death, the petitioners shifted to Silbheta under J agiroad Police Station in the district of Morigaon. 4. In support of their plea of being Indian citizens by birth, the petition ers exhibited Ext.1 Certificate dated 22/11/1993 purportedly issued by the Gover nment Gaonbura certifying the petitioners to be residents of the particular loca lity ; Ext. Ka photocopy of voter list of 1965 containing the name of one Moizud din ; Ext. Kha photocopy of voter list of 1970 containing the name of Moizuddin ; Ext. Ga Special Family Identity Card containing the name of one Maizuddin and some other family Identity cards and Certificate of Gaonbura containing the name s of Moizuddin and Foizuddin. 5. stablish their Indian citizenship, that too by birth. Above are the documents on the basis of which the petitioner wanted to e 6. The learned Tribunal while noticing the fact that the reference is 16 ye ars old duly scrutinize the materials on record and disbelieving the story made out by the petitioners in support of their claim of being Indian citizens, has a nswered the reference against them with the opinion that they are all illegal mi grants. The petitioner No.3 in his deposition as OPW-1 although stated in his de position that they had cast votes at Silbheta but could not produce any voter li st. OPW-2 Md. Saidul Islam stated in his deposition that he has seen the petitio ners at Silbheta from about 30-35 years. He proved the photocopies of voter list of 1965 and 1970 as Exts. Ka & Kha respectively. According to him, Ext. Ga, Gh a Ongo are the ration cards in the names of Abu Kalam, Abdul Sattar and Akbar. He also exhibited Exts. Cha and Chha NREGA job cards in the names of Abdul Satt ar and Abul Kalam. Ext. Ja, Jha, Niya and Ta, all are the certificates of Gaonbu ra. 7. On perusal of the materials on record, it is found that the name of one Moiruddin appeared in the voter list of 1965 and that of Moizuddin in the voter list of 1970. There is apparent discrepancy in the age of the person concerned i n both the voter list when compared to each other. Similarly, in Ext. ’Gha’ the ration card holder Md. Abdul Sattar is the son of one Foizuddin but as per Ext. ’Ga’ the ration card holder Md. Abdul Kalam is the son of one Maizuddin. While F oizuddin is the resident of village Silbheta, Maizuddin is a resident of Muladha ri. Thus, it appears that the father of the petitioners has 3 (three) names whic h are Moizuddin, Moiruddin and Foizuddin which in absence of any evidence is no t believable. Often, it is seen that the suspected foreigners took up names from the voter lists to identify the same as their parents, grand parents etc. if th e petitioners are citizens of India, they could have easily prove the same by pr oducing cogent and acceptable evidence instead of harping on their father’s iden tify by three names. 8.