Justice Kalyan Rai Surana, Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund, Gauhati High Court

The Gauhati High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a man declared a foreigner of the post-1971 stream by a Foreigners Tribunal, holding that voter lists carrying the names of his projected father and grandfather could not establish citizenship unless the petitioner proved his linkage with them.

The Court found that the petitioner neither pleaded his family nor connected himself with the persons named in the exhibited documents, and held that there was no case for interference with the Tribunal’s opinion.

The Division Bench of Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund observed, “Accordingly, through the exhibited documents, the petitioner has not been able to prove his relationship with his projected father, Sadar Ali, and there is also no linkage between Sadar Ali with Jahur Ali.”

The Bench noted that most of the voter lists contained only one or two names, so the entire family was not seen living together, and that the exhibited documents showed names with whom the petitioner had not linked himself.

The Bench further held that the proceedings of Foreigners Tribunals are civil in nature, so a proceedee’s evidence can be rejected for want of cogent and admissible proof even where the State did not cross-examine his witnesses.

Advocate N. Haque appeared for the Petitioner, while Standing Counsel G. Sarma appeared for the Respondents.

Brief Facts

The petitioner, Sofiqul Islam, approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, assailing the opinion of the Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal 2nd, Morigaon, which declared him a foreigner of the post-1971 stream. His son and daughter were also declared foreigners of the post-1971 stream, drawing lineage from him.

Before the Tribunal, the petitioner filed a written statement and denied being a foreigner. He claimed to be an Indian citizen born and brought up at village Tengaguri, Kacharigaon, in Morigaon district.

He claimed that his grandfather, Jahur Ali, appeared in the old voter lists, that his father, Sadar Ali, appeared in the later voter lists, and that his own name appeared in a voter list and in his birth certificate. He relied on twenty exhibits, including voter lists, a jamabandi, a PAN card and documents relating to his wife and children. He also examined the Gaonburah of the village as DW-2, who had issued a certificate in his favour.

The Tribunal held that a Gaonburah was not authorised to issue a linkage certificate. The old voter lists were discarded for want of proof that the petitioner was the son of Sadar Ali or that Jahur Ali was the father of Sadar Ali.

The Tribunal doubted the petitioner’s relationship with other persons recorded alongside Jahur Ali in the voter list and the jamabandi, since their names were not mentioned in his written statement or evidence. The later voter lists were not accepted as reliable, and the PAN card was rejected on the ground that it was issued on self-declaration and did not establish a relationship.

Contentions of the Parties

The petitioner submitted that the entire evidence was discarded because of minor omissions in not disclosing the names of persons appearing in the voter list and the jamabandi, and that the petitioner held all the documents linking him to his projected father and grandfather. It was submitted that Gaonburah had seen the petitioner since birth and knew his father and grandfather, but his evidence was negated without cogent reasons. 

The Respondents submitted that the petitioner’s name appeared for the first time in a voter list of a much later period, and that there was a lack of linkage between the petitioner and his father, and between the father and the projected grandfather. It was submitted that a jamabandi is not a document of title but only a revenue record, which does not prove lineage for the purpose of establishing citizenship, and that a certified copy of it is available in the public domain. 

Observations/Findings of the Court

The Court noted that the written statement disclosed only the names of the petitioner, his father and his grandfather, and that the petitioner pleaded the name of no other family member, including his grandmother, his mother and the siblings of his father and grandfather.

It observed that the petitioner did not disclose his relationship with the other persons whose names appeared in the voter lists and the jamabandi. It further noted that, according to Gaonburah, Sadar Ali had twelve children, but none of the petitioner’s siblings or his projected father came forward to depose in his favour.

The Court also found an inconsistency in age, since the age shown in the voter list did not match the age that followed from the petitioner’s own evidence-on-affidavit.

It was observed, "It is also noted that the petitioner, apart from not disclosing his relationship with those persons whose names appeared in the jamabandi and in the voter’s list, has also not pleaded the name of his grandmother and the name of his mother. It is reiterated at the cost of repetition that the family of the petitioner is not pleaded, and therefore, evidence tendered beyond pleading is liable to be discarded."

The Court relied on Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Ram Pal Singh Bisen (2010) to hold that mere filing or exhibiting of a document does not amount to proof of its contents, that documentary evidence must be proved from the record and not solely by oral testimony, and that a document otherwise inadmissible does not become admissible merely because the State raised no objection to its being marked as an exhibit. 

The Court concluded that the petitioner failed to make out a case for interference with the impugned opinion, dismissed the writ petition.

Cause Title: Sofiqul Islam v. Union of India & 5 Ors. [Neutral Citation: 2026:GAU-AS:16234]

Appearances:

Petitioner: Advocate N. Haque

Respondents: CGC U.K. Goswami; Standing Counsel G. Sarma (FT & Border); Junior Government Advocate R.B. Bora; Standing Counsel A.I. Ali (ECI)

Click here to read/download the Judgment

Tags: