Major Ali v. The Union of India and 6 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010065792018 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:ooWP(C)/1533/2018 MAJORoALI oREPRESENTEDoBYoHISoBROTHERoMD.oAZADoALI S/O-LATEoABUoTALEB oR/O-oVILL-MIRIHOLA oMOUZA-SOOTEA oPO-oTEWARIPAL oPS-SOOTEA oVERSUS THEoUNIONoOFoINDIAoANDo6oORS.o(H) REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoINDIA oMINISTRYoOFoHOMEoAFFAIRS oNEWoDELHI 2:THEoSTATEoOFoASSAM REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFo oHOMEoDEPARTMENT oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-6 o3:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER oSONITPUR oTEZPUR oASSAM o4:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER oBISWANATH o5:THEoSUPERINTENDENToOFoPOLICE oSONITPUR Page No.# 2/5 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI 7:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE BISWANATH CHARIALI BISWANATH CHARIALI POLICE STATION ------------ Advocate for : MR. N N JHA Advocate for : ASSTT.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS. (H) Linked Case :WP(C)/2051/2018 MAJOR ALI S/O. LT. ABU TALEB, VILL. MIRIHOLA, UNDER KOTORATI REVENUE VILLAGE, MOUZA SOOTEA, P.O. TEWARIPAL, P.S. SOOTEA, DIST. SONITPUR, ASSAM (PERSON OF UNSOUND MIND), REP. BY HIS BROTHER MD. AZAD ALI, S/O. LT. ABU TALEB, VILL. SIPORIA CHAPORI (KOTORATI), P.S. SOOTEA, DIST. SONITPUR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT. DISPUR GHY. 3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER 4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER BISWANATH Page No.# 3/5 5:THE SUPDT. OF POLICE DIST. SONITPUR 6:THE SUPDT. OF POLICE BISWANATH POLICE DISTRICT BISWANATH CHARIALI DIST. BISWANATH 7:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE BISWANATH CHARIALI POLICE STATION DIST. BISWANATH Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N N JHA Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI 28/02/2024 (Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J) Heard Sri N N Jha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A Verma, learned Standing counsel, Home Department, Assam for the respondent Nos. 2, 5, 6 & 7 and Sri P Sharma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent Nos.3 & 4.

¶2Both these writ petitions being connected are disposed of by this common order.

¶3The petitioner was a proceedee in F.T. Case No. 321/2016 before the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal 6th Tezpur, Sootea. Page No.# 4/5

¶4As per the projected case of the petitioner, after filing of the written statement, an application was filed before the learned Tribunal, whereby it was informed that the petitioner was suffering from mental ailment and accordingly, a prayer was made to defer the proceedings. The aforesaid petition was however rejected by the learned Tribunal vide an order dated 07.02.2018 and the said rejection is the subject matter of the first writ petition, i.e., WP(C) No. 1533/2018.

¶5In the meantime, the Tribunal went ahead with the proceedings and disposed of the same vide a final opinion/order dated 21.03.2018, whereby it was opined that the petitioner was a foreigner/illegal migrant and accordingly consequential directions were given. The said opinion dated

21.03.2018 is the subject matter of the second writ petition, i.e., WP(C) No. 2051/2018.

¶6During the course of proceedings, instructions were sought for by this Court and in this regard, written communications received by the learned Standing counsel were placed on record. The said communications which are of the year 2018 had indicated that on examination, the petitioner was found to be conscious, alert and co-operative and only his mood was found to be depressed. It was also stated that there had been irregular past psychiatric treatment and accordingly further evaluation was advised. The reports also indicate that due to non cooperation of the petitioner, further assessment process could not be completed by the clinical psychologist.

¶7After filing of the second writ petition, i.e., WP(C) No. 2051/2018, this Court had called for a fresh report from the concerned authorities. Accordingly, a report dated 20.12.2023 has been furnished as per which, the petitioner was found to have clinically improved and was discharged on

16.12.2023 with advise to continue regular medication and periodic follow up.

¶8We have noted that the present age of the petitioner would be around 41 years.

¶9After consideration of the materials on record, particularly the written instructions which were obtained from the concerned authorities, we are of the opinion that at the relevant point of time, it appears that the petitioner had some mental ailment for which he was not able to defend himself properly. The said reports were however of the year 2018. The recent report of 20.12.2023 has however stated regarding the clinical improvement of the petitioner and the fact of his discharge on

16.12.2023.

¶10Taking the aforesaid facts and circumstances in the consideration, we are of the opinion that interest of justice would be served if a proper opportunity is granted to the petitioner to defend himself in the aforesaid F.T. Case. Accordingly, the ex parte order dated 21.03.2018 passed by the Page No.# 5/5 learned Member, Foreigners' Tribunal-6 Tezpur (Assam) in Case No. FT C (6) 321/2016 is set aside.

¶11Since the petitioner had participated to the stage of filing of written statement and no documents were also filed, we direct the petitioner to appear before the learned Member, Foreigners' Tribunal-6 Tezpur (Assam) on or before 15.03.2024 to file the documents as well as the evidence-on-affidavit along with a certified copy of this order. On such appearance, the learned Tribunal would take charge of the matter and proceed with the same in accordance with law.

¶12Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the learned Tribunal for doing the needful in terms of the direction made in this order.

¶13Both the writ petitions accordingly stand disposed of.

¶14The interim order, if any, stands merged with this final order.

¶15The communications of the authorities regarding the health condition of the petitioner which were placed before the Court be made part of the record.

JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant