Saravanu Bibi v. The Union of India and 7 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010129312020 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/4733/2020o SARAVANUoBIBIo W/O-oFAKIRoCHAND,oVILL.-oJHALERALGAoPART-oI,oP.S.-oGAURIPUR,oDIST.-o DHUBRI,oASSAM. VERSUSo THEoUNIONoOFoINDIAoANDo7oORS.o REP.oBYoTHEoSECY.,oMINISTRYoOFoHOMEoAFFAIRS,oNEWoDELHI-o110001. 2:THEoSTATEoOFoASSAM oREP.oBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECY.oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM oHOMEoANDoPOLITICALo(B)oDEPTT. oDISPUR oGHY-o6. 3:THEoADDL.oDIRECTORoGENERALoOFoPOLICEo(BORDER) oASSAM oROOPNAGAR oGHY-o32. 4:THEoDY.oCOMMISSIONER oDHUBRI oDHUBRI oASSAM. 5:THEoSUPERINTENDENToOFoPOLICEo(B) oDHUBRIoDISTRICT oDHUBRI oASSAM. 6:THEoOFFICER-IN-CHARGE oGAURIPURoPOLICEoSTATION Page No.# 2/4 DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM. 7:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA REP. BY THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER NIRVACHAN SADAN NEW DELHI PIN-110001. 8:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTRAR OF CITIZENS (NRC) BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI PIN-781005 Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. K DEVI Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.

BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN O R D E R

30.03.2023 (A.M. Bujor Barua, J)

Heard Ms. K Devi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. L Devi, learned CGC appearing on behalf of respondents in the Union of India as well as for the authorities in the NRC, Mr. G Sarma, learned counsel for the State respondents in the Home Department of Government of Assam, Mr. T. Pegu, learned counsel for the Election Commission of India and Mr. NK Das Das, learned counsel for the Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri.

¶2The petitioner Saravanu Bibi had been referred to the Foreigners Tribunal No. 4, Dhubri for rendering an opinion as to whether she is a person who entered the State of Assam from the specified territory on or after 25.03.1971 Page No.# 3/4 resulting in registration of Case No. F.T.-4/108/GPR/2017, wherein an opinion dated 23.05.2019 was given that the petitioner is a foreigner. Being aggrieved, this writ petition is instituted.

¶3In the writ proceeding, the petitioner relies on the voters list of 1966 of village 101 Geramari Part-III, police station Dhubri in the Dhubri district, which contains the name of Farid Sheikh son of Dhuturu Munshi at serial No. 5 and also that of Eusof Ali son of Darid in the voters list of 1970 of village 101 Geramari Part-III at serial No.632. The petitioner thereafter refers to a rayati khatian in respect of a land in village Geramari Part-III, wherein the name of the rayats, father's name and place of dwelling is shown to be Surbanu Khatun along with Nurbanu Khatun and Nur Khatun all being daughters of Esob Ali Sheikh.

¶4If the information is correct, prima facie, the same may lead to a conclusion that the petitioner is a citizen of India.

¶5In view of the materials being available on record, the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to examine the authenticity and correctness of the voters list of 1966 and 1970 of village 101 Geramari Part-III as well as the rayati khatian in respect of a plot of land in village Geramari part-III, which amongst others, contains the name of Surbanu Khatun daughter of Esob Ali Sheikh and pass a reasoned order thereon. The petitioner may produce any other relevant material before the Tribunal, as may be advised.

¶6It has been clarified by the petitioner that Surbanu Khatun after the marriage is now known as Saravanu Bibi. The State respondents to also make the verification as to whether Saravanu Bibi, daughter of Esob Ali as contained in the Rayati Khatian with reference to the voters list of 1966 and 1970 and the Page No.# 4/4 village Geramari proceedee Saravanu Bibi are one and the same person.

¶7If the reasoned order is in favour of the petitioner, the same shall prevail over the earlier opinion dated 23.05.2019. If the reasoned order goes against the petitioner, consequence as per law shall follow.

¶8The petitioner shall appear before the Foreigners Tribunal No. 4, Dhubri on

08.05.2023. Till the reasoned order is passed, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner.

¶8The writ petition is allowed as indicated above. Send back the LCR immediately. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant