Gauhati High Court sets aside Ex-parte order declaring woman a foreigner

Kashish Jain

Acknowledging that citizenship is one of the most important rights of a person, the Gauhati High Court recently stated that any question arising about the citizenship of a person must be adjudicated based on merits on hearing the person concerned. 

The Division Bench comprised of Justice N Kotiswar Singh and Justice Soumitra Saikia. The Bench said,

“It is to be remembered that citizenship is one of the most important rights of a person. Under citizenship, one becomes a member of a sovereign country and becomes entitled to various rights and privileges granted by law in the country and, as such, if any question arises about the citizenship of a person, in our opinion the same should be adjudicated as far as possible based on merit and on hearing the person concerned.”

The Bench was dealing with a petition filed by Rahima Khatun, who challenged an ex-parte order passed by the Foreigners Tribunal, Dhubri which declared her to be an illegal migrant post-1971 stream. 

The petitioner made the case that it was without her knowledge that her son appeared on her behalf and when the ex-parte order was passed he did not appear before the Tribunal on various dates fixed in the matter. 

On the perusal of records, the High Court observed that the Foreigners Tribunal had passed the order “without hearing the petitioner.”

The Court then set aside the impugned order of the Foreigners Tribunal and stated,

“However, since the petitioner’s citizenship is under a cloud as the petitioner has been already declared as a foreigner by the aforementioned Foreigners Tribunal, she will appear before the Superintendent of Police (Border), Dhubri within 15 days from today. On such appearance, the petitioner will furnish a bail bond of Rs 5000/- with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the said authority where after she shall remain on bail. The concerned Superintendent of Police (Border) shall also take steps for capturing the fingerprints and biometrics of the iris of the petitioner if so advised.”

Related Post