Gauhati HC holds in favour of woman declared Indian citizen in 2013, a foreigner in 2017 by Foreigners Tribunal; says dissimilarities in information in two proceedings too minor

Published on:

28 Mar 2021, 4:03 pm

THE Gauhati High Court Monday came to the rescue of a woman who in 2013 had been declared not to be a foreigner by the Foreigner Tribunal, but was declared to be one in 2017 in subsequent proceedings initiated against her.

A division bench of Justices N. Kotiswar Singh and Manish Choudhury held that subsequent findings by the Foreigners' Tribunal were barred by the principle of res-judicata (where a matter finally decided on its merits by a court having competent jurisdiction, cannot be subjected to litigation again between the same parties) as has been held by the Apex Court in the judgment reported in Abdul Kuddus Vs Union of India.

The argument of the petitioner that she had been declared an Indian citizen earlier by the Foreigners' Tribunal, had not been accepted by the Tribunal in subsequent proceedings, noting dissimilarities in the names of the petitioner's father and husband in the two proceedings.

The Gauhati High Court bench, before which the petitioner had challenged her subsequent declaration as a foreigner, however, observed that the petitioner Bulbuli Bibi's husband's name had been Najimuddin in one reference and in the other reference, he had been referred to as Nazim. The name of village and the police station however remain the same. The only difference or inconsistency was with regard to the name of the husband, viz, Nazim and Najimuddin, it recorded.

The court, therefore, termed this difference to be minor and not substantial and held that the same could be ignored. Similarly, the name of the father of the "proceeded" which had been recorded as late Giapuddin Fakir in the first proceeding and as Giyas Fakir in the second was also considered by the bench a minor variations, which could be ignored.

It thus held that as the petitioner had not been declared a foreigner by the Foreigners' Tribunal in the earlier proceeding, she could be declared as an Indian citizen.

It also noted that her husband was an Indian citizen and had not been declared a foreigner as well.

Advocate P. Kataki appeared for the petitioner.