AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
AM Bujor Barua, J
Heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. AI Ali, learned counsel for the Election Commission of India and Mr. A. Kalita, learned counsel for the State of Assam appearing for the Foreigners' Tribunal and Border Areas, Ms. A Verma, learned standing counsel for the authorities under the NRC as well as Ms. G Sarma, learned counsel for the authorities under the Union of India.
On being referred by the Superintendent of Police (B), Baksa, F.T. Case No.860/Baksa/2017 was registered before the Foreigners Tribunal, Baksa. In the written statement a stand was taken that the name of the father of the petitioner is Nripendra Sarkar whose name appeared in the voter list of 1970 pertaining to village Nagrijuli Bagan, P.S. Tamulpur, district Kamrup. Before the Tribunal, the petitioner exhibited the voter list of 1965 and 1970 of village Nagrijuli Bagan containing the name of Nripendra Sarkar.
The Gaonburah of village Nagrijuli Bagan has also been examined as DW-2 who deposes that the father of the petitioner is Nripendra Sarkar of village Nagrijuli Bagan. It is taken note that the DW-2 was appointed as a Gaonburah in the year 1966. If the evidence of the Gaonburah is admissible, a link is established between the petitioner and Nripendra Sarkar of 1965 and 1970 of voter list of village Nagrijuli Bagan.
In view of the above, the order dated 25.07.2018 of the Foreigners Tribunal, Baksa is set aside for a re-consideration as regards the evidence of DW-2 linking the petitioner with that of Nripendra Sarkar of 1965 and 1970 voter list of village Nagrijuli Bagan. In doing so, it would be open for the State respondents to further cross-examine the DW-2 in order to verify the veracity of the statement made in his deposition but no further evidence shall be allowed on behalf of either of the parties other than the cross examination of DW-2.
The petitioner shall appear before the Tribunal on 06.03.2019 for a further consideration as indicated above. Upon doing so the Tribunal shall give its final opinion within a period of 30(thirty) days thereafter, in the event, the petitioner does not appear before the Tribunal or remain uncooperative, the Tribunal may pass any order under the law.
In terms of the above, the writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above.
Send back the LCR immediately.