In a huge relief for 67-year-old Mohammed Iddrish Ali, the Gauhati High Court has held an order declaring him foreigner to be erroneous. Ali was declared foreigner on September 5, 2018 by a Foreigners’ Tribunal (FT) in Jorhat and subsequently sent to a detention camp.
A reference was made against him as he was designated a D Voter in 1997. In his written statement before the FT Ali had stated his father’s name as Ali Box and grandfather’s name as Lt Joidor and that he was presently a resident of Village No. 2, Kairigaon under Sarupather Police Station in the District of Golaghat, Assam.
However, he originally hails from and is a permanent resident of a village Moiradhwaj under Dhing Police Station in the District of Nagaon, Assam. His grandfather and father also hail from this village. Ali further stated in the Written Statement that in the year 1983, there was a flood in this village so he had shifted to No. 2, Kairigaon Village at Sarupather.
Ali also stated that in the years 1985 & 1989, he had cast vote in Moiradhwaj Village where had had been born and raised. His grandfather’s name appeared in the Voter List of 1965. The petitioner claimed that since 1965 to till 1989, his family used to cast their votes at Moiradhwaj Village. But, when he shifted to No. 2, Kairigaon Village, his name was displayed in the Voter List of Golaghat District as ‘D’ voter. So, since 1997, he has been shown in the Voter List as ‘D’ voter.
To build his case, Ali submitted the following 11 documents as recorded by the court:
1) Exhibit-1 is the Village Gaon Bura Certificate stating the petitioner to be resident of No. 2, Kairigaon Village;
2) Exhibit-2 is another Village Gaon Bura Certificate stating the petitioner to be resident of Moiradhwaj Village;
3) Exhibit-3 is the Voter List of 1965, wherein, Ali Box and Oli Box appeared;
4) Exhibit-4 is the Voter List of 1970, wherein, Ali Box and Oli Box appeared;
5) Exhibit-5 is the Voter List of 1975, wherein, Ali Box and Oli Box appeared;
6) Exhibit-6 is the Voter List of 1985 displaying the name of the petitioner;
7) Exhibit-7 is the Voter List of 1989 displaying the name of the petitioner with his wife;
8) Exhibit-8 is the Certificate issued by the Election Officer, Dhansiri, Sarupather certifying the petitioner to be a ‘D’ voter;
9) Exhibit-9 is another certificate issued by the Election Officer, Dhansiri,Sarupather certifying the petitioner to be a ‘D’ voter;
10) Exhibit-10 is another certificateissued by the Election Officer, Dhansiri, Sarupather certifying the petitioner to be a ‘D’ voter; and
11) Exhibit-11 is the copy of Jamabandi containing the names of the projected father and the projected uncle of the petitioner.
After examining the said documents, the Gauhati HC observed, “The Exhibit-6 is the Voter List of 1985, wherein, the name of the petitioner appears as a son of Ali Box. The age of the petitioner has been stated to be 28 years. On the other hand, Exhibit-7 is the Voter List of 1989, wherein, the name of the petitioner appears. While tendering oral evidence, the petitioner claimed to be 65 years. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the petitioner should have been born sometime in the year 1953 and by the year 1974, he should have attained the capacity of casting vote. The Tribunal noticed that in the Voter List of 1975, marked as Exhibit-5, the petitioner’s name does not appear. The Tribunal also noticed that post 1971 Voter List have no proper linkages in any manner with “pre cut of Voter List” and therefore, Exhibits 6 & 7 are of no help to the petitioner.”
The HC ruled, “We have no doubt that the Tribunal has committed an error while appreciating Exhibits 6 & 7.” It explained, “Here at this stage, the difference between a Tribunal and a Court must be stated. The Tribunal is established for quick disposal of the matters sent to it. Unlike a regular Court, the laws of evidence are not strictly applicable in a Tribunal. Courts exercise judicial power to the State to maintain and Page No.# 5/6 uphold the rights of the citizens. It punishes the wrong doers and adjudicates upon disputes. The Tribunal, on the other hand, are special alternative institutional mechanisms usually established under a Statute to decide disputes arising with reference to that particular Statute.”
The HC ordered, “It is stated that the petitioner was taken into custody since 21.09.2019 and he has been lodged at Jorhat Detention Camp. In this situation, we direct the Superintendent of Police (B), Golaghat to make necessary arrangement to produce the petitioner, Md. Iddrish Ali, before the Foreigners Tribunal, Jorhat, Assam on 17.03.2020. After such production, the petitioner may make application for bail along with documents in his support. Such application shall be considered by the Tribunal and necessary order for bail shall be passed on terms and conditions that may be set down by the Tribunal. It is expected that the Tribunal will fix the next immediate date for hearing within a reasonable time. We also make it clear that the proceeding before the Tribunal shall be concluded within a period of 60 days from 17.03.2020. We further make it clear that if the petitioner defaults in appearing before the Tribunal on the dates to be fixed in the case and also fails to take required steps, it will be open to the Tribunal to pass such order or orders as may be deemed fit and proper and in accordance with law. To the extent, the writ petition stands allowed.”
The entire order may be read here: