Crime Today News
The Supreme Court has granted interim protection from deportation to an Assam-born woman, who was declared a foreigner by the Foreigner’s Tribunal under Section 2 (a) of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
The Bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Vinod Chandran on Tuesday directed the authorities concerned to neither deport petitioner Jaynab Bibi, nor take any coercive steps against her.
It further issued notice on the petition, directing the respondents to file a reply by August 25.
The petitioner moved the Apex Court challenging the February 17 verdict of the Gauhati High Court, which upheld the judgment delivered by a Foreigners Tribunal on May 20, 2017, declaring her to be a foreigner.
Appearing for the petitioner, Advocates Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi and Akanksha Rai apprised the Bench that Jaynab Bibi was born and raised in Muamari village of Nagaon district in Assam .
They produced documents, including the 1951 NRC list; voter lists from 1965, 1970, 1989, 1997, 2016 and 2018; jamabandi records; Gaon Panchayat; and Gaonburah (traditional village headsman) certificates to establish the petitioner’s lineage with her father, grandfather, and husband.
They claimed that the Tribunal ignored this evidence and passed a mechanical two-page order finding Jaynab Bibi a foreigner because neither she nor her mother named her uncle in their depositions. The Tribunal also rejected Gaonburah certificates explaining a name discrepancy, the lawyers added.
They placed reliance on the Supreme Court order dated July 11, 2024, in Mohd Rahim Ali vs State of Assam, in which the Court had expressed concern over the arbitrary and opaque manner in which residents of Assam were being suspected to be foreigners.
The top court of the country had observed that reference-making authorities must disclose the basis on which a person was suspected to be a foreigner. Mere suspicion was not a sufficient ground for initiating proceedings under the Foreigners Act, it added.
On February 17, 2025, the High Court upheld the Tribunal’s finding on the grounds that the petitioner failed to discharge the burden under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act. It held that the oral testimony of her mother was insufficient to establish her lineage. The documents did not conclusively link the petitioner to her projected father or grandfather, it added.
The High Court further rejected the explanation for the alleged discrepancy in the petitioner’s father’s name – Kasom Ali and Abul Kasem on the grounds that the petitioner did not address this inconsistency in her written statement or evidence.
Only the Gaonburah’s certificate attempted to equate the two names and in the absence of corroborating testimony, the document could not establish the claimed identity, the High Court had pointed out.
Several certificates were inadmissible due to bearing the State Emblem, noted the High Court, adding that foundational facts missing from her written statement.
📰 Crime Today News is proudly sponsored by DRYFRUIT & CO – A Brand by eFabby Global LLC
Design & Developed by Yes Mom Hosting
