WP(C)/6177/2025 of ABDUL ALI Vs THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS on 11 May 2026

ORDER

Date : 12-05-2026 (S.K Medhi, J)

Heard Shri. S.A Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri. G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Home Deptt. and Shri. N. Kalita, learned Standing Counsel, ECI, Shri. P. Sharma, learned State Counsel and Shri. S.S Roy, learned CGC.

2. The instant application has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an opinion dated 28.02.2022 passed by the learned Member Foreigners Tribunal, Jorhat in Case No. FTG.56/2012 corresponding to S.P.’s Enquiry No. 24/2012 whereby the petitioner has been declared as a foreigner post-1971.

3. The primary ground of challenge is that the opinion is an ex-parte one which has been rendered without giving a proper opportunity to the petitioner to defend himself.

4. Shri. S.A Ahmed, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that at no point of time the notice was served upon him. He has also submitted that the records would reveal that there is a report of the Jarikarak, who had observed that the petitioner had left the place many years back and therefore, the notice could not be served.

5. Shri. G. Sarma, the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that without even going to the legality or otherwise on the aspect of how a notice is to be served, the petitioner was under of duty to inform the fact to the jurisdictional police station regarding his change of address which was not done.

6. Without going to the aforesaid aspect regarding the duty cast upon a proceedee to inform any shift of address, we are of the view that interest of justice would be served if the matter is remanded to the concerned Tribunal for adjudication of the matter in accordance with law. We also make it clear that the aspect of service of notice cannot be taken up any further since this order is passed in presence of the learned counsel of the petitioner.

7. The matter is accordingly remanded to the Tribunal directing the petitioner to appear on or before 25.05.2026 along with the written statement and the evidence of all the witnesses which the petitioner would like to produce. On such presentation, the learned Tribunal would take charge and would complete the adjudication expeditiously and in accordance with law by following Order 3(14) of the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964.

8. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner has informed that the petitioner is in custody since 25/05/2025. To facilitate the petitioner an effective opportunity to defend himself, we deem it proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

9. This Court accordingly grants bail to the petitioner, namely, Abdul Ali, subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only)

with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Superintendent of Police (Border), Golaghat. Further, it is directed that the biometrics of the iris of both eyes, the fingerprints of both hands and the photographs of the petitioner shall be obtained, whereafter, he shall be allowed to remain on bail, which shall be subject to the outcome of the present Reference.

10. The Superintendent of Police (Border), Golaghat, shall also obtain necessary information and documentation as required under the Rules from the petitioner for securing his presence.

11. Records be sent back forthwith to the concerned Tribunal.

12. We also make it clear that since the opinion is in respect of many cases, the present order is confined only in the case of the Reference against the petitioner. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant