Why 15 documents failed to prove a man's citizenship: Gauhati High Court advocate explains

The Gauhati High Court has upheld a Foreigners Tribunal's decision declaring an Assam resident a foreigner, ruling that despite submitting 15 documents and oral testimony, he failed to legally establish his Indian citizenship.
 

A Division Bench comprising Justices Kalyan Rai Surana and Shamima Jahan dismissed the petition filed by the daily wage labourer, holding that the documents produced were either legally inadmissible or insufficient to discharge the burden of proof under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
 

The petitioner, born in 1988 and currently residing in rented accommodation near Guwahati, had submitted several documents, including copies of the 1951 National Register of Citizens (NRC) carrying the names of his father and grandparents, electoral rolls of different years, a 1973 land deed executed by his grandfather, a school certificate, PAN card and Elector's Photo Identity Card (EPIC). His father also deposed before the tribunal to establish the family's lineage.
 

However, the High Court agreed with the Foreigners Tribunal that the documents failed to establish a legally admissible link between the petitioner and his claimed ancestors.
 

The court observed that the copy of the 1951 NRC produced by the petitioner was only a computer-generated printout without the mandatory certification required under the law governing electronic evidence. It further held that Census records, including the 1951 NRC, are inadmissible as evidence under the Census Act, 1948.
 

The petitioner's school certificate was also rejected as neither the headmaster who issued it nor the school's admission register was produced before the court to verify its authenticity.
 

The High Court also found inconsistencies in the voter lists relied upon by the petitioner and held that oral testimony alone cannot establish citizenship without supporting documentary evidence. During cross-examination, the petitioner's father was found to be different from the individual whose name appeared in one of the electoral rolls submitted as evidence.
 

Finding no legal infirmity in the Foreigners Tribunal's order, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, thereby affirming the declaration that the petitioner is a foreigner.
 

Speaking to India Today NE, Gauhati High Court advocate Azad Ahmed said the documents produced by the petitioner were mostly photocopies and printouts, which by themselves are not sufficient before a court of law.
 

"The documents submitted by the individual were all photocopies or printouts. Under the provisions of the Evidence Act, certified copies must accompany such documents. However, he submitted a copy of the 1951 NRC without a certified copy," Ahmed said.
 

He further explained that while the petitioner had also submitted printouts of his PAN card and Voter ID card, those documents alone could not establish citizenship.
 

"The 1951 NRC, by itself, is not treated as conclusive evidence and must be proved before the court. Similarly, while a Voter ID is a valid document, it must establish continuous electoral records showing that the individual or their family was in India prior to March 24, 1971," the advocate said.
 

Ahmed added that a person may also establish citizenship by producing pre-1971 documents belonging to their father or grandfather, provided those ancestors were Indian citizens and the documents are legally admissible and properly proved before the court.