The Gauhati High Court has held that the mere appearance of a person's name in voter lists is not sufficient to establish Indian citizenship when the individual fails to prove the necessary family relationships connecting him to pre-1971 ancestors.
A Division Bench of Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund dismissed a writ petition filed by Sofiqul Islam, who challenged a Foreigners Tribunal order declaring him a foreigner belonging to the post-25 March 1971 category. The Court found that the documents produced by him did not adequately establish his relationship with his claimed father and grandfather.
Background
Sofiqul Islam approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging an opinion dated August 27, 2018, passed by the Foreigners Tribunal No. 2, Morigaon, in Case No. F.T. 30/2017.
Before the Tribunal, Islam claimed that his grandfather, Jahur Ali, appeared in the 1966 and 1970 electoral rolls, while his father, Sadar Ali, was mentioned in subsequent voter lists. He also relied on his own voter records, a birth certificate, land revenue records, a PAN card and other documents to establish his Indian citizenship.
He argued that the Tribunal had wrongly rejected his documentary evidence and the testimony of a village Gaonburah, who claimed to have known his family for several years.
The High Court examined the electoral rolls, land records and other documents and found several gaps in the petitioner's explanation of his family background.
The Bench noted that although several individuals appeared alongside Jahur Ali in the older voter lists and land records, Islam had not explained their relationship with him. Similarly, he failed to establish a clear connection between his projected father, Sadar Ali, and grandfather, Jahur Ali.
The Court observed:
"The names of nine persons appear as sons of Jahur in the jamabandi (Ext.C), but the relationship of the petitioner with those eight out of nine persons is not disclosed by the petitioner. The other person being Sadar Ali, whose name appears at Serial No. 18, is projected to be the father of the petitioner."
The Bench also questioned inconsistencies in the petitioner's age across different records and noted that he had not properly disclosed the names of his grandmother, mother and other family members in his written statement.
The Court further found that the Gaonburah's certificate could not establish the claimed family linkage, particularly when the witness admitted that he had no official authorisation to issue such a certificate.
On the legal burden of establishing citizenship, the Bench referred to Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, which places the responsibility on the person concerned to establish that he is not a foreigner.
The Court clarified:
"Therefore, in civil suits and proceedings, even if the other side does not cross-examine the witnesses examined by the plaintiff/State, on account of lack of cogent and admissible evidence, a civil proceeding can still be dismissed."
It also relied on Supreme Court and Gauhati High Court precedents holding that merely producing a document in court does not automatically prove the truth of its contents.
The Bench rejected the petitioner's argument that the absence of cross-examination by the State authorities should result in acceptance of his evidence. It held that the person concerned must independently establish the relevant facts through reliable and admissible evidence.
Finding no sufficient grounds to interfere with the Foreigners Tribunal's opinion dated August 27, 2018, the Gauhati High Court dismissed the writ petition.
The Court directed that the consequences of the Tribunal's opinion would follow and made no order as to costs.
Case Details
Case Title: Md. Sofiqul Islam v. Union of India & Ors.
Case Number: WP(C)/3087/2019
Judges: Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Susmita Phukan Khaund
Decision Date: 5 November 2026
