Assam Widow Deported to Bangladesh Approaches Supreme Court Over Citizenship Dispute
A 43-year-old widow from Assam has approached the Supreme Court of India. She alleges authorities wrongly declared her an illegal migrant. This happened even though all sixteen members of her family appear on the National Register of Citizens.
Deportation and Detention Details
The woman, Aheda Khatun, faced deportation to Bangladesh recently. Her lawyer, Adeel Ahmed, stated she was taken from the Matila transit camp on December 19. This occurred while her citizenship case was still pending before the Supreme Court.
Earlier, on September 30, officials sent her to a detention center. This followed a Gauhati High Court decision in August. The high court rejected her plea challenging a Foreigners Tribunal order.
Claims of Indian Citizenship by Birth
In her petition, Khatun asserts she is an Indian citizen by birth. She was born in India in 1981. Her parents were already enrolled as voters for decades before her birth.
She cites Section 3(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act to support her claim. The National Register of Citizens family list shows every member of her family as accepted. This includes her father, mother, and fourteen siblings.
Khatun alone was marked as a doubtful voter. The petition states this was solely due to a pending case before a Foreigners Tribunal. This situation creates a strong prima facie case for her Indian citizenship, according to her legal filing.
Legal Proceedings and Tribunal Order
The Foreigners Tribunal declared her a foreigner in September 2019. It ruled she failed to provide conclusive proof of her lineage. Khatun moved the high court after a delay of more than five years.
Following the high court's dismissal of her plea, authorities detained her. She now challenges that high court order. Her petition argues the court rejected her case due to delay without examining the merits.
Supreme Court's Directive and Document Scrutiny
The Supreme Court has taken note of her plea. Since her brother filed an affidavit on her behalf, the court issued a specific notice. It aims to inquire into the genuineness of the documents her brother submitted.
The court ordered officials to verify these documents. This step is limited to assessing their authenticity for now.
Allegations of Legal Error and Document Rejection
The petition raises serious allegations against the Foreigners Tribunal. It claims the tribunal placed an insurmountable burden on Khatun under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
The tribunal rejected statutory and certified public documents she produced. This happened without any rebuttal or contradictory evidence from the State, according to the petition.
Khatun presented nine key documents as evidence. These included four consecutive voter lists from 1965, 1970, 1985, and 1997. Other documents were a Jamabandi, mutation order, registered gift deed, school certificate, and Gaonburah certificate.
Her legal team argues these are primary evidence of lineage and citizenship. The petition states the tribunal was not entitled to discard these documents based on surmises. This is especially true when the State led no contrary evidence.
The case highlights ongoing complexities in Assam's citizenship verification process. It underscores the human impact of legal and administrative decisions in such matters.
