SC sets aside Assam tribunal's declaration of foreigners: 'Citizenship must be determined by fair process'

The Supreme Court has delivered judgment on a series of petitions challenging the denial of citizenship by the Aliens Tribunal in Assam. The court said citizenship and alien status must be determined through a “fair, lawful and reasonable” process, setting aside Gauhati High Court judgments that upheld the declaration of 27 appellants as aliens.

A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta allowed 27 appeals and remanded the cases to the concerned foreigner tribunals for a fresh decision, Live Law said.

The court also ruled that the question of citizenship has deep constitutional significance and must be decided in accordance with the requirements of justice.

The petitioners argued that they were declared foreigners simply because of hyper-technical errors such as minor spelling discrepancies of names in old voter lists.

The Supreme Court’s judgment on Monday followed the Gauhati High Court dismissing a challenge to an ex parte order of the Aliens Tribunal declaring the petitioner a foreigner.

The Supreme Court held that in the absence of any written statement, documents or evidence from the parties, “the tribunal had no option but to uphold the reference”.

Referring to Section 9 of the Aliens Act, 1946, the High Court emphasized that the burden of proving Indian citizenship rests solely on the litigant as the relevant facts are particularly known to him.

He ruled that if no evidence is presented, the Tribunal is entitled to declare a party to the proceedings to be a foreigner based on the application filed against them.

On Monday, the Supreme Court noted: “Citizenship and the status of a foreigner occupy an area of high constitutional and legal importance.”

At the same time, the court recognized the state’s interest in preventing illegal claims to Indian citizenship.

“The State has a legitimate and compelling interest in ensuring that persons who are not legally entitled to apply for Indian citizenship do not acquire such status by abuse of process, false claim or taking advantage of delay,” the Bench said under Live Law.

However, the court emphasized that this goal cannot be at the expense of procedural justice. “At the same time, the determination of such status must be made through a process that is fair, lawful and reasonable,” it said.

“The statutory burden under Section 9 of the Aliens Act of 1946 remains fully applicable,” the court said.

The Bench further clarified that the remand prosecution should not be construed as granting any equitable relief to the petitioners.

“The intention of the ordered remand is not to provide any justice in favor of a person who is unable to prove his claim. It is only to ensure that the serious consequence of being declared a foreigner results from a sentence that meets the requirements of the Foreigners Act 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order 1964 and the mandate of the Constitutional Court of Justice,” he said.

Accordingly, the court set aside the judgments of the Gauhati High Court and the corresponding opinions and orders passed by the foreign tribunals concerned.

“The concerned tribunals shall decide the cases afresh and uninfluenced by any of the pronouncements of the Supreme Court or the tribunals in the earlier opinions,” the court ordered.

Clarifying the scope of its order, the Bench said it did not examine the merits of the appellants’ claims of Indian citizenship.

“We have not examined the merits of the applicants’ claims to citizenship, nor have we expressed any opinion on the authenticity, admissibility, relevance or sufficiency of any document relied upon by them. These questions must be decided independently by the tribunal concerned,” the court said.