Petitioner's Claim of Indian Citizenship Dismissed Due to Lack of Credible Evidence and Unsupported Mental Illness Claim
In a significant ruling, the Gauhati High Court has upheld the decision of the Foreigners Tribunal declaring Farjul Haque, also known as Md. Faizul or Fazlul Hoque, as a foreigner. The court found that Haque failed to establish his claim of Indian citizenship, unable to substantiate his lineage with credible documentation, particularly the linkage to his projected father.
The case, filed under WP(C)/5227 of 2019, was presided over by Justices Kalyan Rai Surana and Shamima Jahan, who delivered the judgment on June 26, 2026. The petitioner sought to overturn the Tribunal's decision dated March 28, 2017, which categorized him as a foreigner of the post-1971 stream.
Haque's plea was primarily based on documents such as voter lists and land sale deeds, which he claimed demonstrated his father's and grandfather's presence in India before the cutoff date of March 25, 1971. However, the court noted inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence provided. The voter lists did not adequately link Haque with his projected father, Abdul Jabbar, as the documents failed to establish a clear lineage.
Additionally, Haque asserted that he suffered from mental illness, which he argued affected his ability to present his case effectively. He submitted an OPD ticket from the Lokopriya Gopinath Bordoloi Regional Institute of Mental Health, but the court found this insufficient to substantiate a claim of mental illness under the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017. The court emphasized that a mere prescription was inadequate without a formal medical examination or certification by a competent board, as outlined in Section 105 of the Act.
The High Court underscored its limited jurisdiction in certiorari proceedings, reiterating that it cannot reappraise factual findings but only review the legality of the decision-making process. The court found no procedural errors in the Tribunal's decision and thus refrained from interfering with its factual conclusions.
Ultimately, the writ petition was dismissed, and the court vacated any interim orders previously granted. The judgment signifies the rigorous standards required to challenge citizenship determinations and the stringent burden of proof on individuals asserting Indian citizenship under the Foreigners Act, 1946.
Bottom line:-
Foreigners Tribunal - Petitioner's claim of Indian citizenship rejected based on failure to establish linkage with the projected father and lack of credible evidence, including voter lists and other documents. Mental illness claim unsupported by adequate medical proof under Mental Healthcare Act, 2017. Certiorari jurisdiction of High Court limited to examining the decision-making process and not the reappraisal of factual findings.
Statutory provision(s): Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Foreigners Act, 1946 Section 9, Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 Sections 3, 4, 105
