In the case of Md Rahim Ali @ Abdur Rahim vs State of Assam and Ors through an investigation it revealed that the appellant illegally migrated to the State of Assam from Bangladesh after March 25, 1971, no evidence has been presented to support this claim, except for the bare allegation that he illegally migrated to India after March 25, 1971.
The bench for this case consisted of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah who stated that there are no records with the police regarding the proceedings which was initiated against Md Rahim Ali in 2004.
Ali has already appealed the Foreigners Tribunal verdict in the Gauhati High Court. The High Court originally suspended the enforcement of the tribunal's order, but his request was dismissed in November 2015.This prompted the current appeal before the Supreme Court.The Court concludes that a serious miscarriage of justice occurred in this case.The court also said that appellant is not a foreigner thus his case would not fall under Section 8 of Citizenship Act 1955 which states that,
(1) When a foreigner is recognised as a national by the law of more than one foreign country or where for any reason it is uncertain what nationality if any is to be ascribed to a foreigner, that foreigner may be treated as the national of the country with which he appears to the prescribed authority to be most closely connected for the time being in interest or sympathy or if he is of uncertain nationality, of the country with which he was last so connected:
Provided that where a foreigner acquired a nationality by birth, he shall, except where the Central Government so directs either generally or in a particular case, be deemed to retain that nationality unless he proves to the satisfaction of the said authority that he has subsequently acquired by naturalization or otherwise some other nationality and still recognized as entitled to protection by the Government of the country whose nationality he has so acquired.
(2) A decision as to nationality given under sub-section (1) shall be final and shall not be called in question in any Court:
Provided that the Central Government, either of its own motion or on an application by the foreigner concerned, may revise any such decision.
The court further also said that there were said that they were able to trace the origin of Md Rahim Ali, so there should have been some evidence to support this argument but the records show that there was no such document provided that supported the above claim.While analyzing this case the court asked whether Section 9 of the Citizenship Act 1955 empowers the state to randomly suspect any person that He/She is a foreigner and pick them.
In the present case, the Court ruled that the authorities made major mistakes by interpreting the phrase 'a copy of the major grounds on which he is believed to be a foreigner' in the rules to mean the allegations leveled against the person.The Court thereby overturned the orders of the High Court and the Foreigners Tribunal.The Court further ordered that a copy of the verdict be distributed to all Foreigners' Tribunals in Assam.
