Archive · 8 Oct 2026
Gauhati High Court Rejects Woman’s Citizenship Challenge
Mustt Hasena Bhanu said she was an Indian citizen by birth.
She showed the court voter lists and other papers to support her claim that a man named Hasen Ali was her father.
A Foreigners’ Tribunal had earlier said the papers did not prove her family connection and declared her a foreigner who entered India after March 25, 1971.
Bhanu asked the Gauhati High Court to change that decision.
The court said people whose citizenship is questioned must provide reliable evidence and important family details.
It also said a witness’s statement does not prove a claim just because the other side did not question the witness.
The court dismissed Bhanu’s challenge and cancelled her interim bail.
The tribunal’s decision will now take effect.
The Gauhati High Court dismissed Mustt Hasena Bhanu’s challenge to a Foreigners’ Tribunal opinion declaring her a foreigner.
The tribunal’s May 19, 2017 opinion found she entered India illegally from Bangladesh after March 25, 1971.
Bhanu relied on older and later electoral rolls, a village panchayat link certificate, a PAN card application and witness testimony.
The court found the evidence did not establish her claimed family links and said citizenship claims require cogent, reliable and admissible proof.
The court rejected her argument about lack of cross-examination, revoked her interim bail and allowed the tribunal’s decision to take effect.
- Who
- Mustt Hasena Bhanu, the Gauhati High Court and a Foreigners’ Tribunal.
- What
- The High Court dismissed Bhanu’s challenge to the tribunal’s finding that she was a foreigner of the post-March 25, 1971 stream.
- When
- The High Court made its observation on October 5; the tribunal’s opinion was dated May 19, 2017.
- Where
- Gauhati High Court, Assam, India.
- Why
- The court found that Bhanu had not proved her claimed family links and citizenship with sufficient evidence.
Bhanu’s arguments
Authorities’ and court’s position
Family relationship evidence
Bhanu’s arguments
Bhanu relied on electoral rolls and testimony from Md Imam Hussain to support her claim that she was Hasen Ali’s daughter.
Authorities’ and court’s position
The authorities and court said the documents and testimony did not establish the claimed lineage; the panchayat certificate was also rejected because its issuing authority had not been examined.
Lack of cross-examination
Bhanu’s arguments
Bhanu argued that her evidence had not been effectively challenged because neither she nor her witness was cross-examined.
Authorities’ and court’s position
The court said a disputed fact is not proved merely because a witness was not cross-examined, and oral testimony alone cannot establish citizenship in these proceedings.
Burden of proof
Bhanu’s arguments
Bhanu maintained that she was an Indian citizen by birth and asked the High Court to overturn the tribunal’s opinion.
Authorities’ and court’s position
The authorities and court said a person asserting they are not a foreigner must provide foundational facts and prove the claim with cogent, reliable and admissible evidence.
- Petitioner
- Mustt Hasena Bhanu
- Court
- Gauhati High Court
- Judges
- Justices Kalyan Rai Surana and Susmita Phukan Khaund
- Tribunal opinion
- May 19, 2017
- Cut-off date
- March 25, 1971
- Evidence cited
- 1966 and 1970 electoral rolls, later electoral rolls, a village panchayat link certificate, a PAN card application and witness testimony
- Outcome
- The High Court dismissed the petition, declined to interfere with the tribunal’s opinion and revoked interim bail granted on August 25, 2017.
