Gauhati: The Gauhati High Court has ordered the Assam government to pay ₹2 lakh as interim compensation to the husband of a Bengali-origin Muslim woman, saying she was expelled to Bangladesh without being afforded an opportunity to challenge a Foreigner’s Tribunal (FT) decision.
Bench finds procedural breach, flags "malice in law"
A Division Bench of Justices Kalyan Rai Surana and Susmita Phukan Khaund issued the direction on September 3 while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Mujammel Hoque, the husband of the woman identified in court records as Mumtaz Begum. The court said the way the FT in Nagaon handled the matter gave rise to what it described as "malice in law" appearing from the record.
"malice in law"
The Bench observed that Ms. Begum was declared a foreigner by the Nagaon FT on May 30 after she appeared before the tribunal pursuant to an earlier High Court direction to re-examine her case. The court found that the FT did not take into account all the evidence submitted on her behalf in earlier proceedings.
Arrest and expulsion before legal remedies exhausted
The High Court noted that Ms. Begum was arrested soon after being informed of the May 30 FT order and was not given an opportunity to challenge the tribunal's decision in the High Court. The Bench questioned the narration of events provided by the tribunal member and the police concerning the timing and circumstances of her arrest.
The court held that the sequence of actions amounted to a "direct violation" of the standard operating procedure governing the expulsion of declared foreign nationals, under which an affected person must generally be allowed to exhaust available legal remedies before expulsion. It found that the conduct of the State machinery effectively prevented Ms. Begum from approaching the High Court against the FT order.
First instance of State being ordered to pay for cross-border expulsion
The September 3 direction marks, according to the order, the first instance of any court imposing a cost on the State for pushing a person across the international border into Bangladesh by violating deportation rules. The Bench's interim award of ₹2 lakh to Mr. Hoque is aimed at providing immediate relief while further proceedings continue.
- Petition: Habeas corpus filed by husband Mujammel Hoque
- FT involved: Nagaon Foreigner’s Tribunal
- FT order date: 30 May
- HC direction date: 3 September (interim)
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 30 May | FT in Nagaon declared Mumtaz Begum a foreigner |
| 3 September | Gauhati High Court ordered Assam government to pay ₹2 lakh as interim compensation |
Context and implications for Assam
Foreigner’s Tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies constituted to determine whether a person is a citizen or a foreigner. In Assam, decisions by FTs have long-standing social and political ramifications because of the State’s history of migration and the sensitive nature of citizenship, identity and cross-border movement with Bangladesh.
The HC's finding that the prescribed procedure was not followed — and that the State effectively foreclosed judicial review by way of an expeditious arrest and expulsion — raises questions about compliance with deportation norms and safeguards meant to protect the rights of individuals declared foreigners. The court's strong language and its decision to fix a pecuniary cost on the State are likely to be watched closely by rights groups, lawyers and families of persons facing similar proceedings.
The order does not set aside the FT's declaration in the interim; rather, it provides immediate monetary relief to the petitioner while the matter proceeds. The Bench's observations on the record of the FT and the police may influence subsequent hearings and any final directions the High Court eventually issues.
What the order signals
Legal observers in the State will view the judgment as a precedent emphasising procedural safeguards in deportation and the obligation of the State to allow access to judicial remedies before effecting an expulsion. It also underlines the role of higher courts in scrutinising the conduct of quasi-judicial bodies and state agencies where fundamental rights and liberty are at stake.
The case continues in the Gauhati High Court and further orders can be expected as the petition is adjudicated on its merits.
Report by Ananya Bora, Assam correspondent.
