The Supreme Court set aside Gauhati High Court judgments declaring 27 people as foreigners and directed the concerned Foreigners Tribunals to decide the citizenship claims afresh through a fair and lawful process

The Supreme Court on Monday set aside a batch of judgments passed by the Gauhati High Court that had upheld the declaration of 27 appellants as foreigners, and remanded the cases to the concerned Foreigners Tribunals for fresh adjudication.

The Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta allowed the appeals, holding that questions relating to citizenship and foreigner status carry profound constitutional significance and must be determined through a process that is “fair, lawful and reasonable.”

“Citizenship and foreigner status occupy a field of high constitutional and legal significance,” the Court observed.

The Court, however, also recognised 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 claim Indian citizenship do not secure such status by misuse of process, by false claim or by taking advantage of delays,” the Bench said.

At the same time, the Court stressed that such concerns cannot override procedural fairness.

“At the same time, the determination of such status must be made through a process which is fair, lawful and reasonable. The statutory burden under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 remains fully applicable,” it added.

No opinion on Citizenship Claims

Clarifying the scope of its intervention, the Bench stated that it had not examined the merits of the appellants’ claims to Indian citizenship.

“We have not examined the merits of the claims of citizenship by the appellants or expressed any opinion on the genuineness, admissibility, relevance or sufficiency of any document relied upon by them. Those questions must be decided by the concerned Tribunal independently,” the Court said.

The Court further made it clear that the remand should not be treated as granting any equitable relief to the appellants.

“The remand being directed is not intended to confer any equity in favour of a person who is unable to establish his or her claim. It is only to ensure that the serious consequence of being declared a foreigner follows from an adjudication which satisfies the requirements of the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, and the constitutional mandate of fairness,” the Bench observed.

Fresh Adjudication Ordered

Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside both the impugned judgments of the Gauhati High Court and the corresponding opinions and orders passed by the Foreigners Tribunals.

“The concerned Tribunals shall decide the cases afresh and uninfluenced by any of the observations made by the High Court or by the Tribunals in the earlier opinions,” the Court directed.

Background of the Case

In the lead matter, the Gauhati High Court had dismissed a challenge to an ex parte order of the Foreigners Tribunal declaring the petitioners to be foreigners. The High Court noted that notices had been duly served, but the proceedees failed to appear before the Tribunal and challenged the order only after nearly 23 years.

The High Court had held that in the absence of any written statement, documents or evidence from the proceedees, “the Tribunal had no option but to affirm the reference.”

Relying on Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, the High Court had emphasised that the burden of proving Indian citizenship lies entirely on the proceedee and does not shift even in ex parte proceedings.

Case Title: Sabitri Dey @Swasthi Dey v. Union of India and connected matters 

Bench: Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta

Hearing Date: July 13, 2026

Tags: