Adhir Sarkar @ Adhir Chandra Sarkar v. The Union of India and 7 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010131032023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oI.A.(Civil)/1805/2023o ADHIRoSARKARo@oADHIRoCHANDRAoSARKARo S/O-oLATEoJAGADISHoSARKAR,oR/O-oVILL.-oHALDIBARIoPART-II,oP.S.o ABHAYAPURI,DIST.-oBONGAIGAON,oASSAM,oPIN-o783383. VERSUSo THEoUNIONoOFoINDIAoANDo7oORS.o REP.oBYoTHEoSECRETARY,oMINISTRYoOFoHOMEoAFFAIRS,oGOVT.oOFo INDIA,SHASTRIoBHAWAN,oNEWoDELHI-110001. 2:THEoSTATEoOFoASSAM oREP.oBYoTHEoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM oHOMEoDEPARTMENT oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-781006. 3:THEoELECTIONoCOMMISSIONoOFoINDIA oREP.oBYoTHEoCHIEFoELECTIONoCOMMISSION oNIRVACHANoSADAN oASHOKAoROAD oNEWoDELHI-o110001. 4:THEoSTATEoCOORDINATOR oNATIONALoREGISTRATIONoOFoCITIZENS oASSAM o1SToFLOOR oACHYUToPLAZA oG.S.oROAD oBHANGAGARH oGUWAHATI oASSAM oPIN-o781005. PageoNo.#o2/4 5:THEoFOREIGNERSoTRIBUNAL oBONGAIGAONoNO.2 oABHAYAPURI oP.O.oANDoP.S.oABHAYAPURI oDIST.-oBONGAIGAON oASSAM oPIN-o783383. 6:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER oBONGAIGAON oP.O. oP.S.oANDoDIST.-oBONGAIGAON oASSAM oPIN-o783380. 7:THEoSUPERINTENDENToOFoPOLICEo(BORDER) oBONGAIGAON oPO. oP.S.oANDoDIST.-oBONGAIGAON oASSAM oPIN-o783380. 8:THEoOFFICER-IN-CHARGE oABHAYAPURIoPOLICEoSTATION oP.O.oABHAYAPURI oDIST.-oABHAYAPURI oASSAM oPIN-o783383o AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oMoAHMED,oMR.oIoHoLASKARo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oASSTT.S.G.I.,oSC,oECI,SC,oNRC,SC,oF.Too oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo BEFORE HONOURABLEoMR.oJUSTICEoKALYANoRAIoSURANA HONOURABLEoMR.oJUSTICEoKARDAKoETE ORDERo Dateo:oo11.11.2024 (K.R.2Surana,2J) Mr. 2 D.K. 2 Agarwala, 2 learned 2 counsel 2 for 2 the 2 applicant 2 prays 2 for 2 an Page No.# 3/4 adjournment as the counsel for the applicant is not available.

¶2Heard Mr. M. Adhikary, learned CGC appearing for the respondent No.1; Mrs. A. Verma, learned Standing counsel, Home Department appearing for the respondents No.2, 7 and 8 and Mr. A.I. Ali, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 and Mr. R. Talukdar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.6.

¶3The Court finds that the Foreigners' Tribunal No.2 Bongaigaon, Abhayapuri is not a necessary party in the adjudication and accordingly, the respondent No.5 is struck off.

¶4The Registry shall do the necessary correction in the Cause Title without altering the seriatim of the parties.

¶5By this Interlocutory Application, the applicant has prayed for condoning the delay of 53 days beyond the period of limitation in filing the connected review petition.

¶6The learned Standing counsel, Home Department has opposed the prayer made in the application.

¶7However, on considering the projection that the applicant was taken into custody pursuant to the opinion dated 04.07.2016 passed by the learned Member, Foreigners' Tribunal, Bongaigaon No.2, Abhayapuri in Case No. Page No.# 4/4 BNGN/FT/Case No.3683/2008 and after three years of detention, he was released and it is projected that the petitioner was under financial constraint, for which, the review could not be filed on time, Court is inclined to allow the application.

¶8The delay of 53 days beyond the period of limitation in filing the connected review petition stands allowed.

¶9List the connected review petition after a week.

JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant