In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has held that a Foreigners Tribunal cannot reopen a concluded case and sit in appeal over its own final judgment. The apex court set aside an order passed by the Foreigners Tribunal (F.T.) of Assam, which had revisited an earlier adjudication that had already declared Rejia Khatun @ Rezia Khatun to be an Indian citizen.
The ruling was delivered by a bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan in Criminal Appeal No. ______/2025 (arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 12481/2023). The Court allowed the appeal of Rejia Khatun @ Rezia Khatun, overturning the judgment of the Gauhati High Court dated June 9, 2023, in Writ Petition (C) No. 2811/2020.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose from two conflicting orders passed by the Foreigners Tribunal under the Foreigners (Tribunal) Order, 1964, issued under Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
First Tribunal Order (February 15, 2018): In F.T. Case No. 14/2016, the Foreigners Tribunal, after considering oral and documentary evidence, ruled that Rejia Khatun was not a foreigner from Bangladesh who had entered India after March 25, 1971. The Tribunal passed the order upon a reference made by the Assam government, and the State was represented by an Assistant Government Advocate.
Second Tribunal Order (December 24, 2019): Despite the first order, a fresh reference was made in F.T. Case No. 2854/2012, again at the instance of the Assam government. The Tribunal entertained the new reference and held that it was empowered to scrutinize documents and findings from the previous proceedings. It directed Rejia Khatun to file a written statement, disregarding the earlier adjudication.
The appellant challenged the second Tribunal order before the Gauhati High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, but the High Court upheld the Tribunal’s power to re-examine the case, rejecting the plea of res judicata (a legal doctrine preventing re-litigation of the same issue).
Supreme Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court disagreed with the High Court and firmly held that the Foreigners Tribunal had no power to reopen and review its own final decision. The Court remarked:
“What stares at the face is that the first order was passed after full consideration of evidence and legal representation by the State. The Tribunal’s attempt to re-examine its own findings amounts to sitting in appeal over its own judgment—something it has no authority to do.”
Further, the Court questioned the actions of the State of Assam:
“The State was a party to the first order but failed to challenge it before the High Court or seek recall. Instead, it initiated fresh proceedings before the same Tribunal, which is impermissible.”
Court’s Decision
Setting aside the second Tribunal order and the Gauhati High Court’s ruling, the Supreme Court held:
The 2018 Tribunal order declaring the appellant an Indian citizen remains final and binding.
The Tribunal cannot review or reopen its own adjudicated cases.
The State and Union of India cannot now challenge the 2018 order after failing to take proper legal recourse at the time.
The Supreme Court’s ruling underscores the principle that quasi-judicial bodies, such as Foreigners Tribunals, must adhere to legal finality and cannot arbitrarily reopen settled cases. The judgment provides significant relief to Rejia Khatun, whose citizenship status was being repeatedly questioned despite a prior ruling in her favor.
Legal Representation
The appellant, Rejia Khatun, was represented by Senior Advocate Pijush Kanti Roy, along with Mrs. Kakali Roy, Mr. Rajesh Kumar Chaurasia (AOR), Mr. Sujeet Kumar, Mr. Shailendra Kumar Nirmal, and Mr. Nitin Kumar Gupta.
The Union of India and the State of Assam were represented by Additional Solicitor General K.M. Nataraj, along with Advocates Shuvodeep Roy, Sharath Nambiar, Anuj Srinivas Udupa, Karunesh K. Shukla, Satvika Thakur, and Arvind Kumar Sharma (AOR).
