The Calcutta High Court ruled that Aadhaar, PAN and voter ID cards alone cannot conclusively establish Indian citizenship while dismissing a petition challenging the detention of a suspected Bangladeshi national.
Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that documents such as Aadhaar cards, PAN cards and voter identity cards are not conclusive proof of Indian citizenship.
The observation came during the hearing of a petition filed by Suman Molla, who challenged the detention of his nephew, Nasir. According to the petition, Nasir was lodged in a detention centre after his name was removed from the electoral rolls during the 2026 Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise in West Bengal, even though an appeal against the deletion was pending.
Also Read
To establish Nasir's Indian citizenship, the petitioner relied on his voter ID card, Aadhaar card, PAN card issued by the Income Tax Department and a bank passbook.
A division bench comprising Justices Debangsu Basak and Ajay Kumar Gupta held that voter identity cards, Aadhaar and PAN cards are not conclusive proof of Indian citizenship.
The court observed that a voter ID card only proves that a person was enrolled in the electoral rolls, adding that Nasir's name had already been deleted during the 2026 SIR process. It also ruled that merely holding a bank account cannot be treated as proof of Indian citizenship.
"The writ petitioner and the detainee are unable to discharge the burden of proof as mandated by the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025," the court observed.
Holding that Nasir's Indian citizenship had not been established, the court declined to interfere with the authorities' decision and dismissed the petition.
Detention and citizenship verification
The court noted that Nasir was detained on June 18, 2026, under a Ministry of Home Affairs circular dated May 2, 2025, and is currently lodged in a detention centre.
Under the MHA guidelines, a detainee is given 60 days to establish Indian citizenship. The bench observed that as of July 20, Nasir had failed to produce any document proving his citizenship.
During the hearing, the court allowed the petitioner's lawyer to speak to Nasir over the phone through a facility provided by the state. Nasir claimed that his parents had died in India.
The bench said it considered directing a DNA test using the mortal remains of Nasir's parents to verify his claim. However, both Nasir and the petitioner refused to identify where his parents had been buried.
"We draw an adverse inference as against the detainee with regard to his parents being Indian citizens," the court said.
Court questions petitioner's claims
The High Court also questioned the credibility of the petitioner, observing that he had not approached the court with clean hands.
It noted that in a complaint filed with the police, Molla had described himself as Nasir's cousin, whereas in the writ petition he claimed to be Nasir's uncle.
The petition further stated that Molla had brought up Nasir after the death of his father in 1980. However, the court pointed out that the petitioner is 38 years old, while the detainee is 46, making the claim implausible.
Appearing for the Centre, counsel submitted that an inquiry, interrogation and verification conducted before the detention order concluded that Nasir is a Bangladeshi national.
(With PTI inputs)
Published: 30 Jul 2026, 10:28 am IST
Disclaimer: Kindly avoid objectionable, derogatory, unlawful and lewd comments, while responding to reports. Such comments are punishable under cyber laws. Please keep away from personal attacks. The opinions expressed here are the personal opinions of readers and not that of Mathrubhumi.