The respondents, on the other hand, urged the Court to take note of the appellant’s conduct stating that he was guilty of suppressing material facts.
It was also highlighted that substantial proof had been brought on record to show that the appellant had been conferred Pakistani citizenship and was permitted to travel to India on a temporary residential permit.
The respondents contended that the burden of proof lay on the appellant to show that he was not a Pakistani citizen, and the judge had rightly found that he failed to dislodge the burden.
Attention was also drawn to an observation by a coordinate bench of the Court, in collateral proceedings, wherein it was recorded that the appellant was admittedly not an Indian citizen.
Source: Barandbench
