Illegal immigrants <\/a>were defined in Section 3(c) of the Act.<\/h3>\n\n\n\nAny person who meets the criteria listed below is an illegal immigrant, pursuant the Section:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n- He arrived in India after March 25, 1971.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Is a foreign national.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Has entered India without a current passport or another active piece of identification.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n\n
Need A Legal Advice<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nThe internet is not a lawyer and neither are you. Talk to a real lawyer about your legal issue<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nTalk to a Lawyer<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>![\"\"](\"data:image\/svg+xml;base64,PHN2ZyB3aWR0aD0iMSIgaGVpZ2h0PSIxIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcvMjAwMC9zdmciPjwvc3ZnPg==\")
<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<\/div>\n\n\n\nA list of those to whom the Act does not apply was included in Section 2 of the Act:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n- Any person found to be a foreigner upon entry from any of India’s international borders;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Any foreigner who entered India with a valid passport and visa but is still residing in India even after the expiration of his visa;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Any person who has been deported from India before the commencement of this Act or any such person who has been deported under any other law in effect.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
This Act cleared the ground for the creation of legal tribunals in Assam to determine<\/a> whether a person is an Indian citizen or a foreigner. The government had the burden of proof in this case, unlike the Foreigners Act of 1946. The government offered the accused a fair chance to verify his identification by setting up tribunals. The person had the opportunity to appeal to the Appellate Tribunal if they were not happy with the Tribunal’s judgement.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIllegal Migrants (Determination) Tribunals:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
According to the Act, the Central Government may appoint as many Illegal Migrants (Determination) Tribunals as it deems necessary. Each Tribunal must exercise its authority within its own boundaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There should be a minimum of two members on each Tribunal. Either a district judge or an additional district judge in a state must be the person nominated to the Tribunal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are two methods for submitting a request to the Tribunal:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n- Against a government order designating someone a foreigner and ordering them to leave the country.<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
- By anyone else declaring someone to be an undocumented immigrant.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The Tribunal had the following authority:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n- Summoning, requiring the presence of, and questioning under oath witnesses;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Finding and producing any document;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Acceptance of affidavit-based evidence;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Requesting from any court or office public records;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Creation of any commission for witness examination.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
This process needed to be completed swiftly in order to be successful, hence Section 13 of the Act mandated that the reference made to the Tribunal be investigated immediately and resolved within six months of the date of service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Appellate Tribunal: <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The central government was to provide instructions for the establishment of the Appellate Tribunal,<\/a> which will have a minimum of two members and a maximum of six. The person must be a High Court Judge in order to qualify to serve on that Appellate Tribunal. Within 30 days of the Tribunal’s decision, an appeal may be filed with the Appellate Tribunal. If the Appellate Tribunal was pleased with the reason for the delay after the passing of thirty days, the case would be taken; otherwise, the Tribunal’s judgement would be final.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSarbananda Sonowal v. Union Of India (2005)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Need A Legal Advice<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\nThe internet is not a lawyer and neither are you. Talk to a real lawyer about your legal issue<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nTalk to a Lawyer<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n<\/div>\n\n\n\nA list of those to whom the Act does not apply was included in Section 2 of the Act:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n- Any person found to be a foreigner upon entry from any of India’s international borders;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Any foreigner who entered India with a valid passport and visa but is still residing in India even after the expiration of his visa;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Any person who has been deported from India before the commencement of this Act or any such person who has been deported under any other law in effect.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
This Act cleared the ground for the creation of legal tribunals in Assam to determine<\/a> whether a person is an Indian citizen or a foreigner. The government had the burden of proof in this case, unlike the Foreigners Act of 1946. The government offered the accused a fair chance to verify his identification by setting up tribunals. The person had the opportunity to appeal to the Appellate Tribunal if they were not happy with the Tribunal’s judgement.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIllegal Migrants (Determination) Tribunals:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
According to the Act, the Central Government may appoint as many Illegal Migrants (Determination) Tribunals as it deems necessary. Each Tribunal must exercise its authority within its own boundaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There should be a minimum of two members on each Tribunal. Either a district judge or an additional district judge in a state must be the person nominated to the Tribunal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are two methods for submitting a request to the Tribunal:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n- Against a government order designating someone a foreigner and ordering them to leave the country.<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
- By anyone else declaring someone to be an undocumented immigrant.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The Tribunal had the following authority:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n- Summoning, requiring the presence of, and questioning under oath witnesses;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Finding and producing any document;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Acceptance of affidavit-based evidence;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Requesting from any court or office public records;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Creation of any commission for witness examination.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
This process needed to be completed swiftly in order to be successful, hence Section 13 of the Act mandated that the reference made to the Tribunal be investigated immediately and resolved within six months of the date of service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Appellate Tribunal: <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The central government was to provide instructions for the establishment of the Appellate Tribunal,<\/a> which will have a minimum of two members and a maximum of six. The person must be a High Court Judge in order to qualify to serve on that Appellate Tribunal. Within 30 days of the Tribunal’s decision, an appeal may be filed with the Appellate Tribunal. If the Appellate Tribunal was pleased with the reason for the delay after the passing of thirty days, the case would be taken; otherwise, the Tribunal’s judgement would be final.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSarbananda Sonowal v. Union Of India (2005)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.leadindia.law\/blog\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/talk-to-lawyer-black-logo.png\"){kind=logo}
<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\nA list of those to whom the Act does not apply was included in Section 2 of the Act:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n- Any person found to be a foreigner upon entry from any of India’s international borders;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Any foreigner who entered India with a valid passport and visa but is still residing in India even after the expiration of his visa;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Any person who has been deported from India before the commencement of this Act or any such person who has been deported under any other law in effect.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
This Act cleared the ground for the creation of legal tribunals in Assam to determine<\/a> whether a person is an Indian citizen or a foreigner. The government had the burden of proof in this case, unlike the Foreigners Act of 1946. The government offered the accused a fair chance to verify his identification by setting up tribunals. The person had the opportunity to appeal to the Appellate Tribunal if they were not happy with the Tribunal’s judgement.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIllegal Migrants (Determination) Tribunals:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
According to the Act, the Central Government may appoint as many Illegal Migrants (Determination) Tribunals as it deems necessary. Each Tribunal must exercise its authority within its own boundaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There should be a minimum of two members on each Tribunal. Either a district judge or an additional district judge in a state must be the person nominated to the Tribunal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
There are two methods for submitting a request to the Tribunal:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n- Against a government order designating someone a foreigner and ordering them to leave the country.<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
- By anyone else declaring someone to be an undocumented immigrant.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
The Tribunal had the following authority:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n- Summoning, requiring the presence of, and questioning under oath witnesses;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Finding and producing any document;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Acceptance of affidavit-based evidence;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Requesting from any court or office public records;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Creation of any commission for witness examination.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
This process needed to be completed swiftly in order to be successful, hence Section 13 of the Act mandated that the reference made to the Tribunal be investigated immediately and resolved within six months of the date of service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Appellate Tribunal: <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The central government was to provide instructions for the establishment of the Appellate Tribunal,<\/a> which will have a minimum of two members and a maximum of six. The person must be a High Court Judge in order to qualify to serve on that Appellate Tribunal. Within 30 days of the Tribunal’s decision, an appeal may be filed with the Appellate Tribunal. If the Appellate Tribunal was pleased with the reason for the delay after the passing of thirty days, the case would be taken; otherwise, the Tribunal’s judgement would be final.<\/p>\n\n\n\nSarbananda Sonowal v. Union Of India (2005)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
This Act cleared the ground for the creation of legal tribunals in Assam to determine<\/a> whether a person is an Indian citizen or a foreigner. The government had the burden of proof in this case, unlike the Foreigners Act of 1946. The government offered the accused a fair chance to verify his identification by setting up tribunals. The person had the opportunity to appeal to the Appellate Tribunal if they were not happy with the Tribunal’s judgement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to the Act, the Central Government may appoint as many Illegal Migrants (Determination) Tribunals as it deems necessary. Each Tribunal must exercise its authority within its own boundaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There should be a minimum of two members on each Tribunal. Either a district judge or an additional district judge in a state must be the person nominated to the Tribunal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This process needed to be completed swiftly in order to be successful, hence Section 13 of the Act mandated that the reference made to the Tribunal be investigated immediately and resolved within six months of the date of service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The central government was to provide instructions for the establishment of the Appellate Tribunal,<\/a> which will have a minimum of two members and a maximum of six. The person must be a High Court Judge in order to qualify to serve on that Appellate Tribunal. Within 30 days of the Tribunal’s decision, an appeal may be filed with the Appellate Tribunal. If the Appellate Tribunal was pleased with the reason for the delay after the passing of thirty days, the case would be taken; otherwise, the Tribunal’s judgement would be final.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIllegal Migrants (Determination) Tribunals:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
There are two methods for submitting a request to the Tribunal:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
The Tribunal had the following authority:<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Appellate Tribunal: <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union Of India (2005)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n