ORDER A.K. Sikri, J. - The report of the Foreigners Tribunal-1, Nalbari has been received who has conducted the inquiry in pursuance of the directions given by this Court. In para 10 of the report it is observed as under: "10. On careful scrutiny of the above, it transpires that Santosh Ghosh son of Bolai was a voter in India since 1965 (Ex. 5). The name of Santosh Kr. Ghosh is found since 1953 at Dhamdhama Road, Nalbari. Though it appears that the O.P. Mintu Ghosh is a son of Santosh Kr. Ghosh, but most surprisingly he has not been able to prove any document where Santosh Kr. Ghosh son of Bolai Ghosh of Nalbari Town, Ward No. 2 and/or Dhamdhama Road, Nalbari Town is related with Mintu Ghosh son of Santosh of Nalbari Town, Ward No. 4. It was also nowhere mentioned as to when and where Santosh Kr. Ghosh son of Bolai of Dhamdhama Road, Nalbari expired. Ext. 1 and Ext. 2 are not admitted as they have not been proved by the concerned authority. The O.P has also not been able to prove his place and date of birth." 2. We may mention that the petitioner Mintu claims to be the son of Santosh Ghosh. In the aforesaid para the Tribunal records that Santosh Ghosh was a voter in India since 1965 (Ext. 5). It is also stated the name of Santosh Ghosh is found since 1953 at Dhamdhama Road, Nalbari. It is also recorded that the name of the father of the petitioner (Mintu) is Santosh Ghosh. However, at the same time, the Tribunal observed that it is not clear as to whether father of the petitioner is the same person i.e. Santosh Kumar Ghosh s/o Bolai who has been a voter in India since 1965. Since the scope of inquiry was limited the Tribunal had not gone further to ascertain the aforesaid fact which may require further evidence. In view thereof, learned counsel for the respondent also fairly states that let there be a de-novo trial by the Foreigners Tribunal, Nalbari to determine the basic issue as to whether the petitioner is a citizen of India. The petitioner shall be entitled to produce any other documentary or oral evidence on which he wants to place reliance. The Foreigners Tribunal shall try to conclude the case within six months. 3. The petitioner shall be entitled to produce any other documentary or oral evidence on which he wants to place reliance. The Foreigners Tribunal shall try to conclude the case within six months. 3. The special leave petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 4. We make it clear that this order has been passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances and shall not be treated as precedent. 5. Since the petitioner is under detention for quite some time he is released on bail which shall be subject to further order that can be passed by the Foreigners Tribunal 6. Pending applications, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.