IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. Nagaprasanna, J.
Mohammed Noman Ahmed Almeri - Appellant
Vs.
Union Of India Represented By Secretary To Government Of India Ministry Of Overseas India Affairs North Block, New Delhi - Respondent
Writ Petition No.15631 OF 2023 (GM – RES)
Decided On : 20-12-2023
Visa Extension - Citizenship Application - Citizenship Act 1955, Section 5(1)(c)
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a citizen of Yemen, seeks extension of Visa and Indian citizenship based on marriage to an Indian citizen and 7 years of residence in India. The rejection of Visa extension and non-consideration of citizenship application are challenged.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner engaged in fraudulent activities, including bringing Yemen nationals to India under the guise of medical treatment, converting Visas without valid documents, and marrying an Indian citizen for the purpose of acquiring citizenship.
Issues: Validity of Visa extension rejection and non-consideration of citizenship application, fraudulent activities of the petitioner, interpretation of Section 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act 1955.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's fraudulent activities and lack of valid grounds for Visa extension and citizenship application rendered the petition lacking in merit.
Final Decision: The petition for Visa extension and citizenship application lacking in merit stands rejected.
ORDER :
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question cancellation/rejection of his application for extension of Visa by the rd respondent/Foreigners Regional Registration Officer and seeks a consequential direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider his application for extension of Visa.
2. Facts adumbrated are as follows:
3. Heard Mr. Rahamathulla Kothwal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri H.Shanthi Bhushan, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Mr. Rahamathulla Kothwal would vehemently contend that application of the petitioner could not have been rejected, as in terms of Section 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) he is entitled to be treated as a Indian citizen on two grounds – one, he has married an Indian and the other, he is a resident of India for more than 7 years. On these two grounds the learned counsel would submit that a mandamus is to be issued to the respondents to treat the petitioner as an Indian citizen by grant of such citizenship. She would further contend that as on today the petitioner holds a valid passport of Yemen and it cannot be said that Visa cannot be extended or citizenship cannot be granted in the teeth of the Act and the Foreigners Act 1946.
5. On the other hand, the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India Sri H.Shanthi Bhushan would vehemently refute the submissions of the petitioner. He would take this Court through document by document contending that the petitioner has played fraud with the 3rd respondent. Though he is married and has three daughters in Yemen comes to India and marries an Indian citizen in 2019 only to make eligible for consideration of his citizenship in India. He has never been an inpatient in any hospital for him to get a medical Visa. He is in fact doing the business of medical tourism and has got hundreds of people
Fraudulent activities and lack of valid grounds for Visa extension and citizenship application render the petition lacking in merit.
Section 4 of Act runs as citizenship by descent.
The absolute and unfettered power of the Government of India to expel foreign nationals who overstay without proper documentation, and the paramount importance of national security in immigration mat....
The court upheld that compliance with statutory norms under the Foreigners Act is valid, and citizenship claims lacking formal proof under the Citizenship Act cannot impede authority action.
The right to stay in India as a student is subject to Indian laws and the VISA Rules, and no unfettered right can be claimed by a foreign student.
An FIR against a foreign national for overstaying a visa can be quashed if no violation of visa conditions occurred, emphasizing deportation over criminal prosecution.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.