SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

ARUNACHALAM
Somasundaram – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the parties:
For the Petitioners - R. Shanmugasundaram.
For the Respondent - S. Shanmughavelayutham, A.P.P.

ORDER

Arunachalam, J. - All these petitions are disposed of together by a common order, since the respondent is the same and the contentions raised are identical. Further, the petitioner in Crl. M.P. No. 9727 of 1988, is the husband of the petitioner in Crl. M.P. No. 9730 of 1988, and the father of petitioners in Crl. MP. Nos. 9733, 9736, 9739 and 9742 of 1988. All these petitions have been preferred under section 482, Cr. P.C. to call for the records and quash the pending prosecutions in C.C. Nos. 92 to 97 of 1988 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanyakumari at Nagercoil, as not maintainable and an abuse of process of court.

2. All the petitioners are facing a charge under section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. The petitioners are stated to be foreigners, namely, citizens of Republic of Sri Lanka, holding passports of that country. All of them arrived in India on 11.3.1986 and were permitted to stay in this country until 12.8.1986, as per residential permits issued. Without obtaining extension permits, they continued to remain in India and hence are liable for punishment under section 14 of the Foreigners Act read with para 7 of the Foreigners Order, 1948.

3. Mr. R.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top