IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J.
Cr. WJC No. 322 of 2024
(29.4.2024)
Farida Malik @ Sana Akhtar ... Petitioner
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents
Foreigners Act, 1946 – Sections 14/14(b) – Passport (Entry into India) Rules, 1950 – Rule 13 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 419 and 420 – Constitution of India – Article 226 – Quashing petition – Petitioner is a citizen of USA and she is in incarceration – Petitioner was earlier convicted under Section 3 of Passport Act read with Rules 3 and 5 of Passport Rules and under Section 14 of Foreigners Act read with Rule 3 of Foreigners Rules – Petitioner was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and was prescribed mood stabilizing and anti-psychotic medications – At best it is a case of unlawful entry into territory of India by petitioner and due to such reason, petitioner should have been deported in terms of Section 5 of Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 instead of facing trial under Sections 419 and 420 of Indian Penal Code and Section 14(b) of Foreigners Act, 1946 – Section 14 of Foreigners Act gets attracted only when there is allegation of violation of conditions of a valid Visa – Petitioner is not liable for committing any offence under Section 14(b) of Foreigners Act, 1946 – Criminal proceedings against petitioner quashed – Union of India and DGP directed to take immediate steps in consultation with USA Embassy in India to repatriate petitioner at once. (Paras 14, 15, 19, 20, 23, 26 and 27)
Bibek Chaudhuri, J. – The petitioner is a foreign national, being a citizen of United States of America. She is in incarceration in connection with Mahila (Kishanganj) P. S. Case No. 44 of 2022, dated 2nd of November, 2022, registered under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 14/14(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
2. It is relevant to mention, at the outset, that in connection with the aforesaid police case, charge-sheet has been submitted before the jurisdictional Court of the learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Kishanganj cognizance was taken; and the case is at the stage of trial.
3. At this stage, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition with the following relief: –
“(i) To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the First Information Report bearing Mahila (Kishanganj) P.S. Case No. 44/2022 dated 02.11.2022 registered under Sections 419 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 14/14(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and consequential proceedings.
(ii) To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Charge Sheet No. 53 of 2022 dated 28.12.2022 filed under Sections 419 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 14/14(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
(iii) To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the cognizance taking order dated 17.01.2023 by the Learned Court of SDJM, Kishanganj under Sections 419 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, section 14/14(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
(iv) To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order framing charge dated 05.10.2023 under Sections 419 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 14, 14(B) of the Foreigners Act, 1946 by which charge has been framed by the Court of ADJ-1 cum-Special Judge, Kishanganj, in ST No. 119/2023.
(v) To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of mandamus for commanding the respondents to return the items mentioned in the seizure memo forming part of the FIR, including the passport bearing no. A01007049, seized from the petitioner on her arrest.
(vi) To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of mandamus for commanding the respondents to deport the petitioner to the United States of America in consonance with Section 5 of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920.
(vii) To any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found to be entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
4. One Deepak Sharma, Assistant Commandant of 41 Battalion, Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) submitted a written report, duly forwarded to the SHO, Mahila Police Station Kishangan, alleging, inter alia, that on 1st of November, 2022 at about 07.30 P.M., Border Interaction Team apprehended one woman, who was travelling from Bagdodara Airport in a Maruti Espresso, bearing Registration No. WB74-BE/8075 and was trying to cross India-Nepal border to go to Nepal. The Border Interaction Team detained her. The said woman disclosed her name as Sana Akhtar and produced an identity card issued by the Asian Academy of Film and Television, Noida. She was asked to produce some other identity proof and her boarding pass for the journey from Delhi to Bagdodara. While producing the same, other boarding pass in the name of Farida Malik, dated 30th of July, 2022 for DOH-KTM flight was found to be present in her bag along with two other boarding passes of Indigo Airlines from Pant Nagar to Delhi and from Delhi to Bagdodara in the name of Sana Akhtar. From her possession, another boarding pass from Delhi to EWR of Qatar Airways and also from Doha to Kathmandu in the name of Farida Malik were recovered. On being asked, she disclosed her name as Farida Malik. She also disclosed that she was originally a citizen of Pakistan and had renounced her citizenship of Pakistan and took the citizenship of United States of America. The said lady mentioned one Americ
Charges under the Foreigners Act and Passports Act are not sustained when valid visas and passports are presented without immigration stamps; the appropriate legal remedy is deportation instead of pr....
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.
The court ruled that it lacks jurisdiction to direct visa issuance in bail proceedings, emphasizing the distinction between judicial custody and executive detention under the Foreigners Act.
Section 4 of Act runs as citizenship by descent.
Anticipatory bail may be granted where the prosecution fails to demonstrate the necessity for custodial interrogation or present sufficient evidence of ongoing criminal activity.
The main legal point established is that the necessity of custodial interrogation and the presence of evidence linking foreign travel to illegal activities are crucial factors in determining the gran....
The court affirmed that obtaining a passport from another country conclusively proves voluntary acquisition of its citizenship, terminating Indian citizenship under the Citizenship Act.
The fundamental right to travel abroad should not be deprived except by a just, fair, and reasonable procedure, as per the principles established by various judgments.
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.