The main legal point established is that a restriction cannot be imposed retrospectively, and in the absence of evidence of a quarantine directive, the petitioner's actions did not constitute a violation.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr. P.C. seeking following prayers:

"A. Pass an appropriate order/direction quashing:

"(i) FIR No. 128/2020, dated 09.04.2020, registered against the Petitioner at Police Station Amar Colony, Delhi;

(ii) Complaint dated 18.09.2020 under Section 195 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by ACP, Kalkaji, New Delhi in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Saket Court, New Delhi;

(iii) Final Form report submitted under section 173 Cr.P.C. under Sections 188, 269 & 270 of Indian Penal Code, 1890, Section 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 and Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005;

(iv) Order dated 26.03.2021 issuing summons passed by the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, Saket Court, New Delhi in Cr CASE/0004440/2020 and all other related/consequential proceedings emanating therefrom"

2. The present FIR has been lodged against the petitioner for violating quarantine norms issued in the wake of Covid-19 pandemic. As per the FIR it has been alleged that the petitioner was directed to remain in 14 days home isolation w.e.f. 17.03.2020 to 30.03.2020 in terms of the prohibitory order No. 608-647/ACP, Kalkaji, Delhi dated 24.03.2020. However, the CDR of her mobile number, reflected that the petitioner was outside her home and not following the said directions, thereby flouting the Covid-19 norms.

3. Basis the said allegations, FIR No. 0128/2020 came to be registered on 09.04.2020 against the petitioner herein under sections 188/269/270/271 of IPC, section 3 of Epidemic Diseases Act and section 51 of Disaster Management Act at PS Amar Colony.

4. Briefly alleged the facts are that the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India issued certain Travel Advisories on 11.03.2020 and 16.03.2020. It has been submitted that in terms of the said Travel Advisories, the passengers travelling from the countries namely, China, Italy, Iran, Republic of Korea, France, Spain, Germany, UAE, Qatar, Oman, and Kuwait were mandated to quarantine themselves for 14 days. It is submitted that on 17.03.2020, the petitioner who is employed as a cabin crew with TATA SIA Airlines Ltd. (Vistara) in regular discharge of her professional duties, operated the Delhi-Kathmandu-Delhi, Vistara flight - UK 155 and UK 156, and after landing in Delhi at 18:20 hours, headed back to her residence at Dayanand Colony. Thereafter, again on 18.03.2020 to 20.03.2020, the Petitioner operated flights to Mumbai, Bangalore and back to Delhi in regular discharge of her professional duties.

5. It has been submitted that as on 17.03.2020 and 18.03.2020, when the petitioner operated the aforesaid flights, there was no advisory issued by the Government of India mandating 14 days quarantine for passengers travelling/transiting from Nepal. The prohibitory orders dated 24.03.2020 and 31.03.2020 only mandate compulsory 14 days quarantine with respect to travelers from certain countries namely China, Italy, Iran, Republic of Korea, France, Spain, Germany, UAE, Qatar, Oman, and Kuwait. Thus, the petitioner who operated the flight from Nepal was not required to undergo the mandatory quarantine for 14 days. She was only required to self-monitor her health, which was duly done by her. It has been submitted that the petitioner was neither issued a quarantine tag from the airport, nor did the authorities paste a quarantine poster outside her residence as was the practice followed by the Government at the relevant time. It is reiterated that the Petitioner was throughout in good health and exhibited no symptoms.

6. Further, grievance of the petitioner is with respect to the non-applicability of the prohibitory orders dated 24.03.2020 and 31.03.2020. It is the plea of the petitioner that the said orders came into effect only from 24.03.2020 and 01.04.2020, respectively, and thus cannot have any retrospective application on the petitioner, who was directed to quarantine from 17.03.2020 to 30.03.