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

1960 Supreme(Ker) 345

High Court of Kerala
Anna Chandy, P.G.Menon, JJ.
State of Kerala - Appellant
Versus
Kunhammed - Respondent
Crl.A. No. 192 of 1959
Decided On : 30-05-1960

The provisions of the Indian Passport Rules apply to all persons, including Indian citizens, and entering India without a passport is punishable under Rule 6(a) of the Indian Passport Rules.

Headnote:

Passport Rules - Foreigners Act - Indian Passport Rules, 1920 (Rule 3, Rule 6) - Foreigners Act, 1946 (Section 14) - Foreigners Order, 1948 (para 7)

Fact of the Case:

The State appealed against the acquittal of the respondent by the District Magistrate for an offence under Rule 3 read with Rule 6 of the Indian Passport Rules and para 7 of the Indian Foreigners Act, 1946. The respondent, a Pakistani citizen, was found in India without a valid passport or visa.

Finding of the Court:

The District Magistrate acquitted the respondent, holding that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused is a foreigner. The court found that even if the accused is considered a foreigner, the offence under para 7 of the Foreigners Order was not made out. The court ordered a retrial for an offence under Rule 6 read with Rule 3 of the Indian Passport Rules.

Issues: The main issue was whether the respondent, a Pakistani citizen, had entered India without a valid passport or visa, and whether the prosecution had proved the accused to be a foreigner.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of the Indian Passport Rules apply to all persons, including Indian citizens, and that entering India without a passport is punishable under Rule 6(a) of the Indian Passport Rules. The court also found that the respondent should be retried for the offence under Rule 6 read with Rule 3 of the Indian Passport Rules.

Final Decision: The court set aside the acquittal and ordered a retrial for an offence under Rule 6 read with Rule 3 of the Indian Passport Rules.

JUDGMENT

P. Govinda Menon, J.

1. This is an appeal filed by the State against the order of the District Magistrate (J), Kozhikode in C. C. 165/58 under which he acquitted the respondent. The charge sheet filed by the police against the respondent was for offence under Rule 3 read with Rule 6 of the Indian Passport Rules and para 7 of the Indian Foreigners Act, 1946. The case was that the accused who is a Pakistanee citizen had come to Kundotti within the Indian Union on 16-3-53 with a valid passport and visa issued by the High Commissioner for India in Pakistan and returned to Pakistan on 2-12-53 and that later he again came to India and was found at Kundotti on 14-9-58 without a passport or visa or any valid travel document from the authorities concerned or a residential passport for stay in India.

2. P. W. 1 is the Sub Inspector of Police who was in Kundotti till December 1955. He has proved that the accused had gone to his police station on 16-9-53 with a Pakistan passport No. 126015 and C. Visa No. 38420 dated 3-9-53, that his arrival had been noted in the station general diary and that the accused had left India on 2-12-1953. He proved Ext. P. 1, the register of Pakistanees maintained in the regular course of business at his police station. Ext. P. 2 is the particular entry with regard to this accused. Ext. P. 3 is a C. Visa application of the accused, wherein the accused has described himself as a Pakistanee. Ext. P. 4 is the memo received by him along with Ext. P. 3 from the District Police Office, Kozhikode and Ext. P. 5 is the endorsement on Ext. P. 4 made by P. W. 1. P. W. 2 is the Adhikari of the Kundotti amsom. He says that the accused is a Pakistanee since 10 years and that since about 6 months he has been seeing the accused in Kundotti. P. W. 3 is the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kundotti who arrested the accused on 14-9-58. He says that when the accused was arrested, he had with him a certificate of identity, Ext. P. 6, issued by the Political Agent in Persian Gulf. P. W. 4 is a clerk in the District Police Office who proved the documents which he had produced from the office of the District Superintendent of Police. On this evidence a charge under Section. 14 of the Foreigners Act 1946 read with para 7 of the Foreigners Order 1948 was framed against the accused. No charge was framed under Rule 3 read with Rule 6 of the Indian Passport Rules. It is not known why such a charge was not framed or why the Public Prosecutor did not request the court to frame such a charge.

3. The case of the accused was that he is not a foreigner, but he is an Indian citizen. He relies on Ext. P. 6 the identity card. When questioned about Ext. P. 3, the application for visa, he admitted his signature to that document, but he denied knowledge of its contents and stated that the entries contained therein were made by his brother and that what is contained therein is not correct. According to his statement, it is clear that he had no passport or visa to visit India and his case seems to be that he is an Indian citizen and as such there is no need for any passport or visa. The learned District Magistrate held that the prosecution has not succeeded in proving that the accused is a foreigner and therefore found him not guilty under para 7 of the Foreigners Order 1948 and acquitted the accused.

4. Para 7 of the Foreigners Order relates to "Restriction on sojourn in India". It reads as follows :

"Every foreigner who enters India on the authority of a visa issued in pursuance of the , Indian Passport Act, 1920 (XXXIV of 1920) shall obtain from the Registration Officer having jurisdiction, "either at the place at which the said foreigner enters India or at the place at which he presents a registration report in accordance with rule 6 of the Registration of Foreigners Rules 1939", a permit indicating the period during which he is authorised to remain in India and shall, unless the period indicated in the permit is extended by the Central Government, depa
















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