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

2026 Supreme(Mad) 2690

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
Parista - Petitioner
Versus 
The State of Tamil Nadu, Additional Secretary to Government, Public (SC) Department – Respondent 
W.P.(Crl).No.1651 of 2025, W.P.MP.(Crl).No.776 of 2025
Decided On : 13-07-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.G.Kartheeban
For the Respondent: Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar

ORDER :

G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The Writ Petition has been filed challenging the government order in G.O.(1D)No.527 Public (Foreigners-II) Department dated 20.09.2025, thereby directing the petitioner to reside in the special camp identified and located by the District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District, in view of the petitioner’s release from the jail till deportation.

2. The petitioner is an Sri Lankan Nationals and she gave birth to a child and she has presently residing in India. The petitioner was came to India by tourist visa and due to fear of waging war in Srilanka she stayed in India. While she was staying in India, she has been implicated in a case relating to the alleged possession of a forged Indian Passport. However, the petitioner is in possession of her original Sri Lankan Passport No.N10986281 issued on 13.11.2023 valid upto 13.11.2033 at Sri Lanka, which establishes her nationality and identity as a bona fide citizen of Sri Lanka. She also obtained Aadhaar card and other proof of her identity and residence in India. On the strength of those documents, she applied for passport in India and she was issued with passport after due verification of her credentials. Further, the petitioner obtained valid Visa for Switzerland vide Visa No.008241370. Subsequently, the petitioner approached the concern authority to apply for exit permit on 02.06.2025, wherein it was found that she had alledgedly used Indian document to obtain Visa in her favour. Thereafter, the Immigration Authority lodged a complaint as against the petitioner before the 2nd respondent alleging that she possessed a fake passport. Thereafter, on 21.08.2025, on the receipt of the complaint from the immigration officer, the 2nd respondent registered the FIR in Crime No.151 of 2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 12(1)(b), 12(1A)(a) of the Passports Act and Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2) of BNS, 2023 alleging that being a Srilankan national, she had come to India in the month of May, 2012 through tourist visa and she had overstayed in India illegally and she had fraudulently obtained Indian identity documents including Aadhaar card and using those documents applied passport and obtained passport and also travelled to several countries on various occasions. One of such travel, when the petitioner travelled to Srilanka and returned back to Chennai, she was suspected and on enquiry, it is revealed that she was a Srilanka national. Therefore, the petitioner is arrayed as accused. Pursuant to the registration of FIR, she was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. However, she was released on bail on certain conditions. Thereafter, the first respondent passed the order impugned in this Writ Petition, thereby directed the petitioner to stay in the special camp at Tiruchirappalli until such time of their deportation is effected.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is clear violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India which guaranteed the right to life and personal liberty, encompassing within its fold the right to live with dignity, right to education and right to family life. The order of detention was passed under Section 3(2)(e) of the Foreigners Act, 1946. However, the Foreigners Act, 1946 itself stood repealed by virtue of new enactment of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, which came into force on 01.09.2025. Further, the first respondent had no jurisdiction or legal authority to invoke or rely upon the provision of a repealed statue. Therefore, the exercise of power under a non-existing law renders the impugned order null and void, being in violation of the fundamental principles of legality and competence.

3.1. He further submits that based on the powers conferred under Section 33 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, and in supersession of the Registration of Foreigners (exemption) Order 1957 and the Immigration (Carrier’s Liability) Order, 2007, which governs the field as on the date of the

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top