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

2026 Supreme(Mad) 2694

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
Parista - Petitioner
Versus 
The Special Principal Secretary to the  Government of Tamil Nadu  Public (Foreigners-II) Department (Review Committee) – Respondent 
W.P.(Crl).No.1474 of 2026
Decided On : 13-07-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: M/s.Charles Kamalesh M.Appaji
For the Respondent: Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar

ORDER :

G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The Writ Petition has been filed for a direction, directing the 1st respondent Review Committee to delodge the petitioner from the 2nd Respondent Special Camp for Foreigners, Tiruchirappalli to the rented house bearing No.4, Vasantham Apartment, Sathyapuri Street, West Mambalam, Chennai based on her representation dated 23.03.2026.

2. The petitioner is an Sri Lankan National and she gave birth to a child and she is presently residing in India. The petitioner came to India by tourist visa and due to fear of waging war in Srilanka she stayed in India and also due to her poor financial condition and uncertainty of the life condition in her native village at Srilanka, she could not return to Srilanka after the expiry of her visa. She studied beautician course and worked in various beauty parlours at Chennai. 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.2559409, 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 allegedly used Indian document to obtain Visa in her favour. Thereafter, the Immigration Authority lodged a complaint as against the petitioner before the 3rd respondent alleging that she possession a fake passport. Thereafter, on 21.08.2025, on the receipt of the complaint from the immigration officer, the 3rd 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 Ac

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