##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2931/2026

Michael Shane Hatton, S/o. Late Mr. Warner Duke Hatton ----Petitioner

Versus Union Of India

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Susan Mathew For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anima Chaturvedi for

Mr. Bharat Vyas, ASG

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

06/04/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking protection against arbitrary

deportation and coercive actions by the respondent-authorities.

2. In the instant matter, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner and his wife were initially granted a B-1 type multiple-entry Regular Visa by the Immigration Department of the Republic of India. The said visa has been extended from time to time, and the latest visa, issued on

17.05.2024, is valid until 16.05.2029.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been peacefully residing in India since 2010. Out of the wedlock, three children were born in India, specifically in Jaipur, and their visa validity extends until 28.05.2029. It is further submitted that the elder son of the petitioner has completed his secondary school examination conducted by the CBSE. The petitioner and his wife

(Uploaded on 09/04/2026 at 06:16:00 PM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 08:36:50 PM)

(2 of 4) [CW-2931/2026]

are actively engaged in an export business in collaboration with a Jaipur-based entity and that the petitioner and his wife file income

tax returns on a regular basis.

4. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has diligently ensured that his continuous stay in India does not exceed 180 days at any given time. It is next submitted that whenever an extension beyond 180 days is necessitated, the requisite residential permit is obtained; the last such permit issued was valid from 16.12.2024 to 13.04.2025. It is submitted that the petitioner’s family exited India in December 2024 and returned back in January 2025. It is next submitted that thereafter, an application for a fresh residential permit was submitted to Respondent No. 3; however, due to administrative inaction and the absence of any response, the petitioner exited India on 03.06.2025 and returned back on 14.06.2025, and subsequently exited again and returned back on 27.09.2025, strictly to comply

with the 180 days continuous stay restriction.

5. Learned counsel submitted that upon return of the petitioner to India, the immigration authorities arbitrarily cautioned him that he had been registered with Respondent No. 2, and that his future travel and re-entry would be prohibited, and that he was liable for

deportation.

6. It is further contended that the petitioner was desirous of visiting his ailing father, who unfortunately expired on 06.11.2025. Despite submitting a representation on 12.12.2025 regarding his travel and visa status, no response has been received from respondent No.3. Due to the prevailing uncertainty, administrative

(Uploaded on 09/04/2026 at 06:16:00 PM)

(Downloaded on 11/04/2026 at 08:36:50 PM)

(3 of 4) [CW-2931/2026]

inaction, and the looming threat of penal action, the petitioner seeks permission to exit the country without incurring any penalty. 7. Learned counsel argued that the impugned threats and restrictions are arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India, which afford protective guarantees to

foreign nationals as well.

8. In light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, learned counsel submitted that there exist an apprehension that some coercive actions might be taken against the petitioner by the

respondent authorities.

9. This Court has observed that despite the service of notice upon the learned ASG on 19.02.2026, no reply has been filed till date. Today, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents seeks an adjournment on account of the personal

difficulty of the learned ASG