FOREIGNERS ACT, 1946
(1) This Act may be called the Foreigners Act, 1946.
(2) It extends to the whole of 1[India] 2[***].
------------------------------------------------
1. Subs. by Act 38 of 1947, sec. 2, for “British India” (w.e.f. 15-12-1947).
2. The words “except the State of Hyderabad” ins. by the A.O. 1950 and omitted by Act 3 of 1951, sec. 3 and Sch. (w.e.f. 1-4-1951).
------------------------------------------------
In this Act,—
1[(a) “foreigner” means a person who is not a citizen of India;]
2[***]
(b) “prescribed” means prescribed by orders made under this Act;
(c) “specified” means specified by direction of a prescribed authority.
------------------------------------------------
1. Subs. by Act 11 of 1957, sec. 2, for clause (a) (w.r.e.f. 19-1-1957).
2. Clause (aa) ins. by the A.O. 1950 and omitted by Act 3 of 1951, sec. 3 and Sch. (w.e.f. 1-4-1951).
------------------------------------------------
(1) The Central Government may by order1 make provision, either generally or with respect to all foreigners or with respect to any particular foreigner or any prescribed class or description of foreigner, for prohibiting, regulating or restricting the entry of foreigners into 2[India] or, their departure therefrom or their presence or continued presence therein.
(2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, orders made under this section may provide that the foreigner—
(a) shall not enter 2[India], or shall enter 2[India] only at such times and by such route and at such port or place and subject to the observance of such conditions on arrival as may be prescribed;
(b) shall not depart from 2[India], or shall depart only at such times and by such route an
(1) The Central Government may, by order declare that all or any of the provisions of this Act or of any order made thereunder shall not apply, or shall apply only in such circumstances or with such exceptions or modifications or subject to such conditions as may be specified in the order, to or in relation to—
(a) the citizens of any such Commonwealth country as may be so specified; or
(b) any other individual foreigner or class or description of foreigner.
(2) A copy of every order made under this section shall be placed on the table of both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after it is made.]
------------------------------------------
1. Ins. by Act 11 of 1957, sec. 4 (w.r.e.f. 19-1-195
1[(1) Any foreigner (hereinafter referred to as an internee) in respect of whom there is in force any order made under clause (g) of sub-section (2) of section 3, directing that he be detained or confined, shall be detained or confined in such place and manner and subject to such conditions as to maintenance, discipline and the punishment of offences and breaches of discipline as the Central Government may from time to time by order determine.]
(2) Any foreigner (hereinafter referred to as a person on parole) in respect of whom there is in force an order under clause (e) of sub-section (2) of section 3 requiring him to reside at a place set apart for the residence under supervision of a number of foreigners, shall while residing therein, be subject to such conditions as to maintenance, discipline and the punishment of offences and breaches of discipline as the Central Government ma
The Foreigners Act, 1946, was enacted to regulate the entry and stay of foreigners in India. Section 4 specifically addresses the conditions under which foreigners may be detained and the obligations of the authorities regarding their internment.
Section 4 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, provides the framework for the detention of foreigners in India. It allows the government to intern foreigners under certain conditions, particularly in cases where their presence is deemed undesirable or poses a threat to national security.
The scope of Section 4 extends to all foreigners residing in India, particularly those whose presence is regulated under the Foreigners (Internment) Order, 1962. It applies to various categories of foreigners, including those from countries at war with India.
Violations of the provisions under Section 4 can lead to penalties, including imprisonment for a term that may extend to five years and fines, as stipulated in Section 14 of the Foreigners Act.
This commentary provides an overview of Section 4 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, highlighting its legal implications, scope, and the essential principles governing the detention of foreigners in India.
(1) No foreigner who was in 1[India] on the date on which this Act came into force shall, while in 1[India] after that date, assume or use or purport to assume or use for any purpose any name other than that by which he was ordinarily known immediately before the said date.
(2) Where, after the date on which this Act came into force, any foreigner carries on or purports to carry on (whether alone or in association with any other person) any trade or business under any name or style, other than that under which that trade or business was being carried on immediately before the said date, he shall, for the purposes of sub-section (1), be deemed to be using a name other than that by which he was ordinarily known immediately before the said date.
(3) In relation to any foreigner who, not having been in 1[India] on the date on which this Act
(1) The master of any vessel landing or embarking at a port in 1[India], passengers coming to or going from that port by sea and the pilot of any aircraft landing or embarking at any place in 1[India], passengers coming to or going from that place by air, shall furnish to such person and in such manner as may be prescribed a return giving the prescribed particulars with respect to any passengers or members of the crew, who are foreigners.
(2) Any District Magistrate and any Commissioner of Police or, where there is no Commissioner of Police, any Superintendent of Police may, for any purpose connected with the enforcement of this Act or any order made thereunder, require the master of any such vessel or the pilot of any such aircraft to furnish such information as may be prescribed in respect of passengers or members of the crew on such vessel or aircraft, as the case may be.
&nb
(1) It shall be the duty of the keeper of any premises whether furnished or unfurnished where lodging or sleeping accommodation is provided for reward, to submit to such person and in such manner such information in respect of foreigners accommodated in such premises, as may be prescribed.
Explanation.—The information referred to in this sub-section may relate to all or any of the foreigners accommodated at such premises and may be required to be submitted periodically or at any specific time or occasion.
(2) Every person accommodated in any such premises shall furnish to the keeper thereof a statement containing such particulars as may be required by the keeper for the purpose of furnishing the information referred to in sub-section (1).
(3) The keeper of every such premises shall maintain a
(1) The prescribed authority may, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, direct the owner or person having control of any premises used as a restaurant or as a place of public resort or entertainment or as a club and frequented by foreigners—
(a) to close such premises either entirely or during specified periods, or
(b) to use or permit the use of such premises only under such conditions as may be specified, or
(c) to refuse admission to such premises either to all foreigners or to any specified foreigner or class of foreigners.
(2) A person to whom any direction has been given under sub-section (1) shall not, while such direction remain in force, use or permit to be used any other premises for any of the aforesaid purposes, except w
Legal Comments
"Introduction" - Foreigners Act, 1946 governs treatment, registration, and removal of non-citizens; key provisions include Sections 3, 7, 14 and the Foreigners Order, 1948; Courts have repeatedly framed the Act as central to controlling foreign presence and overstays in India.
"What Section 7 Says" - Section 7 imposes an obligation on the keeper of premises (e.g., hotels) to furnish information about foreign guests; non-compliance can trigger offences under applicable sections of the Foreigners Act or Registration of Foreigners Act depending on the precise provision implicated; forms (e.g., Form C) and reporting timelines are central. [Ashok Kumar @ Ashok Prasad VS State of Bihar], [01400020496]
"What Section 14 Says" - Section 14 criminalizes overstaying or contravention of directions/orders under the Act (including Foreigners Order, 1948 para 7); penalties may include imprisonment, fines, or both; retrospective definitions and para 7 have been subject to constitutional scrutiny in certain cases. [WAHID MIAN HIDDAN MIAN VS STATE], [01400001472]
"Essential ingredients" - For a conviction under Section 14( read with Para 7 or 3(2)(C)) the prosecution must show (i) the person is a foreigner, (ii) a departure/permit condition was breached or overstaying occurred, and (iii) the relevant order/permit was in force; burden often rests on the proceedee to prove non-foreigner status per Section 9 (Foreigners Act). [GOLAM RASUL VS SUPDT. OF POLICE], [02800000000]
"Scope of Section 7" - Section 7 targets hotel/ premises-keepers; it requires furnishing Form-C and reporting; failure to comply can lead to Section 5 (Registration of Foreigners Act) offences; there must be a prescribed order under Sections 2–3 of the Act for Section 7 to attach, otherwise Section 5/Registration offences may apply. [Ashok Kumar @ Ashok Prasad VS State of Bihar], [S. Vijayan VS Central Bureau of Investigation, Represented by the Asst. Solicitor General]
"Scope of Section 14" - Section 14 applies to overstaying or non-compliance with deportation/exit orders; it cross-references Section 3(2)(C) and the Foreigners Order, 1948; the question often arises whether overstaying beyond visa or lacking permit suffices; courts require either absence of permit or explicit overstay beyond permit to sustain conviction. [WAHID MIAN HIDDAN MIAN VS STATE], [KALLAN KHAN VS STATE]
"Punishment for Section 14" - Sentences can include imprisonment (variable by offence) and fines; appellate decisions have constrained defaults in payment fines (e.g., up to one-fourth of maximum term in some contexts) and sometimes modified sentences on appeal to align with statutory caps; in NDPS/Foreigners mix cases, courts balance security interests with proportionality. [ABDUL BARIK VS UNION OF INDIA], [Soe Win VS State]
"Judicial approach to nationality/foreigner status" - Several cases emphasize that nationality is a question of fact/circumstance; Indian citizenship explanations hinge on Article 5, Article 7, and Citizenship Act; courts generally hold that before prosecuting under Foreigners Act, status as a foreigner must be established; retrospective amendments have faced constitutional scrutiny under Article 20(1). [State VS Ghoraishi (Qureshi) Sayed Mohomed], [Jiban Das VS Union of India], [STATE VS YAKUB]
"Overstay in Assam/Assam Accord context" - Section 6A and related provisions intersect with citizenship/domicile questions and NRC processes; courts have upheld constitutional validity of certain citizenship provisions while ensuring due process in FT proceedings; remand to tribunals may be ordered for fresh consideration. [State Of Assam VS Jilkadar Ali], [IN RE : SECTION 6A OF THE CITIZENSHIP ACT 1955 VS . ]
"Burden of proof in Foreigners Act prosecutions" - Burden typically on proceedee to prove not a foreigner under Section 9; if not, tribunal findings may declare him foreigner after due process; ex parte orders can be contested but require proper notice and opportunity to present evidence. [Jiban Das VS Union of India], [Rezia Bibi @ Rezia Begum VS Union of India]
"Interplay with Registration of Foreigners Act/Rules" - Prosecutions may fall under Section 5 of the Registration of Foreigners Act (not Section 7/14) when the issue concerns Form-C or registration violations; distinct offences govern offences under the Registration Rules; misreading of Rule-7 can lead to abuse of process. [S. Vijayan VS Central Bureau of Investigation, Represented by the Asst. Solicitor General], [Nikhil Mathur VS State of Rajasthan]
"Detention centers/expedition of deportation" - Court-directed timely detention/deportation arrangements and operational detention centers have been urged to streamline removal of overstaying foreigners; ministerial guidance and FRRO actions are critical to implementation. [ABC VS State Through IO, Calangute Police Station], [The Union of India VS Hasanali Mahamed Hussein Shariff]
"Overstay vs. citizenship status" - Several decisions hold that overstayer status must be determined in light of whether the person is a citizen; if a person is held to be a citizen, deportation actions may be challenged; conversely, a person found foreigner may be prosecuted for overstaying. [Hajee M. Mohamed Kassim and Others VS Sub Inspector of Police, Kottar Police Station, Nagercoil], [ABDUL BARIK VS UNION OF INDIA]
"Bail considerations for foreigners" - In cases with long detention and slow trials, courts have occasionally granted bail to foreign nationals (subject to conditions) to ensure due process, particularly where drug offences or other counts are not proven to involve active wrongdoing; individual merits govern. [Mohammad Rahim Ashori VS State of Haryana], [Saeidi Mozdhdeh Ehsan VS State of Karnataka]
"Retrospective amendments to 'foreigner' definition" - The 1957 amendment introducing broader foreigner definitions was held void in certain contexts for ex-post facto concerns under Article 20(1); this affects how para 7 applies to individuals who entered India before amendment. [ABDUL HALEEM VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH], [STATE VS YAKUB]
"Tribunal authority and res judicata" - Tribunals cannot generally revisit settled findings; applications to reopen previously decided FT cases may be disallowed; proper appellate channels must be used; merits-based reexaminations require statutory exercise of power. [Frank Vitus VS Narcotics Control Bureau]
"Hotelier liability vs. mere presence" - Liability under Section 7 hinges on hotelier/premises keeper reporting obligations; mere hosting of foreigners without failure to report does not automatically trigger Section 7, and offences under Section 14 or Section 5/Registration may be more apt depending on the facts; courts stress the need for clear ingredients. [State of Kerala VS Kunhammed ], [S. Vijayan VS Central Bureau of Investigation, Represented by the Asst. Solicitor General]
"Foreigners Tribunal procedure" - FT procedures are mandated by the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964; tribunals must provide hearing opportunities, allow evidence, and deliver a concise opinion; non-compliance can be challenged in writs but outcomes depend on proper due process. [Rezia Bibi @ Rezia Begum VS Union of India]
"Impact of domicile and long residence" - Domicile and long residence alone are not enough to confer Indian citizenship; intention to make India permanent must be shown; mere residence cannot cure status for citizenship; this informs determinations under Section 14. [State VS Ghoraishi (Qureshi) Sayed Mohomed]
"Practical enforcement concerns" - High courts have urged systemic improvements: quicker investigations, better inter-agency coordination, and minimization of unnecessary detentions; overstay issues require operational detention centers and swift deportation actions. [CHRISTIAN CHIDIEERE CHUKWU VS STATE OF KARNATAKA], [ABC VS State Through IO, Calangute Police Station]
"Key reference principle (Section 7 vs. Section 5)" - Where Form-C/report obligations apply, violations fall under Section 5 Registration of Foreigners Act unless a specific order under Section 7/Foreigners Order is applicable; mislabeling charges can lead to quashing of FIRs for lack of cognizable offences. [Ashok Kumar @ Ashok Prasad VS State of Bihar], [Nikhil Mathur VS State of Rajasthan]
"Constitutional cautions" - Several judgments caution against ex-post facto implications and uphold Article 20(1) protections in the context of retrospective statutory amendments; ongoing citizenship determinations can centralize decision-making under Citizenship Act for final status. [ABDUL HALEEM VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH], [ABDUL BARIK VS UNION OF INDIA]
"Summary outcome note" - The Act remains a central tool for regulating foreigners, with diverse case outcomes depending on nationality status, permit/visa compliance, registry obligations, and procedural fairness; court decisions emphasize strict application while ensuring due process. , [Abdul Khalique (Md. ) VS Union of India]
(1) When a foreigner is recognized as a national by the law of more than one foreign country or where for any reason it is uncertain what nationality if any is to be ascribed to a foreigner, that foreigner may be treated as the national of the country with which he appears to the prescribed authority to be most closely connected for the time being in interest or sympathy or if he is of uncertain nationality, of the country with which he was last so connected:
Provided that where a foreigner acquired a nationality by birth, he shall, except where the Central Government so directs either generally or in a particular case, be deemed to retain that nationality unless he proves to the satisfaction of the said authority that he has subsequently acquired by naturalization or otherwise some other nationality and still recognized as entitled to protection by the Government of the country wh
If in any case not falling under section 8 any question arises with reference to this Act or any order made or direction given thereunder, whether any person is or is not a foreigner of a particular class or description the onus of proving that such person is not a foreigner or is not a foreigner of such particular class or description, as the case may be, shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), lie upon such person.
[Rep. by the Foreigners Laws (Amendment) Act, 1957 (11 of 1957), sec. 7 (w.r.e.f. 19-1-1957)].
(1) Any authority empowered by or under or in pursuance of the provisions of this Act to give any direction or to exercise any other power, may, in addition to any other action expressly provided for in this Act, take, or cause to be taken such steps and use, or cause to be used, such force as may, in its opinion, be reasonably necessary for securing compliance with such direction or for preventing or rectifying any breach thereof, or for the effective exercise of such power, as the case may be.
(2) Any police officer may take such steps and use such force as may, in his opinion, be reasonably necessary for securing compliance with any order made or direction given under or in pursuance of the provisions of this Act or for preventing or rectifying any breach of such order or direction.
(3) The power conferred by this section shall be dee
Any authority upon which any power to make or give any direction, consent or permission or to do any other act is conferred by this Act or by any order made thereunder may, unless express provision is made to the contrary, in writing authorise, conditionally or otherwise, any authority subordinate to it to exercise such power on its behalf, and thereupon the said subordinate authority shall, subject to such conditions as may be contained in the authorisation, be deemed to be the authority upon which such power is conferred by or under this Act.
(1) Any person who attempts to contravene, or abets or attempts to abet, or does any act preparatory to, a contravention of, the provisions of this Act or of any order made or direction given thereunder, or fails to comply with any direction given in pursuance of any such order, shall be deemed to have contravened the provisions of this Act.
(2) Any person who, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that any other person has contravened the provisions of this Act or of any order made or direction given thereunder, gives that other person any assistance with intent thereby to prevent, hinder or otherwise interfere with his arrest, trial or punishment for the said contravention shall be deemed to have abetted that contravention..
(3) The master of any vessel or the pilot of any aircraft, as the case may be, by means of which any foreigner enters or leaves India in contraven
If any person contravenes the provisions of this Act or of any order made thereunder, or any direction given in pursuance of this Act or such, he shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine; and if such person has entered into a bond in pursuance of Clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Section 3, his bond shall be forfeited, and any person bound thereby shall pay the penalty thereof, or show cause to the satisfaction of the convincting Court why such penalty should not be paid.
The Foreigners Act, 1946, was enacted to regulate the entry and stay of foreigners in India. Section 14 specifically addresses penalties for contraventions of the provisions of the Act, including overstaying a visa or violating the conditions of a visa.
Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, stipulates that any foreigner who:- Remains in India beyond the period allowed by their visa,- Violates any conditions of their visa,- Contravenes any provisions of the Act or any orders made thereunder,shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term that may extend to five years and/or a fine.
The scope of Section 14 encompasses all foreigners in India, regardless of their nationality. It applies to various situations, including overstaying, unauthorized employment, and failure to comply with registration requirements.
The punishment under Section 14 can include:- Imprisonment for up to five years.- A fine, which may be imposed in addition to imprisonment.- Forfeiture of any bonds entered into under the Act.
This commentary provides an overview of Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, highlighting its implications, legal interpretations, and the judicial approach towards enforcement and compliance.
Whoever—
(a) enters into any area in India, which is restricted for his entry under any order made under this Act, or any direction given in pursuance thereof, without obtaining a permit from the authority, notified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette, for this purpose or remains in such area beyond the period specified in such permit for his stay; or
(b) enters into or stays in any area in India without the valid documents required for such entry or for such stay, as the case may be, under the provisions of any order made under this Act or any direction given in pursuance thereof,
shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years, but may extend to eight years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than ten thousand rupe
Section 14(a) of the Foreigners Act, 1946, addresses the offence of remaining in India beyond the permitted period of stay, and the penalties associated with such contraventions. It forms a crucial legal provision to regulate and control the presence of foreigners within Indian territory, ensuring compliance with visa and immigration laws.
Section 14(a) stipulates that any foreigner who remains in any area in India after the expiry of the period for which the visa was issued, or contrary to the conditions of the visa, commits an offence punishable with imprisonment, fine, or both. The section aims to penalize unauthorized stay and violations of visa conditions.
The section applies broadly to all foreigners who overstay or violate visa conditions. It covers both cases where the individual remains beyond the permitted period and where they violate specific conditions attached to their visa. The scope also extends to those who enter restricted areas without proper authorization, as clarified in case law.
The section prescribes imprisonment which may extend up to five years, along with a fine. The punishment varies depending on the nature of the offence, the duration of overstay, and whether the violation was intentional or due to negligence.
Strict Liability - Section 14(a) imposes a strict liability on foreigners for overstay, regardless of intent, emphasizing the importance of compliance with visa conditions [Bismark Bakuba Guitermbi VS State of U. P. ].
Overstay Definition - Overstay includes remaining beyond the period permitted by the visa or violating conditions of stay, as clarified in judicial rulings [CHRISTIAN CHIDIEERE CHUKWU VS STATE OF KARNATAKA].
Breach of Visa Conditions - Any violation of visa conditions, including overstaying or entering restricted areas without permission, falls within the ambit of Section 14(a) [State of Kerala VS C. K. Kunju].
Penal Provisions - The section prescribes imprisonment up to five years and fine, reflecting the serious nature of illegal stay .
Overstay and Penalty - Conviction under Section 14(a) is upheld when the prosecution proves the stay beyond the permitted period, as confirmed in case law [Lalmawia VS S. I. Lalnuntluanga].
Legal Presumption - Once the overstay is established, the burden shifts to the accused to prove lawful stay or valid authorization [Innocent Uzoma vs State].
Overstay Due to Illness or Circumstances - Court may consider mitigating circumstances such as illness or administrative delays, but the core offence remains committed [Syed Naqui Alam Son of Syed Masood Alam, Grand Son Kazi Abdul Quadir VS State of Bihar].
Role of Immigration Authorities - Immigration authorities are responsible for issuing visas, and failure to adhere to visa conditions can lead to prosecution under Section 14(a) [Letchumanan Mary Franciska VS Union of India, Represented by The Inspector of Police, Chennai].
Bail and Section 14(a) - Courts have held that overstay under Section 14(a) can be a ground for denial of bail, especially if the stay is prolonged or deliberate [Kasongo Abimael vs State].
Procedural Requirements - Proper charge framing and evidence linking the accused to the overstay are essential for conviction; hearsay or uncorroborated evidence is insufficient [Lalthanmawia S/o Hrangkiauva (L) VS State of Mizoram].
Overstay as an Offence - Overstay without valid permission is an offence, and the law does not require prior notice or opportunity to be heard for prosecution under Section 14(a) [00500026349].
Penalty for Abetment - Abetment of the offence, such as facilitating illegal stay, is also punishable under the same section .
Overstay in Restricted Areas - Entry into restricted areas without permission, coupled with overstay, attracts penalties under Section 14(a) [State of Uttarakhand VS Abid Ali @ Asad Ali @ Ajit Singh @ Abu Bakar].
Amendments and Evolving Law - The Foreigners (Amendment) Act, 2004, introduced stricter provisions and increased penalties, reflecting the legislative intent to deter illegal stay [Foreigners (Amendment) Act, 2004].
Legal Interpretation - Courts have interpreted the section strictly, requiring proof of illegal stay beyond the period and violation of visa conditions for conviction [CHRISTIAN CHIDIEERE CHUKWU VS STATE OF KARNATAKA].
Case Law on Penalty and Conviction - Multiple judgments affirm that the burden of proof lies on the prosecution to establish the overstay beyond reasonable doubt [Bismark Bakuba Guitermbi VS State of U. P. ].
Prohibition on Bail - In certain cases, especially where the accused has overstayed for a long duration or violated conditions, courts have refused bail considering public interest and law enforcement concerns [01100152650].
Natural Justice and Overstay - The law does not mandate a prior notice or hearing before prosecution under Section 14(a), but procedural fairness in investigation and charge framing is essential [State of Kerala VS C. K. Kunju].
Section 14(a) of the Foreigners Act, 1946, serves as a vital legal tool to regulate the stay of foreigners in India. Its enforcement underscores the importance of adhering to visa conditions and respecting immigration laws. Judicial decisions reinforce a strict approach, emphasizing proof beyond reasonable doubt, procedural correctness, and the gravity of illegal overstay, with penalties ranging up to five years imprisonment and fines.
Note: The references are drawn from the provided sources, formatted in square brackets.
Whoever knowingly uses a forged passport for entering into India or remains therein without the authority of law for the time being in force shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years, but may extend to eight years and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less then ten thousand rupees but may extend to fifty thousand rupees.]
--------------------------------
1. Subs. by Act 16 of 2004, sec. 2, for section 14 (w.e.f. 20-2-2004).
Whoever abets any offence punishable under section 14 or section 14A or section 14B shall, if the act abetted is committed in consequence of the abetment, be punished with the punishment provided for the offence.
Explanation.—For the purposes of this section,—
(i) an act or offence is said to be committed in consequence of the abetment, when it is committed in consequence of the instigation, or in pursuance of the conspiracy, or with the aid which constitutes the offence;
(ii) the expression “abetment” shall have the same meaning as assigned to it under section 107 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).]
--------------------------------
1. Subs. by Act 16 of 2004, sec. 2, for section 14 (w.e.f. 20-
No suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act.
The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of, the provisions of the Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939 (16 of 1939), the Indian Passport Act, 1920 (34 of 1920), and of any other enactment for the time being in force.
[Rep. by the Repealing and Amending Act, 1950 (35 of 1950) sec. 2 and Sch. I (w.e.f. 19-4-1950)].
The Foreigners Act, 1946 was enacted to regulate the entry, stay, and exit of foreigners in India. It provides the framework for determining the status of individuals as foreigners and outlines the legal consequences of contravening its provisions. Section 17 of this Act, however, has been repealed, which necessitates an understanding of its historical context and implications.
Section 17 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 was originally intended to impose penalties for contraventions of the provisions of the Act. However, it has since been repealed, indicating a shift in the legislative approach to managing foreign nationals in India.
The scope of Section 17 was broad, covering various violations related to the status and treatment of foreigners under the Act. Its repeal suggests a legislative intent to either consolidate penalties under other sections or to reformulate the approach to foreign nationals.
Since Section 17 has been repealed, it no longer prescribes any punishment. The penalties for violations are now primarily governed by Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, which remains in effect.
Elevate your legal practice with advanced AI-driven research and drafting solutions. Experience unmatched efficiency, precision, and security, tailored exclusively for legal professionals.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
AI Assistant
