38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, July 23, 2024


By Tanurag Ghosh      02 July, 2020 05:21 PM      0 Comments

On Monday, 29th June 2020, the Supreme Court has instructed the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to clarify its position with respect to the status of visas of 2,500 people from 35 different countries. These foreign nationals are none other than the people who attended the Tablighi Jamaat conference in Delhi. The movement of Jamaat received widespread criticism throughout the country as many people traveled to remote parts of the country and tested positive for the virus, resulting in allegations of spreading the infection. 

The apex court bench hearing the matter comprised of Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Maheshwari, and Justice Sanjiv Khanna. It asked the union government to place on record whether individual notices have been issued regarding visa cancellation. The hearing took place through video-conferencing medium and has been postponed to 2nd July 2020 for further adjudication.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Advocate Rajat Nair appeared on behalf of the Union government. They were told by the bench that the government should explain what these people are doing in Indian territory if their visa has been canceled. Advocate Nair said that copies of the petitions have not been served upon them and sought time to file a reply.

The matter has been taken up with the bench clubbing these petitions filed by foreign nationals. The court has clarified that cancellation of visa should be on a case to case basis by the Ministry of Home Affairs and is now seeking information regarding such actions taken by the aforementioned ministry. Appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Senior Advocate CU Singh pointed out that there was no individual consideration but a blanket ban by the ministry resulting in a problematic scenario for these people. Authorities have taken away their passports resulting in the subsequent loss of liberty and these non-citizens are forced to stay in institutions with limited liberty. 

Currently, the courts point of view is that a press release was issued by the ministry which has no effect on the status of visas as for its cancellation, a subjective investigation should take place. On 26th June 2020, the court asked advocates of the petitioners to serve copies to union representatives. A total of 4 petitions have been filed challenging unions orders dating 2nd April 2020 and 4th June 2020 which affect more than 2500 people. 

The petitions have been filed by Advocate FA Ayubbi and drafted by Advocates Ibad Mushtaq and Ashima Mandla. They contended that the en-masse blacklisting of foreigners without any opportunity to defend themselves is a blatant violation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The petition states that the immediate blacklisting, registration of FIRs which led to the forfeiture of passports resulted in complete deprivation of personal liberty without any procedure established by law.

It pointed out that the home countries of these foreigners are increasingly becoming worried and their embassies have started asking for their return repeatedly. The petitions seek to get the court to order the Ministry of Home Affairs to lift this ban along with reinstatement of visas and assistance in return by the Ministry of External Affairs.

Share this article:

Leave a feedback about this

Trending Judiciary
NEET-UG: SC asks IIT-Delhi to apprise it of correct answer of a question where two options are found as correct

SC asks IIT-Delhi to determine correct answer for NEET-UG question with two correct options, report due by 12 PM Tuesday; court to hear further on re-test plea.

23 July, 2024 09:26 AM
Trending Judiciary
2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence: SC grants regular bail to Ashish Mishra, son of ex Union Minister Ajay Mishra

SC grants regular bail to Ashish Mishra, son of ex-Union Minister, in the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case involving the death of eight people.

23 July, 2024 11:02 AM


Trending Judiciary
State govt has got no power to tinker with list of Scheduled Castes: Supreme Court [Read Judgement]

The Supreme Court ruled that state governments lack the authority to modify the Scheduled Castes lists, a power reserved exclusively for Parliament under Article 341.

17 July, 2024 09:31 AM
Trending Judiciary
SC asks Telangana govt to replace judge in Commission of Inquiry into power pact by previous govt

SC directs Telangana govt to replace Justice L Narasimha Reddy in Commission of Inquiry probing former CM KCR's alleged power sector irregularities.

17 July, 2024 09:40 AM
Trending Judiciary
Centre notifies appointments Justice N Kotiswar Singh, Justice Mahadevan as SC judges

Centre notifies appointments of Justice N Kotiswar Singh and Justice R Mahadevan as Supreme Court judges, marking the first SC judge from Manipur.

17 July, 2024 09:57 AM
Trending Judiciary
Imprisonment till rising of court not proper sentence for serious offence of bigamy: SC [Read Judgement]

The Supreme Court ruled that “imprisonment till the rising of the court" is not appropriate for bigamy, a serious offence, stressing the need for proportionate punishment.

17 July, 2024 10:00 AM


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email