Disposed¶26

Maria Guillermina Seyahian & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC1 May 2025W.P.(C)/17519/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tourist visa; denial of entry into India; foreign nationals; mandamus; visa expiry 26.02.2025; entry refused 29.10.2024; withdrawal with liberty to reapply; fresh visa application to be processed expeditiously in accordance with law; Union of India; immigration authorities; Delhi High Court; W.P.(C) 17519/2024; CM APPL.26145/2025; Justice Sachin Datta; order dated 01.05.2025; no finding on reasons for entry denial.

What did the court decide?

Petition permitted to be withdrawn and disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to make a fresh application for grant of tourist visa, which is to be duly considered and processed by the respondent expeditiously in accordance with law; CM APPL.26145/2025 (early hearing) allowed; date fixed i.e. 14.07.2025 cancelled. ¶26

Maria Guillermina Seyahian & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, foreign nationals who were denied entry into India on 29.10.2024, could be directed by mandamus to be permitted entry on their tourist visa valid up to 26.02.2025, subject to any fine or penalty, and to disclosure of the reasons for the denial.

¶17

Court's answer

The tourist visa earlier issued to the petitioners had admittedly expired on 26.02.2025.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioners no longer have a visa to visit India, they cannot be allowed to enter India as prayed for in the petition.

¶22

Key takeaways

In the circumstances, the petitioners sought to withdraw the present petition with liberty to make a fresh application for grant of tourist visa.ratio¶25
Upon a fresh application for tourist visa being filed, the same shall be duly considered and processed by the respondent expeditiously, in accordance with law.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Sachin Datta, J.), order dated 01.05.2025 in W.P.(C) 17519/2024 - Maria Guillermina Seyahian & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.: Foreign national petitioners, denied entry into India on 29.10.2024 despite a tourist visa valid up to 26.02.2025, sought mandamus for permission to enter, imposition of any fine/penalty, and disclosure of reasons for the denial. The Court observed that the tourist visa had admittedly expired on 26.02.2025, so the petitioners, no longer holding a visa, could not be allowed to enter India as prayed. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondents stated on instructions that a fresh visa application would be duly considered. The petition was accordingly withdrawn and disposed of with liberty to file a fresh tourist-visa application, which the respondent was to consider and process expeditiously in accordance with law. The early-hearing application (CM APPL.26145/2025) was allowed and the date fixed (14.07.2025) was cancelled. No substantive ruling was made on the legality of, or reasons for, the original entry denial.

¶1

$~68

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 17519/2024

¶4

MARIA GUILLERMINA SEYAHIAN & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Kartikeya Rastogi and Ms. Ritvika Poswal, Advocates

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Nidhi Raman, CGSC, Mr. Arnav Mittal and Mr. Akash Mishra, Advs. for R-1 to 3.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 01.05.2025

¶11

CM APPL.26145/2025 (early hearing)

¶12

This is an application, filed by the petitioners, seeking early hearing.

¶13

Considering the averments made in the application, the same is allowed.

¶14

W.P.(C) 17519/2024 is take up for hearing today itself.

¶15

W.P.(C) 17519/2024

¶16

The present petition seeks the following prayers:

¶17

“ a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to allow the Petitioners to enter in India on their tourist visa valid up to 26.02.2025;

¶18

b) Direct the Respondents to grant the Petitioners entry subject to imposing any fine or penalty, if any;

¶19

c) Direct the Respondents to disclose the reasons for denying the entry of the Petitioners on 29.10.2024. ”

¶20

Admittedly, the tourist visa that had earlier been issued to the petitioner has expired on 26.02.2025. As such, the petitioners, who no

¶21

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 23:54:42

¶22

longer have a visa to visit India, cannot be allowed to enter India, as prayed for in the present petition.

¶23

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that if the visa is granted to them, they would have no objection if their movement in India is monitored, to enable the authorities to keep a check on the purpose of their visit. It is further stated that the petitioners will abide by any conditions that may be imposed by the Indian Immigration Authorities for the purpose of their visit to India.

¶24

Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submits on instructions that in the event of a fresh application seeking visa being filed by the petitioners, the same shall be duly considered by the concerned authority.

¶25

In the circumstances, the petitioners seek to withdraw the present petition with liberty to make a fresh application for grant of tourist visa. Upon such an application being filed, the same shall be duly considered and processed by the respondent expeditiously, in accordance with law.

¶26

The petition is disposed of, in above terms.

¶27

W.P.(C) 17519/2024

¶28

The date already fixed i.e. 14.07.2025 stands cancelled.

¶29

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶30

MAY 1, 2025/ cl

¶31

This is a digitally signed order.

¶32

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 23:54:42

Maria Guillermina Seyahian & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maria Guillermina Seyahian & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Punjab and Sind Bank Vs Sh. Harish Bhasin and Ors.

Rakesh Kumar Jangra Vs the Labour Commissioner & Anr.

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited Vs New Delhi Municipal Council

Residents Welfare Association Indira Gandhi Camp, through Its Vice President & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sunil Kumar Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Jaspal Kaur Public School Vs Directorate of Education Government of NCT of Delhi

Management of C.P.W.D. Vs Vinod Kumar Trivedi

Management of Cpwd Vs Smt.Lata Singh & Anr.

Akash Verma Vs the Collector of Stamps & Anr.

Jasmeet Singh Rekhi Vs Bar Council of India & Ors.

Shilpi Asthana Vs Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India

Ldpl Diagnostics Private Limited Vs Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Corporate Affairs & Ors.

Savita Jha Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Captain Sudipt Sen Vs Director General of Civil Aviation & Ors.