Disposed

Ahlaia Nohina v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC14 Jan 2025W.P.(C)/342/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A foreign national unable to obtain an exit-permit to travel to Germany because a hotel failed to upload Form-C sought court intervention. The court directed FRRO to process her request expeditiously upon Form-C upload and barred any penalty for visa overstay.

What did the court decide?

No penalty under Section 14, Foreigners Act; FRRO directed to process exit-permit on Form-C upload and allow 72 hours for departure arrangements.

Ahlaia Nohina Vs Union of India & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~79

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 342/2025

¶4

AHLAIA NOHINA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Vivek Tiwari, Mr. Aditya Trivedi and Ms. Subhi Pastor, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Nidhi Raman, CGSC alongwith Mr. Zubin Singh and Mr. Arnav Mittla, Advs. for UOI.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶10

O R D E R % 14.01.2025

¶11

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking that the petitioner be granted an exit-permit for the purpose of travelling to Germany, which is her country of temporary residence and from where she is stated to have flown into India.

¶12

It transpires that the issuance of an exit-permit to the petitioner was impeded on account of the fact that the requisite Form-C was not uploaded by the concerned hotel where the petitioner had been previously staying during her visit to Chennai. The petitioner is currently staying at a private residence in Delhi.

¶13

Be that as it may, learned counsel for the respondents submits, on instructions, that upon the owner of the concerned premises, where the petitioner is currently staying, submitting/uploading the requisite Form-C on the e-portal of FRRO, the FRRO Office in Delhi shall process the petitioner’s request for grant of exit-permit. It is submitted that the

¶14

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 24/01/2025 at 14:26:53

¶15

concerned FRRO shall carry out the necessary enquiry expeditiously and in case there is no impediment, an exit-permit shall be granted forthwith.

¶16

It also transpires during the course of hearing that the visa of the petitioner expired on 06.01.2025. Learned standing counsel for the respondents informs that since the over-stay period (beyond the expiry of the visa) has not yet exceeded 15 days, there shall be no penalty imposed on the petitioner for the purpose of her travel out of India/grant of an exit-permit, if the petitioner submits the requisite Form-C alongwith the supporting documents (i.e. passport and visa) within a period of 48 hours from today.

¶17

In view of the peculiar circumstances of the case due to which the petitioner could not leave India prior to expiry of her visa (i.e. on 06.01.2025), and considering that she has filed the present petition soon thereafter, it is directed that the respondents shall not levy any penalty in terms of Section 14 of the Foreigner’s Act, 1946 on the petitioner, for remaining in India beyond the expiry of her visa.

¶18

Respondents are also directed to afford to the petitioner a period of 72 hours to make her travel arrangements to Germany upon grant of exitpermit.

¶19

With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of.

¶20

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶21

JANUARY 14, 2025/ at

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 24/01/2025 at 14:26:53

Ahlaia Nohina v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahlaia Nohina v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudesh Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, DELHI-15 and Anr.

Nafis-Ul-Afiin Vs Union of India and Anr.

Kirpal Singh Vs Superintendent Range 118 Central Goods and Service Tax & Anr.

Mrs. Manju Jain Vs Managing Committee of Dayanand Model Secondary School and Anr.

M/S S.H. Enterprises Vs Principal Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax East Delhi

Prashant Reddy T. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Mandeep Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Hawkers Surksha Foundation Vs Union of India and Ors.

Apar Gupta Vs Central Public Information Officer, Mha & Ors.

Savita Mishra Vs Govt of NCT and Anr.

Ms Regi Schipper Vs Union of India and Ors.

Arvind Verma @ Arvind Kumar Verma Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others

Dharambir Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Devendra Kumar Gupta Vs Igl through through Cmd