Wiphaphak Hiranvichayapong Vs Union of India & Ors.

By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner prays for issuance of directions to the respondents to process her Exit Permit application, permit her lawful departure from India, and quash the demand of ₹1,00,000/- reflected on the e-FRRO portal.

¶12

The case set out by the petitioner is that she is a citizen of the Kingdom of Thailand and had lawfully entered India on a valid tourist visa. It is stated that after losing her passport, she promptly lodged a police complaint, obtained an Emergency Travel Document from the Royal Thai Embassy, and applied for an Exit Permit. However, during the final stage of processing of her Exit Permit application, the e-FRRO portal reflected an unexplained demand of ₹1,00,000/under the head ‘Loss of

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 23/07/2026 at 12:20:09

¶15

Passport/Penalty Fees’. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. In the meantime, the petitioner’s visa expired on 14.07.2026.

¶16

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the penalty of ₹1,00,000/-, imposed vide communication dated 01.07.2026, was on account of the loss of the petitioner's passport. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents, however, submits that since the petitioner has overstayed in India after the expiry of her visa on 14.07.2026, the said amount is now being levied on account of such overstay.

¶17

After addressing some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to deposit the aforesaid amount. He, however, prays that the respondents be directed to process and issue the Exit Permit expeditiously.

¶18

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that upon receipt of the aforesaid amount, the respondents shall process and issue the petitioner’s Exit Permit within a period of one week. The said statement is taken on record.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the present writ petition was instituted on 10.07.2026, prior to the expiry of the petitioner’s visa on 14.07.2026. It is, therefore, prayed that the period commencing from 14.07.2026 till the issuance of the Exit Permit should not operate to the petitioner’s prejudice while considering any future visa application.

¶20

This Court is of the opinion that, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the petitioner had promptly approached the authorities after

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

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 23/07/2026 at 12:20:09

¶23

losing her passport and had instituted the present petition before the expiry of her visa. Therefore, the period of overstay commencing from 14.07.2026 till the issuance of the Exit Permit shall not be treated as an adverse circumstance while considering any future visa application of the petitioner. In all fairness, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents has stated that the respondents have no objection to the aforesaid direction.

¶24

No further orders are called for.

¶25

The present writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶26

The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.

¶27

DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J

¶28

JULY 20, 2026/ns

¶29

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 23/07/2026 at 12:20:09

Wiphaphak Hiranvichayapong v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Wiphaphak Hiranvichayapong 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

Union of India Vs Ishwer Singh & Anr.

Sanyam Goyal Vs National Testing Agency & Ors.

Sunil Kumar Malhotra & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

M/S Sarv Priya Mahajan Co. Op Group Housing Society Vs Union of India and Ors.

Phool Chand & Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

M/S Aj Owners Vs Central Vigilance Commission & Ors.

Dinesh Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ram Veer Singh Vs Hindustan Vegetable Oil Corporation Ltd.

Badminton Association of India Vs Union of India & Anr.

M/S Eagle Infra India Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Vedant Arora & Anr. Vs Regional Passport Officer & Ors.

Cma (Dr.) Nirmal Kumar Bhattacharyya Vs Institute of Cost Accountants of India

Raveena Suresh Vs Idfc First Bank Ltd. & Ors.

Devender Kumar Wadhwa Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate & Ors.