At the Stage of Framing Charge, Presumption Suffices; Suicide Note and Grave Suspicion Enough: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Charge Under Section 306 IPC 173 CrPC | Framing of Charge Marks End of Investigation—Complainant Cannot Reopen Probe Merely by Citing Police Lapses: Bombay High Court Recovery Alone Cannot Prove Guilt: Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Photos, Videos Must Go: Supreme Court Binds Warring Spouses to Clean Up Social Media in Matrimonial Settlement Standard for Bail Under Section 319 CrPC Is Higher Than Framing of Charge, But Short of Conviction: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Accused Summoned Mid-Trial State Cannot Arbitrarily Deny Subsidies to 'New Industrial Units' by Retrospectively Applying Expansion Caps: Supreme Court Companies Act | Offence Under Section 448 Is Covered Under Section 447: Supreme Court Bars Private Complaint Without SFIO Nod “See-To-It” Obligation Is Not A Guarantee Under Indian Law: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope Of Section 126 ICA In IBC Disputes Mere Employment of Litigant’s Relatives in Police or Court Doesn't Prove Judicial Bias: Supreme Court Sets Aside Transfer of Criminal Case Reserved Candidate Availing Relaxed Standards in Prelims Cannot Migrate to General Quota for Cadre Allocation: Supreme Court Mere Vesting Does Not Mean Possession: Supreme Court Rules ULC Proceedings Abated For Failure To Serve Mandatory Notice To Actual Occupants Contempt of Courts Act | Natural Justice in Administrative Action: Supreme Court Directs West Bengal Govt to Re-Adjudicate Teachers' Arrears Claims Live-In Relationship with Married Man Not a ‘Relationship in the Nature of Marriage’ Under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay High Court Applies Supreme Court Guidelines Income Tax Act | Substitution of Shares held as Stock-in-Trade upon Amalgamation constitutes Taxable Business Income if Commercially Realisable: Supreme Court Judges Cannot Enact Their Own Protocols During Bail Hearings: Supreme Court Sets Aside Sweeping Age Determination Directions In POCSO If There Is Knowledge That Injury Is Likely To Cause Death, But No Intention Falls Under Section 304 Part II:  Supreme Court High Court Ignored POCSO’s Statutory Rigour, Committed Grave Error in Granting Bail: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Gang-Rape Accused Section 22 HSA | Co-Heirs Have Statutory Right of Pre-Emption Even in Urban Property: Punjab & Haryana High Court 138 NI Act | Issuance of Separate Cheques Gives Rise to Independent Causes of Action, Even if Drawn for Same Underlying Transaction: Supreme Court

High Court Grants Regular Bail to Afghan Residents Charged with Overstaying in India

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh granted regular bail to a group of Afghan residents who were charged with overstaying in India. The case, registered under Sections 7 and 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and Section 12(1A) of the Passports Act, 1967, involved allegations of residing in India without valid passports and visas.

The judge, while granting bail, made it clear that this decision does not express any opinion on the merits of the case. Justice Manoj Bajaj stated, “It is not a case that the petitioners were indulging in any illegal activities or commission of crime, and they are being prosecuted for overstaying in India after the expiry of their passport and visa.”

Justice Manoj Bajaj, presiding over the case, emphasized that the petitioners were not involved in any illegal activities or criminal offenses. The court noted that the trial had been progressing slowly, with only two out of nine prosecution witnesses examined thus far. Taking into consideration the extended period of detention and the likelihood of a protracted trial, the court determined that further detention would serve no useful purpose.

The defense counsel argued that the petitioners, who are residents of Afghanistan, have been residing in India for a long time and were implicated solely due to the expiration of their visas and passports.

The court order, released on 4th July 2023, ordered the release of the petitioners on regular bail, subject to the fulfillment of requisite bail bonds or surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court or duty magistrate concerned.

This judgment highlights the court’s consideration of the circumstances and the necessity to avoid prolonged detention for individuals accused of overstaying their visas. It reinforces the principle that each case should be assessed on its own merits, and bail decisions should be made in light of the specific circumstances involved.

Date of decision : 04.07.2023

Mohammad Rahim Ashori vs State of Haryana

Latest Legal News