The Calcutta High Court, while quashing proceedings against a Swiss national booked under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act observed that the case has resulted out of a bona fide mistake of the petitioner and the act of the petitioner is protected by Section 15 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.
Brief Facts:
The present application was filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the petitioner, a Swiss national, who came to India for the purpose of tourism and was granted a Visa by the competent authority on 19th March 2024 allowing the petitioner to stay in India up to 18th April 2024. The petitioner visited the Foreigners Registration Office(FRO) to seek permission to enter Sikkim. During his interaction, Immigration officials discovered the absence of an arrival stamp on his passport and raised the question about the legality of his entry. As a result, the petitioner was arrested by law enforcement officials and an FIR was registered being Darjeeling Sadar Police Station Case No. 25 of 2024 under Section 14 of the Act of 1946. Upon investigation, the charge sheet was filed against the petitioner under Section 14 of the Act of 1946. Being aggrieved by such proceedings, the petitioner has preferred the present revisional application for quashing.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner came to India from Switzerland on tour on a valid Passport and Visa. The petitioner tried to enter through Sonauli Land Immigration Check Post (LICP) on Nepal-India border where immigration officials cancelled his entry and instructed him to proceed to Delhi by flight instead of over land. Further it was submitted that the petitioner did not have any mala fide intention to enter India without valid documents and had himself sought permission to enter Sikkim. Further it was submitted that the petitioner has no malicious intent and did not knowingly attempt to breach immigration law and there malicious intent and did not knowingly attempt to breach immigration law.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the satae submitted that there are no such mala fide allegations against the petitioner. However, prosecution has not yet received report from the Passport authority due to which supplementary charge sheet could not be filed.
Observations of the court:
The court noted that after initiation of the proceedings under Section 14 of the Act of 1946, investigation has been undertaken and charge sheet under Section 14 of Act of 1946 has been filed and during investigation no such mala fide intention of the petitioner transpired, save and except that the Passport was bereft of arrival stamp.
Further the court referred to the material available on record and stated that the case has resulted out of a bona fide mistake of the petitioner and the act of petitioner is protected by Section 15 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 which provides that no suit prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under the Act.
The decision of the Court:
The court allowed the application and quashed the proceedings.
Case Title: In the matter of: Christian Marc Durand
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bivas Pattanayak
Case No.: C. R. R. 176 OF 2024
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjay Vashishtha, Mr. Dhiraj Lakhotia, Mr. Saptak Mazumder, Ms. Khushi Kundu
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, Mr. Arjun Chowdhury
Read @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
