Li Dong vs Union Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 2281 Kant

                                          -1-
                                                      WA No. 35 of 2022




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                        DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL, 2023

                                       PRESENT

               THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE

                                         AND

                         THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

                        WRIT APPEAL NO. 35 OF 2022 (GM-PASS)

               BETWEEN:

               1.    LI DONG
                     D/O LI JING HUA
                     AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS OLD
                     RESIDING AT SCOTT'S BUNGALOW
                     B113, WARD 8, SRIRANGAPATNA
                     MANDYA, KARNATAKA
                     PINCODE-571438.


Digitally                                                  ...APPELLANT
signed by      (BY SRI. AJESH KUMAR S.,ADVOCATE)
ROOPA R U
Location:      AND:
High Court
of Karnataka
               1.    UNION OF INDIA
                     MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
                     REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY
                     CENTRAL REGISTRY
                     SO (R AND D) 74B
                     SOUTH BLOCK
                     NEW DELHI-110011.
                                -2-
                                            WA No. 35 of 2022




2.   FOREIGNERS REGIONAL REGISTRATION
     OFFICE (FRRO)
     REPRESENTED BY MR LABHU RAM
     OFFICER, BMTC BUS STAND,
     5TH FLOOR A BLOCK
     TTMC BUILDING
     KH ROAD, SHANTI NAGAR
     BENGALURU
     KARNATAKA-560027.


                                              ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHANTHI BHUSHAN H.,DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
INDIA)


     WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE PASSED IN
W.P.No.22003/2021 DATED 03.12.2021.


     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                            JUDGMENT

The present appeal is filed challenging the order of the

Learned Single Judge dated 03.12.2021 passed in

W.P.No.22003/2021, whereby the learned Single Judge by

recording that the writ petition is devoid of merits, dismissed

the writ petition. Though the petition was dismissed the

petitioner was protected to some extent by opining that the

competent authority in their discretion may conditionally permit

WA No. 35 of 2022

the petitioner to stay in India till the first flight to China is

scheduled and not beyond that. The appeal is filed in this Court

on 06.01.2022, it seems that the request was made for

posting of the appeal and accordingly, the appeal was directed

to be listed today.

2. Sri. Ajesh Kumar S, learned counsel for the

petitioner prayed for an adjournment of the appeal on the

ground that in spite of efforts of the learned counsel, he was

unable to establish any contact with the appellant. At this

stage, Sri. Shanthi Bushan H, Deputy Solicitor General of India

appearing for respondents furnished the copy of Exit Permit

and a tabular statement and on instructions submitted before

this Court that the appellant was served with Exit Permit on

02.03.2023 so as to exit India on or before 05.03.2023. The

appellant left India on 03.03.2023 by flight No.AF203 scheduled

to depart at 02.40 a.m. and destination as per the record to

reach by the appellant is Basse-Terre, Island in the Eastern

Lesser Antilles in the Caribbean Sea. He invited our attention

to the tabular statement to show that the Passport of the

WA No. 35 of 2022

appellant expires on 15.05.2028 and Visa granted in favour of

the appellant expired on 20.06.2020.

3. The aforesaid documents, namely, copy of the Exit

Permit and the tabular statement is taken on record and

marked as Annexure-X for identification. In view of the

submission of Sri. Shanthi Bushan H, Deputy Solicitor General

of India, appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 as well as in

view of the documents referred by us, which clearly indicate

that the appellant left India on 03.03.2023 and if the appellant

intended to prosecute the appeal, could have certainly informed

about her journey or about her willingness to prosecute the

appeal to the learned counsel engaged by her. But the

appellant failed to take any such care. As such, learned counsel

for the appellant was also genuinely unable to address this

Court for short of instructions.

4. In view of the fact that the appellant left India for

her forward journey on 03.03.2023 clearly indicates that the

appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Her

departure from India to other destination can safely be said as

WA No. 35 of 2022

loosing an efficacy of the appeal. On these grounds, we are left

with no choice but to dismiss the appeal and accordingly,

dismissed the appeal.

Sd/-

CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE RU