OCI’s Rights Cannot Be Curtailed Arbitrarily; Grounds For Deportation Or Blacklisting Must Be Informed: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court reiterated that procedural safeguards must be harmoniously read into cases involving OCI cardholders.
Justice Sachin Datta, Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court held that the grounds for deportation or blacklisting by the authorities have to be informed as the rights as an Overseas Citizen of India cannot be curtailed arbitrarily.
The Court reiterated that while Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 does not expressly provide for a hearing, the procedural safeguards under Section 7-D of the Citizenship Act, 1955 (the Act) must be harmoniously read into cases involving OCI cardholders, particularly when blacklisting them effectively negates their rights under the Citizenship Act.
A Single Bench of Justice Sachin Datta noted, “Section 7-D of the Citizenship Act, 1955, prescribes the conditions under which an OCI cardholder’s registration may be cancelled. Significantly, it mandates that no cancellation can take place without providing the affected individual with a reasonable opportunity of being heard.”
Advocate Amit George appeared for the Petitioner, while CGSC Nidhi Raman represented the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Petitioner, a U.S. citizen and an OCI cardholder, filed a Writ Petition challenging his deportation and the refusal of Indian immigration authorities to allow his entry despite holding an OCI card. Married to an Indian citizen, he had been residing in India since 1994, jointly owning property in Nagaland and raising his family there. Having transitioned from a PIO to an OCI cardholder in 2016, he was granted a lifelong multiple-entry visa.
However, upon returning from a U.S. visit in 2024, he was denied entry at Indira Gandhi International Airport without any explanation, official documentation, or a passport stamp, and was immediately deported.
Court’s Reasoning
The High Court noted that the Petitioner was neither granted an opportunity to be heard nor was he informed about the grounds for his deportation/blacklisting. At the time of deportation, he was neither informed that he had been blacklisted nor given an opportunity to contest the allegations against him.
Under Section 7-B of the Citizenship Act, 1955, the Court pointed out that certain rights are conferred upon an OCI cardholder, elevating their status above that of an ordinary foreign national.
“In the present case, the respondents have taken a stand that the petitioner has been blacklisted under section 3 of the Foreigners Act, and blacklisting has an overriding effect on all kinds of visas, including an OCI card, which is also a lifelong visa granted to eligible foreign nationals. There is no liability on the respondent to even tell the petitioner the reason for such blacklisting, let alone providing them the opportunity of being heard,” the Bench remarked.
Consequently, the Court held that “both the deportation of the petitioner and the process of blacklisting him fail to meet the statutory requirement/s prescribed under Section 7-D of the Citizenship Act, 1955. Given that the petitioner continues to hold a valid OCI card, his rights as an Overseas Citizen of India cannot be curtailed arbitrarily.”
Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the Petition.
Cause Title: John Robert Roughton III v. Union Of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:2108)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Amit George, Dhiraj Abraham Philip, Febin Mathew Varghese, Ibansara Syiemlieh, Achalika Ahuja and Naveen Richard
Respondents: CGSC Nidhi Raman; Advocates Zubin Singh and Arnav Mittal
