Donald Trump offers to mediate in 'explosive' Kashmir standoff

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.

Dubai, Apr 26: Families were shattered as the three dead bodies of UAE-based Indian expats were returned to the country from New Delhi, India.

Family members waited outside the Indira Gandhi International Airport for hours, but they were later told to go back home as the remains of expats Jagsir Singh, Sanjeev Kumar and Kamlesh Bhatt were flown back to Abu Dhabi, following a new order implemented by India's Ministry of Home Affairs.

Inderjeet, brother-in-law of Sanjeev based in Al Ain, said their family in Punjab was devastated.

"This is a non-coronavirus death. We had a death certificate as proof and all necessary documents from Indian Embassy. But the body was returned while our family members waited outside the airport. This is very shocking," Inderjeet said.

"The body shouldn't have been returned. It's difficult to travel across states due to Covid-19 restrictions and also to arrange the ambulance," he added.

"Now the embassy has told me to come on Sunday. They said hopefully things will be sorted out in a day or two."

Meanwhile, the family of Kamlesh resides in the Indian state of Uttarakhand. This means, with existing travel restrictions, they had to secure permits from different states to reach New Delhi.

Dubai-based social worker Girish Pant, who is in touch with the family, said they are all depressed with the unfortunate turn of events.

"His brother Vimlesh had to return home without the remains. They are all clueless and in pain. With the new order from the Ministry of Home Affairs, I have informed the family that the body will reach them within 48 hours. I am also coordinating with the Indian Embassy," Pant said.

Warangal, May 26: A 26-year-old man from Bihar was arrested here for murdering nine people by throwing them into a well to cover the murder of a woman, police said on Monday.

Dr Ravinder, Commissioner of Police (CP), Warangal, said that the bodies were recovered on May 21 and May 22 from the well. Investigation has revealed that the accused, Sanjay Kumar Yadav, killed all of them to cover up the murder of Rafiqa, with whom he had a relationship.

He said that Yadav got acquainted with a person named Maqsood and his sister-in-law Rafiqa. "Slowly, he came close to Rafiqa and started living together with her three children. Yadav tried to misbehave with Rafiqa's 15-year-old daughter. Rafiqa did not like this and threatened to lodge a complaint against him," Ravinder said.

"Then, Yadav planned to kill Rafiqa in order to live with her daughter. Yadav promised Rafiqa to marry. They boarded a train to West Bengal from March 7. Yadav mixed sleeping tablets in the food packet and later strangulated her, and threw her body outside the train," he said.

According to police, Yadav later came back to Warangal but Maqsood's wife Nisha started questioning him about the whereabouts of Rafiqa.

"Nisha threatened to lodge a police complaint against him. With a premeditated motive, from May 16 to May 20, he visited Maqsood's family who stayed in a gunny bag factory," he said.

Yadav purchased sleeping pills from Warangal and mixed in the food on the birthday of Maqsood's elder son on May 20, police said.

"Maqsood and his five family members were living there. Yadav mixed sleeping pills in the food and later they consumed it. Maqsood's family friend Shakeel was also there. Then, he went to the first floor of the factory where two labourers were staying. He mixed sleeping pills in their food too. He suspected that they may get up and create a problem. To cover up the murder of Rafiqa, he killed nine people," Ravinder said.

At around 12:30 am, Yadav woke up and saw that everyone is asleep, according to police.

"Then, he used the gunny bags to drag all the nine people into the well. He threw the gunny bag one by one into the well," Ravinder said.

According to the police, six teams were deployed to investigate the case.

"Yadav has been arrested now and will be taken to police custody. We will collect all evidence and ensure that he gets maximum punishment for this offence," Ravinder said.