Hope no Kejriwal will emerge from my movement again: Anna Hazare

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.

Mumbai, Jun 27: The Shiv Sena on Saturday hit out at the BJP over its charge that the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation (RGF) had accepted donations from the Chinese embassy, and asked it whether the issue had any connection with intrusion by the neighbouring country in Ladakh and the martyrdom of 20 Indian soldiers.

The Sena also alleged that those raising questions against the government over the standoff with China were being labelled as Chinese agents by the BJP.

BJP chief J P Nadda had on Thursday targeted the Congress and the Gandhi family saying that the RGF had allegedly accepted donations from the Chinese embassy. Hitting back, the Congress had said that the RGF issue raised by the BJP government was a "manufactured charge" and "diversionary tactic" to deflect attention from the LAC crisis.

"What do you mean by Congress gets money from China? Instead of responding to the issues raised by Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi over the Chinese incursions, the BJP leaders accused the Congress of receiving funds from China," the Sena said in an editorial in party mouthpiece 'Saamana'.

"Will BJP's revelations about the donations stop the Chinese activities along the border? The BJP should tell what connection does these donations have with the Chinese incursion and the martyrdom of 20 soldiers," it added.

"In our country, many political leaders and parties, and not just the Congress, are beneficiaries of foreign countries. The BJP speaking about this is like throwing stones in the mud," it said.

The Uddhav Thackeray-led party said that Chinese President Xi Jinping visited India twice in the last six years.

"He was hosted in Gujarat. But it is a fact that China has betrayed. Holding talks on the one hand and continuing with the offensive along the border on the other hand is China's old policy," it said.

In the present scenario, the entire country stands firmly with PM Modi. This crisis is not for the BJP or the Congress, but for the entire country, whose prestige is at stake, it said.

"The BJP can fight with the Congress any time later.

But now is the time to fight against China. It should speak on that," the Sena said.

Google on Friday announced the launch of a new feature on Google Search, Assistant, and Maps for users in India to help them find information on COVID-19 testing centres near them.

The search giant has partnered with the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and MyGov to provide the information on authorised testing labs.

The feature is currently available in English and eight Indian languages including Hindi, Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, Kannada, Bengali, Gujarati, and Marathi.

According to the company, users will now see a new "Testing" tab on the search result page providing a list of nearby testing labs along with key information and guidance needed before using their services.

On Google Maps, when users search for keywords like "COVID testing" or "coronavirus testing" they will see a list of nearby testing labs, with a link to Google Search for the government-mandated requirements.

Google said that the Search, Assistant, and Maps currently feature 700 testing labs across 300 cities and working with authorities to identify and add more testing labs located across the country.

The company reiterates that it is important to follow the recommended guidelines that help determine testing eligibility before visiting.