The one who solves Kashmir issue will be worthy of Nobel Peace Prize: Imran Khan

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.

Islamabad, Feb 26: Islamabad on Tuesday declared former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif an absconder while simultaneously denying extending bail to him.

The federal cabinet presided over by Prime Minister Imran Khan, cited that Sharif failed to provide required medical reports and has violated the bail terms.

The government has also decided to freeze gas and electricity tariffs for the next four months, The Dawn reported.

"After Nawaz Sharif failed to submit his medical report of any hospital in London, the medical board rejected a medical certificate sent by him and [the government] declared him an absconder. From today, Nawaz Sharif is an absconder according to the law of land and if he does not return to the country he will be declared a proclaimed offender," said Dr Firdous Ashiq Awan, Special Assistant to the Prime Minister on Information, in a press conference.

She further asserted that the Punjab government, which was authorized by the Islamabad High Court (IHC) to decide Sharif's case on medical grounds, had written several letters asking him to submit his medical report from any hospital in London. However, he failed to do so and only sent a certificate that was not accepted by the medical board.

"If he (Nawaz Sharif) is seriously ill then why a comprehensive medical report is not being submitted to the medical board," Firdous added.

Further, she said that the office of the opposition leader was also waiting for his younger brother and Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly Shahbaz Sharif, who was also staying in London for 'no reason'.

"He is getting a monthly salary and enjoying luxurious offices and other perks and privileges but not performing his duties required by his office and the people. Shahbaz Sahib, return to the country and justify your salary and other benefits being given from taxpayers' money," Firdous added.

On October 29 last year, the IHC granted bail for eight weeks to Sharif, who was convicted and disqualified in corruption cases, on medical grounds.

Sharif left Pakistan for London along with Shahbaz on November 19, 2019, for his medical treatments there.

Tokyo, Feb 26: Two more Indians onboard quarantined cruise ship -- Diamond Princess -- were tested positive for novel coronavirus, the Indian embassy here said on Tuesday, adding that those Indians not infected by the virus will be repatriated to the homeland on February 26.

A total of 16 Indian nationals onboard the luxury ship -- quarantined off the coast of Japan since February 5 -- have been tested positive for coronavirus so far, the embassy informed.

"A chartered flight is being arranged to repatriate Indian nationals onboard #DiamondPrincess, provided they have (a) consented; (b) not tested positive for #COVID19; (c) cleared by the medical team. An email advisory to this effect, with details, has been sent to them," the embassy tweeted.

The repatriation of the Indian nationals will be facilitated by the Indian government.

"PCR test results for ALL Indian nationals declared-02 more Indians tested positive to #COVID19, taking the total to 16. Those fulfilling conditions and consenting to repatriation to India on 26 Feb being facilitated by the Indian Government. Details shared with them," the following tweet read.

A total of 138 Indians, including 132 crew and 6 passengers, were among the 3,711 people on board the luxury cruise ship which was quarantine off Japan on February 5 after it emerged that a former passenger had tested positive for the virus.