The Court ruled that because the government decision was made in response to national security concerns, it does not merit judicial scrutiny.
.jpg)
A plea from a Pakistani woman asking for instructions to evaluate her application for a long-term visa to India was denied by the Delhi High Court on Saturday [Sheena Naz and Anr vs Union of India and Ors].
On April 23, Sheena Naz, who is married to an Indian national, submitted an application for a long-term visa.
Following the terror assault in Pahalgam, the Union government ordered Pakistani nationals to depart for India by April 27 and suspended visa services for them on April 24.
In light of this, Naz petitioned the High Court to have her long-term visa application reviewed and to have her residential permit, which was in effect from March 26 to May 9, not suspended.
In a special hearing on Saturday, Justice Sachin Datta stated that the government's decision is not worthy of judicial scrutiny because it was made in response to national security concerns.
Since the aforementioned decision was granted due to significant national security concerns, it does not, on the surface, merit judicial review under Section 3(1) of the Foreigners Act, 1946. Additionally, this Court does not have the authority to provide any exceptions to that rule,"
the Court stated.
The petitioner's attorney withdrew it as the Court indicated that it was unwilling to consider it.
As a result, the petition is withdrawn and dismissed. Additionally, pending applications are disposed of," the Court ruled.
The petitioner was represented by Senior Advocate Sanjeev Sagar, along with attorneys Zahid Hanief, Shazia Kidwai, and Nazia Parveen.
The Union of India was represented by advocate Arnav Mittal and Central Government Standing Counsel Nidhi Raman.
This website is all about sharing knowledge and updating everything about Law.
