STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. SHER MOHAMMAD RELU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent from an order of learned Single Judge of this Court quashing the order of deportation made against the respondent under section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946.

(2.) IT is not disputed that the respondent was born on 22nd October, 1907 in village Asourd, Tehsil Malerkotla, which has always been a part of the territories comprising India. He continued to reside there till 24th of August, 1947. On 31st january, 1953, he obtained a passport from the Government of India for visiting pakistan. This passport was granted to him but it expired on 31st January, 1954, up to which date only it was valid. The respondent visited Pakistan in October, 1953, and returned to India in December, 1953. In February 1955, he went away to Pakistan again without getting the necessary visa. According to him, he had to go because he had suddenly received news of the serious illness of his son-in-law in Pakistan. It was alleged by him that he was obliged to obtain a passport from the Pakistan Government in order to return to india as he could not get a visa without obtaining that passport. It is apparent from the return, which was filed by the State and others, to the petition under article 226 of the Constitution, that the respondent again entered India on the basis of the same passport, which he had obtained from Pakistan, on 4th March, 1956. It seems that he came to India once again on a date which cannot be ascertained from the present record. Finally, as stated before, the Station House officer, Malerkotla, served the order in December 1958, which was impugned by a petition filed under Article 226 soon after the order to deportation had been served on the respondent.

(3.) THE learned Single Judge based his order on the fact that the respondent was originally a citizen of this country and the Foreigners Act could not be made applicable to him. The case of the State was that the respondent had lost his citizenship of this country when he applied for a passport in Pakistan. The learned judge considered that this matter could be decided only by the Central government under section 9 of the Citizenship Act, 1955, and the rules framed thereunder. Relying on an earlier decision given by him in Nasir Ahmed v. Chief commissioner, Delhi. (1958) 60 Pun LR 693: (AIR 1959 Punj 261) the learned judge held that until the Central Government made the necessary order under rule 30 of the Citizenship Rules which had not been done, it could not be said that the petitioner had lost his citizenship of this country.