E-Paper
Centre opposes Pak woman’s HC plea seeking to enter India
The move formed part of a series of retaliatory steps, including the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, the closure of the Attari land crossing, and a further downgrade in diplomatic relations
The Centre has opposed before the Delhi high court a Pakistani woman’s plea seeking to set aside the exit permit she was issued — after all visas granted to Pakistani nationals were revoked in the wake of the Pahalgam terror attack — and allow her to enter India, asserting that the decision was lawful and taken to safeguard national security.
The woman, Ruqaiya Obaeed, married Delhi resident Ubada Abdul Barakat Farooqi in Pakistan in November last year and entered India with him on April 5 via the Attari-Wagah border. She was granted a residential permit valid till May 19 and applied for a long-term visa (LTV) on April 18. However, she was issued an exit permit on April 28 after the government on April 25 revoked visas granted to Pakistani nationals after the Pahalgam attack on April 22, in which terrorists killed 26 people.
The external affairs ministry directed all Pakistani nationals to leave India by April 27.
The move formed part of a series of retaliatory steps, including the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, the closure of the Attari land crossing, and a further downgrade in diplomatic relations.
Terming her plea as misconceived, the home ministry, in its affidavit filed earlier this month, contended that the exit directions were lawful. It stated that directions issued pursuant to the April 25 and 28 advisories were neither arbitrary nor violative of humanitarian considerations.
“The exit directions issued to the petitioner were lawful, pursuant to the advisories dated 25.04.2025 and 28.04.2025 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs in the aftermath of serious security concerns. These actions were neither arbitrary nor violative of humanitarian considerations but were necessary to safeguard national security,” the affidavit stated.
In her petition, Obaeed also sought the grant of a long-term visa, contending that the exit permit was issued without considering that she had been residing in India since her marriage and that the visa cancellation deprived her of conjugal rights.
However, the government opposed this, asserting that her marriage to an Indian citizen, and any consequent loss of conjugal rights, does not confer a legal right to enter the country in violation of visa rules or statutory provisions.
“The entry, stay and exit of foreign nationals are governed strictly by the erstwhile Foreigners Act, 1946 (presently Immigration and Foreigners Act). The plea of deprivation of conjugal rights cannot override the mandatory legal framework regulating the stay of foreign nationals in India,” the affidavit stated.
In its 22-page affidavit, the ministry also said foreign nationals do not have an absolute right to seek visa services or to enter, stay in, or leave India at their own whims. Visa issuance, the affidavit said, is a discretionary and sovereign function of the government.
The plea is scheduled to be heard on January 22.
