'NRIs must obey Indian courts' | india | Hindustan Times
  • Sunday, Jun 24, 2018
  •   °C  
Today in New Delhi, India
Jun 24, 2018-Sunday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

'NRIs must obey Indian courts'

The Delhi HC ruling restricts any Indian staying abroad from claiming a status superior to that of other Indian citizens.

india Updated: Nov 06, 2005 13:58 IST
PTI

Merely by going abroad a person cannot claim a status superior to that of other citizens of the country and would have to obey the orders issued by courts in India, the Delhi High Court has ruled.

Dismissing a writ petition by one Rajiv Tayal challenging the constitutional validity of an order passed by Ministry of External Affairs impounding his passport, a Division Bench of Justice Mukul Mudgal and Justice HR Malhotra said there was no infringement of any Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14 (right to equality) 19 (right to freedom) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution.

Tayal, a US-based NRI, is facing a NBW in connection with a dowry case in a local court in the national capital. He had challenged the MEA order impounding his passport after being declared a "proclaimed offender."

The petitioner had contended that he was residing in the US and subjecting him to criminal process in India would be an unfair burden put on him and that he was not served summons.

His counsel contended that the investigation into the case ought to have been conducted by sending a questionnaire and that he should not be asked to join the probe in India.

However, the court said, "The acceptance of such a plea would give a premium to the petitioner who happens to travel abroad and it will be thus open to such an accused to misuse the process of law and make a mockery of the Indian judicial system by making such a special procedure totally opposed to criminal jurisdiction."

The Bench also rejected Tayal's plea that the officials' move to enforce his presence in a courtin Indiamilitated against the immigrant status sought by him in the US and was also violation of his Fundamental Rights.