Ankita Kirtkumar Shah v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4895 OF 2015 Ankita Kirtikumar Shah.

..Petitioner.

Versus

The Union of India and Others.

..Respondents.

Mr. Sagar Kasar for the Petitioner.

Mrs. P. H. Kantharia, PP for Respondent No. 1 and 2. Ms. Rebecca Gonsalvez for Respondent No. 3 and 4. Mr. K. V. Saste, APP for Respondent No. 5.

Coram : RANJIT MORE & V. L. ACHLIYA, JJ.

Date : January 8, 2016.

P. C. :

1.

At the outset, Ms. Gonsalvez submitted that in the order dated 17th December 2015, in paragraph 4 inadvertently it is recorded that the Petitioner has paid the penalty on "4th December 2015" instead of "11th December 2015." Typographical error is hereby corrected.

2.

By the order dated 17th December 2015, we had directed the Respondents to permit the Petitioner to enter into India / Mumbai for a period of one week commencing from 18th December 2015 by keeping LOC in abeyance. This order was patilsr 1 / 2

passed on the Petitioner's statement that the Petitioner has acquired citizenship of UK and she wants to enter Mumbai only for the period of 7 days for performing marriage as per Hindu rites and rituals. We had adjourned the matter for today for reporting compliance. Learned PP placed on record report of the PI, (Legal), FRRO, Mumbai, dated 6th January 2016. The report shows that the Petitioner was allowed to clear through arrival immigration at CSI Airport, Mumbai on 18th December 2015 upon her arrival from London and that she had departed from India on 25th December 2015. Thus the order dated 17th December 2015 is complied with. Since the petition was filed for the limited purpose to permit the Petitioner to enter into India for the limited period, and since that relief was granted, petition is disposed of. The Petitioner is at liberty to adopt appropriate remedies to challenge the Circular.

[V. L. ACHLIYA, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.] patilsr 2 / 2