Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.42 seconds)

Farhan Hussain vs State By Thilak Park P S on 5 August, 2020

In yet another judgment dated 16.09.2016 in Crl.P.No.5508/2016 between Mr.Freddy Tshimanga Kanyama Vs. Bureau of Immigration too, nearly a similar view was taken by a Co-ordinate Bench; there is some force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners in drawing parallel between the aforesaid two judgments and the case of accused foreigners, although the said judgments cannot be treated as precedents since no legal principles have been discussed and much less laid down; however, the counsel may be justified in pressing into service these judgments seeking parity of treatment for his clients who are arguably similarly circumstanced qua the parties thereto.
Karnataka High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 2 - K S Dixit - Full Document

Police Registered This Case Against The ... vs Has Been Produced Before This Court. He ... on 28 May, 2018

AIR 1972 SC 2166 (State of Assam Vs Jilkadar Ali) 1973 Crl.L.J. 1471 (State of Uttar Pradesh Vs Ahsan Ali) (Allahabad High Court) Crl.A.No.335/2012 of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi (Nwadike Ugo Ben Vs State) decided on 05.10.2012 Decision of our Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka as per order dated 12.04.2017 in Crl.P.No.1305/2017 (Mr. Junia Erastus Mayemba Vs The Bureau of Immigration & another) and Order dated 16.09.2016 in Crl.P.No.5508/2016 of our Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka (Mr. Freddy Tshimanga Kanyama Vs The Bureau of Immigration & Others).
Bangalore District Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Nzabandora Shilaire vs Union Of India on 3 March, 2017

In the second case i.e., Mr.Freddy Tshimanga Kanyama vs. The Bureau of Immigration & Others (Crl.P.No.5508/2016 disposed of on 16.9.2016), the proceedings before the court below were quashed and the petitioner was directed to leave the country forthwith. In the said case, the FIR was registered against the petitioner/accused therein under Rule 7(2) of the Foreigners Order, 1948 and section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and subsequently, a charge sheet was filed under the above provisions. The case was pending since 2013. This Court observed that since the object of the Foreigners Act and Rules are to deter foreigners from over-staying in India and if the petitioner for one reason or other did not obtain extension of VISA from 2013, the petitioner being prosecuted and remaining in India would run counter-productive. It is best to get him rid of India at the earliest.
Karnataka High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - J M Cunha - Full Document
1