IN RE: MRS. AGA BEGUM Vs. STATE
LAWS(MAD)-1970-7-35
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Decided on July 08,1970

Aga Begum Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The petitioner Mrs. Aga Begum seeks to revise the order of the VII-Presidency Magistrate, Egmore, Madras, convicting her for violation of Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 read with paragraph 7 (2) and 7 (3) of the Foreigners Order, 1948.
(2.) Briefly, the facts proved against her by P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 are that the petitioner is the daughter of one Mr. Hidayatullah who was a registered Iranian National, his serial number being 1437. Her father was working in the Government Arts College and he died in the year 1962 as an Iranian. The petitioner is his eldest daughter. She was born to him in 1921 in India. She was called upon to get herself registered as a foreigner under Exhibit P-1 dated 29th September, 1961. The petitioner gave a reply Exhibit P-3 requesting her to be treated as of an Indian Origin. In Exhibit P-4 she was intimated that she was the daughter of an Iranian and, therefore, she should get herself registered before 31st October, 1961. The petitioner sent a letter Exhibit P-5 requesting ten days time which was duly granted under Exhibit P-6. On 24th October, ig6i she got herself registered as a foreigner. Exhibit P-7 is her application. Exhibit P-8 is the Part I of the certificate of registration retained in the office and Part III of the same was issued to her. She was permitted to stay in India till 23rd January, 1962, and was permitted to get a passport. Exhibit P-9 is the residential permit. She asked for further grant of extension of stay for six months and that was given. On 19th July, 1963 she was called upon to send an application form duly filled up and that she must equip herself with a valid national passport until she acquires Indian Citizenship. The petitioner received Exhibit P-13, but she did not comply with the instruction. After some correspondence, she ultimately maintained her stand in Exhibit P-17 dated 12th October, 1963, that she was an Indian and, therefore, there was no need for her getting registered as a foreigner. Ultimately, after some correspondence, the Government of India rejected the request of the petitioner saying that she need not be compelled to obtain Iranian passport, but subject to good behaviour, she will be allowed to stay in India on the basis of her residential permit without declaring her as a Stateless person. The petitioner was duly informed of the decision of the Government of India and she was permitted to apply for the grant of extension of the stay in India. The petitioner received the order on 17th May, 1965, but she did not take further action. On 7th November, 1966, Exhibit P-21 was sent to the petitioner from the Regional Registration Office, but it was received back as she left her old address. Another communication was sent by the Government on 2nd August, 1967. But the petitioner did not take any further action in the matter. Ultimately the Government of India asked the Government of Madras to warn the petitioner of the consequences if she failed to get herself registered. The Regional Registration Officer thereupon applied to the State Government for sanction to prosecute the accused-petitioner. Ultimately she was prosecuted for failure to register herself as an Iranian. The Commissioner of Police was authorised by the Government of Madras in Exhibit P-28 to prosecute the petitioner.
(3.) The petitioner stated during her examination under Section 251(A)(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure that she was only an Indian National and pleaded "not guilty" to the charge. She further stated in her examination under Section 342, Criminal Procedure Code, that she was born in India, studied in India, married in India and never went out of India. She examined herself as a witness D.W. 1 in this case. According to her, her father was a Persian and Arabic Lecturer in Government Arts College, Madras. Her father owned a house in No. 31, Mir Bhakshi Ali Street. Her father died in 1962. She received Demand Exhibit D-2 from the Estate Duty-cum-Income-tax Department regarding his assets. She had signed Exhibit P-8 filled up and brought to her for her signature by some officers. She claimed that she never applied for or obtained any foreign passport. She never wanted to go either to Pakistan or to Iran. Her mother is an Indian. The petitioner married an Indian, one Mohammad Hussain.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.